Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 05-20-2026 Late CommunicationsCC 05-19-2026 #1 Study Session: Health and Safety Element Update Written Communications From:Liang Chao To:City Clerk Cc:Tina Kapoor Subject:Re: Written Communication on truck noise issue in the Health and Safety element Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 5:12:04 PM Sorry for the late submission. I'd appreciate it if this could be printed out too if possible. But I know you must be busy now. I can easily screenshare too since this is just one policy. Liang Liang Chao Vice Mayor ​​​​ City Council LChao@cupertino.gov 408-777-3192 From: Liang Chao <LChao@cupertino.gov> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2026 5:05 PM To: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.gov> Cc: Kitty Moore <KMoore@cupertino.gov> Subject: Written Communication on truck noise issue in the Health and Safety element Please consider a new strategy to specifically address the nighttime truck noise issue. ======== New Strategy HS-8.7.X: Nighttime Industrial Truck Noise Coordinate with Santa Clara County and other responsible agencies to establish and enforce objective nighttime noise standards for industrial truck operations on Foothill Boulevard, Stevens Creek Boulevard, and other truck routes adjacent to residential areas. Between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., industrial truck operations shall not exceed 65 dBA Lmax, measured using the A-weighted fast response setting, at the receiving residential property line, or the City’s adopted nighttime maximum-noise standard, whichever is more protective. Consistent with the World Health Organization (WHO) Night Noise Guidelines, which recognize that nighttime sleep disturbance can result from single noise events and the number and level of those events, not only from 24-hour averaged CNEL/Ldn exposure, the City shall evaluate nighttime truck pass-by events, engine braking, acceleration, backup alarms, and other short-duration peak noise events using the Lmax standard. A violation shall include any truck-related nighttime noise event exceeding the applicable Lmax standard, or recurring nighttime truck events that exceed the standard during a monitoring period established by the City. Where the Lmax standard is exceeded, require mitigation necessary to meet the standard, including truck-hour restrictions, truck-speed controls, routing changes, engine-brake restrictions, quieter backup alarms, enforcement measures, and alternatives to truck transport, including rail where feasible. Liang Chao Vice Mayor ​​​​ City Council LChao@cupertino.gov 408-777-3192 From:Liang Chao To:City Clerk Cc:Kitty Moore Subject:Written Communication on truck noise issue in the Health and Safety element Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 5:05:57 PM Please consider a new strategy to specifically address the nighttime truck noise issue. ======== New Strategy HS-8.7.X: Nighttime Industrial Truck Noise Coordinate with Santa Clara County and other responsible agencies to establish and enforce objective nighttime noise standards for industrial truck operations on Foothill Boulevard, Stevens Creek Boulevard, and other truck routes adjacent to residential areas. Between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., industrial truck operations shall not exceed 65 dBA Lmax, measured using the A-weighted fast response setting, at the receiving residential property line, or the City’s adopted nighttime maximum-noise standard, whichever is more protective. Consistent with the World Health Organization (WHO) Night Noise Guidelines, which recognize that nighttime sleep disturbance can result from single noise events and the number and level of those events, not only from 24-hour averaged CNEL/Ldn exposure, the City shall evaluate nighttime truck pass-by events, engine braking, acceleration, backup alarms, and other short-duration peak noise events using the Lmax standard. A violation shall include any truck-related nighttime noise event exceeding the applicable Lmax standard, or recurring nighttime truck events that exceed the standard during a monitoring period established by the City. Where the Lmax standard is exceeded, require mitigation necessary to meet the standard, including truck-hour restrictions, truck-speed controls, routing changes, engine-brake restrictions, quieter backup alarms, enforcement measures, and alternatives to truck transport, including rail where feasible. Liang Chao Vice Mayor ​​​​ City Council LChao@cupertino.gov 408-777-3192 From:Liang Chao To:Tina Kapoor; Kitty Moore; City Clerk Cc:Benjamin Fu; Luke Connolly Subject:Re: Written Communication for the Health and Safety Element update - noise Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 4:53:03 PM Adding the City Clerk. This is the second of my written communication, in case of any confusion since the Subject is similar, except one word at the end "noise". I would appreciate if you could print a copy of this to share with all of the councilmembers for easier reference. Thanks, Liang Liang Chao Vice Mayor ​​​​ City Council LChao@cupertino.gov 408-777-3192 From: Liang Chao <LChao@cupertino.gov> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2026 4:49 PM To: Tina Kapoor <TinaK@cupertino.gov>; Kitty Moore <KMoore@cupertino.gov> Cc: Benjamin Fu <BenjaminF@cupertino.gov>; Luke Connolly <LukeC@cupertino.gov> Subject: Fw: Written Communication for the Health and Safety Element update - noise FYI. I would appreciate if