The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC 06-02-2026 Item No. 15 SummerHill Homes - Bandley Drive_Written CommunicationsCC 06-02-2026 #15 SummerHill Homes - 10268 Bandley Drive Written Communications From:Cupertino ForAll To:City Council Cc:City Clerk Subject:Support for Summerhill townhomes at 10268 Bandley Drive Date:Monday, June 1, 2026 1:20:24 PM Attachments:image.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. For item 15 on the city council agenda for June 2, 2026 SUBJECT: Support for Summerhill townhomes at 10268 Bandley Drive Dear Mayor Moore, Vice Mayor Chao, and City Councilmembers, Cupertino for All is writing to express strong support for the Summerhill Homes townhouse project at 10268 Bandley Drive (Item 15 on the City Council agenda.) We believe this project will provide significant benefits such as supporting neighborhood businesses, promoting homeownership for young families, strengthening school enrollment, and making progress towards the city's RHNA goals. Our community has long valued homeownership, but rising costs have pushed this dream out of reach for young families. This townhome development directly addresses this challenge by creating attainable homeownership opportunities for families that find themselves priced out of traditional single-family homes. Moreover, five out of the 27 units are reserved for moderate income families providing a housing type that is much needed in our community. This project will expand equity-building opportunities for these families. In addition, building more homes for families will help sustain school enrollment and reduce the risk of further school closures. Strong enrollment is essential to maintaining the quality and reputation of Cupertino’s schools — which in turn supports local property values. Welcoming new residents to this neighborhood will expand the customer base of the Stevens Creek retail corridor. We all love retail and want as much retail that can be realistically supported. Brick-and-mortar retail has been hurt by consumer trends such as shopping at Amazon and being able to get delivery at the click of a button at restaurants in surrounding cities. In order for Cupertino businesses to thrive we need to build homes for the customers who will spend money to support these businesses. Putting a townhome development within walking distance of Stevens Creek retail is an excellent way to support our local businesses. Cupertino has been mandated by the state of California to build nearly 5,000 housing units by 2031. Although this project is not one of the sites in the Housing Element it will count toward RHNA goals. The City has not built enough units in the past two years to get us anywhere close to our goal in this timeframe. The developer, SummerHill Homes, has stated they will be able to break ground as soon as they have their building permits in hand. Finally, this project is unique in Cupertino in that few neighbors have voiced opposition. How often do we see that? This is likely because the developer designed the project to fit in with the community character. So we urge the City Council to make the easy decision tomorrow (June 2) and approve the actions on Item 15 that were unanimously recommended by the Cupertino Planning Commission. The SummerHill Townhome project will expand homeownership, support local schools, promote existing retail, and help the City meet RHNA goals. We enthusiastically support this project. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Cupertino for All Board of Directors From:Yutaka Kuroda To:Public Comments Cc:Yoshiko Kuroda Subject:Re: Regarding 10268 Bandley Drive Building Date:Monday, June 1, 2026 10:17:16 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Cupertino City Council, My name is Yutaka Kuroda, Managing Director of Mirai Gakuen LLC. We are a Japanese language class located at 10268 Bandley Drive, Suite 108B and have been in business at this location since 2008. We have about 140 students in our classes. Since many people live near this location and since it is not easy to find a similar place nearby, we would like to stay at this location for the foreseeable future to continue our business in Cupertino. Thank you. Yutaka Kuroda Managing Director, Mirai Gakuen LLC From:Lauren Sapudar Cc:Gian Martire; City Clerk Subject:FW: 10268 Bandley: ASA-2025-016, TM-2025-008, TR-2025-033 Date:Tuesday, May 26, 2026 10:00:58 AM Attachments:10268 Bandley - Comments on Land Use Compatibility.pdf Untitled attachment 00020.htm Good morning, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Councilmembers (Bcc’d on this email), Please see the attached letter regarding the proposed project at 10268 Bandley Drive. This project is scheduled to be heard at next week’s meeting. We will include this letter in the written communications. Regards, Lauren Sapudar City Clerk City Manager's Office LaurenS@cupertino.gov (408) 777-1312 From: Erick Serrano <erickserrano@apple.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2026 8:32 AM To: Gian Martire <GianM@cupertino.gov> Cc: Gary Chao <gchao@apple.com>; Sean Redding <s_redding@apple.com>; Rod Diridon <rdiridon@apple.com> Subject: 10268 Bandley: ASA-2025-016, TM-2025-008, TR-2025-033 Hello Gian, Please see attached letter regarding the proposed project at 10268 Bandley Drive (ASA-2025- 016, TM-2025-008, TR-2025-033). Please let me know if you have any questions regarding the letter, or would like to discuss. Thank you, Erick H. Serrano Development Services Manager Email: erickserrano@apple.com May 26, 2026 City of Cupertino City Council 10300 Torre Avenue  Cupertino, CA 95014 Re: SummerHill TownHomes at 10268 Bandley Drive (ASA-2025-016, TM-2025-008, TR-2025-033) — Comments on Land Use Compatibility Dear Mayor and Councilmembers, We submit the following comments in connection with the above-referenced applications.   