you could print a copy of this to share with all of the councilmembers for easier reference. Thanks, Liang Liang Chao Vice Mayor ​​​​ City Council LChao@cupertino.gov 408-777-3192 From: Liang Chao <LChao@cupertino.gov> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2026 4:48 PM To: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.gov> Subject: Written Communication for the Health and Safety Element update - noise Recent State laws and planning guidance have increasingly emphasized the need for objective, measurable standards in General Plan policies and development review, so that requirements can be applied consistently, transparently, and enforceably. With that in mind, I suggest strengthening the Noise section by adding clearer objective standards and review triggers. The current draft includes important general direction, but several policies rely on terms such as “minimize,” “adequate mitigation,” or “substantial disturbance,” which may be difficult to enforce without measurable thresholds. The suggested revisions below are intended to make the policies more objective while preserving the City’s flexibility to require appropriate mitigation based on site-specific conditions. The recommended changes focus on four areas: interior noise standards, construction and vibration impacts, tonal/impulsive/repetitive noise, and traffic-calming or street- design noise. These standards are especially important because noise impacts are not limited to residential areas; offices, schools, parks, open space, habitat areas, and other sensitive uses may also be affected by recurring or high-frequency noise sources such as recreational uses, mechanical equipment, construction activity, or roadway design changes. This is a comment from an individual councilmember for your reference. ==== Part A: New policy on interior noise standards Policy HS-8.X: Interior Noise Standards Require new residential development and other noise-sensitive uses to demonstrate consistency with the California Building Code interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL or Ldn, or the City’s adopted interior noise standard, whichever is more protective, in habitable rooms. An acoustical analysis shall be required when exterior noise levels are projected to exceed 60 dBA CNEL or Ldn, or when required by the California Building Code, the City’s Noise Ordinance, or the City’s land use compatibility standards. The acoustical analysis shall identify building and site design measures necessary to meet the applicable interior noise standard, including sound-rated windows and doors, enhanced wall or roof assemblies, building orientation, setbacks, barriers, and mechanical or fresh-air ventilation systems that allow windows to remain closed, where needed. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall demonstrate that the project design will meet the applicable interior noise standard, and the City may require post-construction verification before occupancy where compliance depends on specialized construction assemblies or mechanical ventilation. Part B. Strengthen HS-8.3 construction noise and vibration Revised HS-8.3: Construction and Maintenance Activities Regulate construction and maintenance activities by establishing and enforcing allowable hours, maximum noise levels, and vibration limits for weekday, weekend, and holiday work. Require construction contractors to use best available noise and vibration reduction technology, including mufflers, equipment shielding, staging-location controls, quieter equipment, and limits on high-impact equipment near sensitive receptors. For construction near homes, schools, childcare facilities, senior housing, or historic structures, require vibration analysis and monitoring where heavy equipment, pile driving, jackhammers, or vibratory rollers may exceed adopted vibration thresholds. Part C. Add objective standards for tonal, impulsive, and repetitive noise New Policy HS-8.X: Tonal, Impulsive, and Repetitive Noise Regulate construction and maintenance activities by establishing and enforcing allowable hours, maximum noise levels, and vibration limits for weekday, weekend, and holiday work, consistent with the Municipal Code and adopted City standards. Construction and maintenance activities shall not exceed adopted City noise and vibration standards at receiving properties, except where a temporary exemption or permit is approved under the Municipal Code. For construction within 500 feet of homes, schools, childcare facilities, senior housing, hospitals, offices, or historic structures, require a construction noise and vibration control plan when heavy equipment, pile driving, jackhammers, vibratory rollers, concrete saws, or similar high-impact equipment will be used. The plan shall identify measures necessary to meet applicable standards, including mufflers, equipment shielding, staging-location controls, quieter equipment, limits on high-impact equipment, notification procedures, and noise or vibration monitoring where needed. For vibration, the City shall require analysis and monitoring where construction activity may exceed the City’s adopted vibration limits, or, if no City standard is adopted, generally accepted thresholds such as 0.30 in/sec PPV for conventional structures and 0.08 in/sec PPV for historic or vibration-sensitive structures. Part D. Strengthen HS-8.8 for recreational uses Policy HS-8.8: Noise-Generating Uses Prior to approving noise-generating uses, including public or private recreational uses, require the proposed use to demonstrate compliance with the City’s adopted noise standards and to avoid substantial noise disturbance to nearby land uses, including residential, office, commercial, school, park, open space, and habitat areas. For noise-generating uses located within or near residential areas, schools, offices, commercial areas, parks, open space, habitat areas, or other sensitive receptors, require a noise study when the use may generate recurring, impulsive, tonal, or high-frequency noise. The study shall evaluate average noise levels, maximum noise levels, tonal noise, impulsive noise, repetitive noise, frequency characteristics, hours of operation, and cumulative noise events. Required mitigation may include setbacks, acoustic barriers, surface or equipment standards, operational limits, posted rules, limits on amplified sound, reduced hours of operation, and post-installation monitoring. Part E. Strengthen street-design noise policy Revised HS-8.6: Traffic-Calming and Street-Design Noise Require traffic-calming and street-design changes, including speed humps, raised crosswalks, rumble features, textured pavement, curb extensions, lane narrowing, medians, and truck-route changes, to avoid creating new or increased noise from braking, acceleration, vehicle impacts, pavement texture, rumble features, or truck movements at nearby receiving properties. For projects located within 500 feet of homes, schools, childcare facilities, senior housing, parks, open space, offices, or other noise-sensitive uses, require a noise analysis when the project would introduce a new physical feature or traffic-control measure that may generate recurring impact, vibration, braking, acceleration, tonal, or impulsive noise. The project shall not increase traffic-related noise by 3 dBA CNEL/Ldn or more where existing noise levels already exceed City standards, or by 5 dBA CNEL/Ldn or more where existing noise levels are below City standards, unless feasible design modifications or mitigation are incorporated to meet the applicable standard. ==== Here is a general comments made by ChatGPT after comparing Cupertino's draft element with those in other jurisdictions: Main gaps in Cupertino’s draft The main issue is not that the policies are wrong. The issue is that many are not objective enough. The biggest gaps are: 1. No explicit threshold for construction vibration. HS-8.3 mentions vibration but does not set PPV limits or require monitoring. 2. No clear standard for impulsive, repetitive, tonal, or low-frequency noise. This matters for sounds that may be more disturbing than their average dBA suggests, such as pickleball impacts, backup beepers, loading docks, mechanical hum, bass, and repeated construction impacts. 3. HS-8.8 is too general for recreational noise. It says recreational uses need mitigation to meet adopted standards, but does not require acoustic studies, operational limits, setbacks, barriers, surface/material review, or post-installation monitoring. 4. Traffic-calming and street-design noise are only “evaluated.” If speed humps, raised crosswalks, rumble features, or curb changes create braking/acceleration noise near homes, the policy should require avoidance or mitigation, not just evaluation. Liang Chao Vice Mayor ​​​​ City Council LChao@cupertino.gov 408-777-3192 From:Liang Chao To:City Clerk Cc:Kitty Moore Subject:Re: Written Communication for the Health and Safety Element update Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 4:50:49 PM I would appreciate if you could print a copy of this to share with all of the councilmembers for easier reference. Liang Chao Vice Mayor ​​​​ City Council LChao@cupertino.gov 408-777-3192 From: Liang Chao <LChao@cupertino.gov> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2026 3:43 PM To: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.gov> Subject: Written Communication for the Health and Safety Element update Here is a list of suggestions I have made to the City Staff through the City Manager. They are summarized here as a written communication on this item for the reference by the public. Part A: Proposed revision for the Policy HS-3.4.1 and HS-3.9 in the draft to add evacuation route study and mitigation when necessary: HS-3.4.1 (Recised) : Review in High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones. For proposed development in High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones identified by CAL FIRE, prior to issuance of the first permit, whether ministerial or discretionary, plans shall include, at a minimum: Site plan, planting plan, planting palette, and irrigation plan with designs to reduce the risk of fire hazards and with consideration of site conditions, including slope, structures, and adjacencies. Development and maintenance of defensible space. More than one point of ingress and egress to improve evacuation, emergency response, and fire equipment access, and adequate water infrastructure for water supply and fire flow that meets or exceeds the standards in the California State Minimum Fire Safe Regulations, including Subchapter 2, Articles 1–5, commencing with Section 1270, and Subchapter 3, Article 3, commencing with Section 1299.01. An evacuation-route assessment when the project would add residential units, increase occupancy, or intensify land use in an area served by an evacuation route segment classified as at capacity or over capacity under the City’s adopted evacuation route capacity assessment. For purposes of this review, an evacuation route segment shall be considered at capacity when the V/C ratio is 1.0 or greater, over capacity when the V/C ratio is 1.5 or greater, severely over capacity when the V/C ratio is 2.0 or greater, and a critical bottleneck when the V/C ratio is 3.0 or greater. Where a project would add evacuation demand to an at-capacity or over- capacity route, plans shall identify feasible measures to avoid, reduce, or offset added evacuation constraints, such as additional ingress and egress, emergency access improvements, site design changes, evacuation management plans, parking management, traffic-control measures, or evacuation-route improvements. Class A roofing assemblies for new and replacement roofs. Location and source of anticipated water supply. Policy HS-3.9 (Revised): Access for Fire and Emergency Vehicles and Equipment Require proposed development to provide adequate access for fire and emergency vehicles and equipment that meets or exceeds the California State Fire Safe Regulation standards, Santa Clara County Fire Department standards, and City standards. These standards are found in two parts of the California Fire Safe Regulations (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7): Subchapter 2, Articles 1-5 (commencing with Section 1270, SRA Fire Safe Regulations); and Subchapter 3, Article 3 (commencing with Section 1299.01, Fire Hazard Reduction Around Buildings and Structures Regulations). Developments must also comply with the applicable provisions of the California Fire Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 9) to ensure fire safety measures, including emergency access, fire protection systems, and defensible space requirements, align with statewide fire prevention standards and include adequate unobstructed roadway width, vertical clearance, grade, turning radius, turnarounds, load-bearing surface, fire lane parking controls, and emergency access easements, as applicable, to allow fire engines and aerial apparatus to safely access and maneuver, including right-turn and turnaround movements, as approved by the Fire Code Official. For development in Fire Hazard Severity Zones, hillside areas, evacuation- constrained areas, or areas served by private or dead-end roads, require confirmation that fire engines and aerial apparatus can safely access and maneuver on-site and off-site, including right-turn and turnaround movements, through compliance with adopted fire access standards or a turning-movement analysis approved by the Fire Code Official. Part B: Proposed policies on Evacuation routes Policy HS-2.11A: Evacuation Route Capacity and Bottleneck Reduction Maintain and periodically update an evacuation route capacity assessment that evaluates evacuation routes, roadway capacity, safety, viability, evacuation locations, and distance to evacuation gateways under a range of emergency scenarios, including wildfire, earthquake, roadway closures, school-day conditions, visitor activity, and power outage conditions. For purposes of this policy, an evacuation route segment shall be considered at capacity when its V/C ratio is 1.0 or greater, over capacity when its V/C ratio is 1.5 or greater, severely over capacity when its V/C ratio is 2.0 or greater, and a critical bottleneck when its V/C ratio is 3.0 or greater under any adopted evacuation scenario. The City shall prioritize mitigation, operational strategies, and emergency planning for route segments meeting these thresholds, especially routes serving neighborhoods with limited evacuation alternatives, longer distances to evacuation gateways, schools, vulnerable populations, or visitor-serving open- space areas. Policy HS-2.11B: Development Review in Evacuation-Constrained Areas Require discretionary development in wildfire hazard areas or evacuation- constrained areas to evaluate whether the project would increase evacuation demand on any evacuation route segment classified as at capacity, over capacity, severely over capacity, or a critical bottleneck under the City’s adopted evacuation route capacity assessment. Where a project would add evacuation demand to such a route segment, the City shall require feasible measures to avoid, reduce, or offset added evacuation constraints, such as improved emergency access, site design changes, evacuation management plans, traffic-control measures, parking management, transportation demand management, one-car-per-household evacuation planning, shelter-in-place or nearby shelter strategies where appropriate, or contributions to evacuation-route improvements. Policy HS-2.11E: Evacuation Corridor Design Standards When resurfacing, redesigning, or improving critical evacuation corridors, evaluate design treatments that preserve or increase emergency evacuation capacity, such as mountable or painted medians, emergency shoulder use, emergency vehicle access features, traffic signal backup power, and designs that can support temporary traffic control during evacuations. Policy HS-2.11H: School and Visitor Evacuation Coordination Coordinate with schools, parks, preserves, golf courses, and open-space managers in the evacuation area to prepare site-specific evacuation plans, parent reunification plans, bus or shuttle staging plans, and traffic-control protocols. Part C: Proposed Policy to provide standards for city infrastructure projects involving roadway changes Policy HS-3.X: Emergency Access Standards for City Infrastructure Projects Involving Roadway Changes City infrastructure projects involving roadway changes, including lane narrowing, road diets, protected bike lanes, raised bike-lane dividers, medians, curb extensions, traffic calming, resurfacing, restriping, or other changes to the public right-of-way, shall maintain adequate emergency vehicle access, fire apparatus access, ambulance access, and emergency vehicle maneuvering. Such projects shall meet applicable California Fire Code, California Fire Safe Regulations, Santa Clara County Fire Department standards, and City standards for unobstructed roadway width, vertical clearance, grade, turning radius, right-turn movements, turnaround access, load-bearing surface, fire- lane parking controls, hydrant access, and emergency vehicle maneuvering. No raised divider, curb extension, median, traffic-calming device, or protected bike-lane barrier shall be installed where it would prevent the design fire apparatus or ambulance from meeting required turning movements, right-turn movements, turnaround movements, or minimum clear access width, unless the City Council makes findings, based on substantial evidence and after consultation with the Santa Clara County Fire Department, that equivalent or improved emergency access and emergency response performance will be maintained through other design or operational measures. Projects shall not reduce emergency access, fire apparatus access, ambulance access, emergency response times, or evacuation route capacity unless the City demonstrates, in consultation with the Santa Clara County Fire Department, that equivalent or improved emergency access and evacuation performance will be maintained through other design or operational measures. For designated evacuation routes, projects shall preserve the City’s ability to implement temporary evacuation traffic controls, including managed outbound flow, lane conversion, turn restrictions, emergency shoulder use, or other evacuation operations. Liang Chao Vice Mayor ​​​​ City Council LChao@cupertino.gov 408-777-3192 From:Liang Chao To:City Clerk Subject:Written Communication for the Health and Safety Element update - noise Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 4:48:25 PM Recent State laws and planning guidance have increasingly emphasized the need for objective, measurable standards in General Plan policies and development review, so that requirements can be applied consistently, transparently, and enforceably. With that in mind, I suggest strengthening the Noise section by adding clearer objective standards and review triggers. The current draft includes important general direction, but several policies rely on terms such as “minimize,” “adequate mitigation,” or “substantial disturbance,” which may be difficult to enforce without measurable thresholds. The suggested revisions below are intended to make the policies more objective while preserving the City’s flexibility to require appropriate mitigation based on site-specific conditions. The recommended changes focus on four areas: interior noise standards, construction and vibration impacts, tonal/impulsive/repetitive noise, and traffic-calming or street- design noise. These standards are especially important because noise impacts are not limited to residential areas; offices, schools, parks, open space, habitat areas, and other sensitive uses may also be affected by recurring or high-frequency noise sources such as recreational uses, mechanical equipment, construction activity, or roadway design changes. This is a comment from an individual councilmember for your reference. ==== Part A: New policy on interior noise standards Policy HS-8.X: Interior Noise Standards Require new residential development and other noise-sensitive uses to demonstrate consistency with the California Building Code interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL or Ldn, or the City’s adopted interior noise standard, whichever is more protective, in habitable rooms. An acoustical analysis shall be required when exterior noise levels are projected to exceed 60 dBA CNEL or Ldn, or when required by the California Building Code, the City’s Noise Ordinance, or the City’s land use compatibility standards. The acoustical analysis shall identify building and site design measures necessary to meet the applicable interior noise standard, including sound-rated windows and doors, enhanced wall or roof assemblies, building orientation, setbacks, barriers, and mechanical or fresh-air ventilation systems that allow windows to remain closed, where needed. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall demonstrate that the project design will meet the applicable interior noise standard, and the City may require post-construction verification before occupancy where compliance depends on specialized construction assemblies or mechanical ventilation. Part B. Strengthen HS-8.3 construction noise and vibration Revised HS-8.3: Construction and Maintenance Activities Regulate construction and maintenance activities by establishing and enforcing allowable hours, maximum noise levels, and vibration limits for weekday, weekend, and holiday work. Require construction contractors to use best available noise and vibration reduction technology, including mufflers, equipment shielding, staging-location controls, quieter equipment, and limits on high-impact equipment near sensitive receptors. For construction near homes, schools, childcare facilities, senior housing, or historic structures, require vibration analysis and monitoring where heavy equipment, pile driving, jackhammers, or vibratory rollers may exceed adopted vibration thresholds. Part C. Add objective standards for tonal, impulsive, and repetitive noise New Policy HS-8.X: Tonal, Impulsive, and Repetitive Noise Regulate construction and maintenance activities by establishing and enforcing allowable hours, maximum noise levels, and vibration limits for weekday, weekend, and holiday work, consistent with the Municipal Code and adopted City standards. Construction and maintenance activities shall not exceed adopted City noise and vibration standards at receiving properties, except where a temporary exemption or permit is approved under the Municipal Code. For construction within 500 feet of homes, schools, childcare facilities, senior housing, hospitals, offices, or historic structures, require a construction noise and vibration control plan when heavy equipment, pile driving, jackhammers, vibratory rollers, concrete saws, or similar high-impact equipment will be used. The plan shall identify measures necessary to meet applicable standards, including mufflers, equipment shielding, staging-location controls, quieter equipment, limits on high-impact equipment, notification procedures, and noise or vibration monitoring where needed. For vibration, the City shall require analysis and monitoring where construction activity may exceed the City’s adopted vibration limits, or, if no City standard is adopted, generally accepted thresholds such as 0.30 in/sec PPV for conventional structures and 0.08 in/sec PPV for historic or vibration-sensitive structures. Part D. Strengthen HS-8.8 for recreational uses Policy HS-8.8: Noise-Generating Uses Prior to approving noise-generating uses, including public or private recreational uses, require the proposed use to demonstrate compliance with the City’s adopted noise standards and to avoid substantial noise disturbance to nearby land uses, including residential, office, commercial, school, park, open space, and habitat areas. For noise-generating uses located within or near residential areas, schools, offices, commercial areas, parks, open space, habitat areas, or other sensitive receptors, require a noise study when the use may generate recurring, impulsive, tonal, or high-frequency noise. The study shall evaluate average noise levels, maximum noise levels, tonal noise, impulsive noise, repetitive noise, frequency characteristics, hours of operation, and cumulative noise events. Required mitigation may include setbacks, acoustic barriers, surface or equipment standards, operational limits, posted rules, limits on amplified sound, reduced hours of operation, and post-installation monitoring. Part E. Strengthen street-design noise policy Revised HS-8.6: Traffic-Calming and Street-Design Noise Require traffic-calming and street-design changes, including speed humps, raised crosswalks, rumble features, textured pavement, curb extensions, lane narrowing, medians, and truck-route changes, to avoid creating new or increased noise from braking, acceleration, vehicle impacts, pavement texture, rumble features, or truck movements at nearby receiving properties. For projects located within 500 feet of homes, schools, childcare facilities, senior housing, parks, open space, offices, or other noise-sensitive uses, require a noise analysis when the project would introduce a new physical feature or traffic-control measure that may generate recurring impact, vibration, braking, acceleration, tonal, or impulsive noise. The project shall not increase traffic-related noise by 3 dBA CNEL/Ldn or more where existing noise levels already exceed City standards, or by 5 dBA CNEL/Ldn or more where existing noise levels are below City standards, unless feasible design modifications or mitigation are incorporated to meet the applicable standard. ==== Here is a general comments made by ChatGPT after comparing Cupertino's draft element with those in other jurisdictions: Main gaps in Cupertino’s draft The main issue is not that the policies are wrong. The issue is that many are not objective enough. The biggest gaps are: 1. No explicit threshold for construction vibration. HS-8.3 mentions vibration but does not set PPV limits or require monitoring. 2. No clear standard for impulsive, repetitive, tonal, or low-frequency noise. This matters for sounds that may be more disturbing than their average dBA suggests, such as pickleball impacts, backup beepers, loading docks, mechanical hum, bass, and repeated construction impacts. 3. HS-8.8 is too general for recreational noise. It says recreational uses need mitigation to meet adopted standards, but does not require acoustic studies, operational limits, setbacks, barriers, surface/material review, or post-installation monitoring. 4. Traffic-calming and street-design noise are only “evaluated.” If speed humps, raised crosswalks, rumble features, or curb changes create braking/acceleration noise near homes, the policy should require avoidance or mitigation, not just evaluation. Liang Chao Vice Mayor ​​​​ City Council LChao@cupertino.gov 408-777-3192 CC 05-19-2026 Oral Communications Written Comments Cupertino Copertino Sister City Exchange Program Welcome to Cupertino, CA …and beyond! We arrive in Copertino, Italy! Pugliese Food Experiences Mangia! Living with my Italian Family St. Giuseppe of Copertino School VIsiting the Surrounding Areas Alberobello Otranto Santa Catarina Grotte di Castellana Lecce Speaking the Language Ciao! Thank you to: Cupertino City Council, CUSD, St. Joseph’s School, Sister City Organizers and the families that made this exchange possible.