Long-Term Use Compatibility. Introducing residential uses into a predominantly non-residential corridor is typically undesirable and could create a sensitive interface. Well established existing commercial and industrial operations are characteristics of this part of the City and may not align with typical residential expectations. If the City decides to approve this project, proactive mitigation measures such as enhanced sound attenuation (windows/walls) and ample landscaping buﬀers (along the side/rear project boundaries), and strategic placement of upper ﬂoor residential windows are recommended conditions of approval. Construction Period Coordination. Construction staging, access, and heavy equipment from the project could impact existing adjacent business operations. We recommend requiring a construction management plan as a condition of approval that mandates proactive neighbor notiﬁcation, deﬁned coordination protocols, and protections for shared access points and the maintenance of existing rights-of-way throughout construction. Pre-Occupancy Disclosure. Future residents, owners, and/or tenants should be formally informed of the existing area's non-residential character before occupancy. Recorded disclosures or CC&R provisions should clearly communicate the operational realities of adjacent uses, not limited to: approved trash/loading areas, permitted uses, hours of activity, delivery schedules, and associated noise levels to set appropriate expectations. Addressing these matters as conditions of approval will protect incoming residents, preserve the operational continuity of existing businesses, and support a stable land use environment over time. We appreciate the Commission's consideration on this matter. Respectfully submitted, Gary Chao Development & Global Transport Services  Places iPhone 408-828-5770 gchao@apple.com From:Jack Farrell To:City Clerk Subject:Public Comment for 6/2/26 Council Meeting Date:Friday, May 29, 2026 7:05:20 AM Attachments:10268 Bandley Drive Letter of Support June 2 2026.docx.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Good morning, Please find attached YIMBY Law's letter of support for item 15, the residential project at 10268 Bandley Drive. Sincerely, Jack Farrell he/him Research Attorney 267-218-1147 Check out everything we achieved in 2025! YIMBY Law 2261 Market Street STE 10416 San Francisco, CA 94114 hello@yimbylaw.org May X X, 2026 City of Cupertino City Council 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA Re: 10268 Bandley Drive, Item 15 Dear Cupertino City Council, We are pleased to submit this letter of support of the proposed Summerhill Homes project at Bandley Drive. YIMBY L aw is a 501(c)3 non-proﬁt corporation, whose mission is to increase the accessibility and affordability of housing in California. The Summerhill Homes project will consist of a development of 27 townhomes dispersed into four buildings, inclusive of 5 affordable units, to replace an existing commercial/ofﬁce use on a 1.55-acre site. The proposal qualiﬁes for protections under the Housing Accountability Act and Density Bonus waivers and incentives under state law. We concur with the assessment of the Planning Commission and your staff that the project is exempt from CEQA and qualiﬁes for ﬁnal approval of all necessary entitlements. The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) and the City’s Housing Element Summerhill Homes submitted an SB 330 Preliminary Application on July 15, 2025, and a ﬁnal application on November 6, 2025. Pursuant to Gov. Code § 65589.5, the application is only subject to the ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect when the Preliminary Application was submitted. YIMBY Law 2261 Market Street STE 10416 San Francisco, CA 94114 hello@yimbylaw.org The proposed project is consistent with the City’s General Plan and zoning ordinance and other applicable objective standards, under state Density B onus law. The State Density Bonus Law SummerHill proposes to provide 5 of the 27 town home-styles at below market rate prices. By designating at least 10 p ercent of the units for Moderate Income households, the project qualiﬁes for beneﬁts under the State Density Bonus Law. Under the State Density Bonus L aw, a develop er may propose unlimited waivers of development standards that would have the effect of physically precluding construction of a qualifying project at the densities or with the concessions or incentives p ermitted by the Density Bonus L aw. SummerHill is entitled to the waivers it has requested, all of which will provide relief from development standards that would physically preclude construction of the project at the density proposed. Once a project qualiﬁes for a density b onus, State law provides that the City may deny a requested waiver only if it would have a speciﬁc, adverse impact up on health or safety, would have an adverse impact on a historic resource, or would be contrary to State or Federal law. In this context, speciﬁc adverse impact “means a signiﬁcant, quantiﬁable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identiﬁed written public health or safety standards, p olicies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.”1 There is no substantial evidence in the record that any of SummerHill’s requested waivers would meet the criteria for City denial. The Housing Accountability Act The Housing Accountability Act, in Section 65589.5(j)(1)(A)-(B), limits a municipality’s ability to deny or condition on lower density a housing development project that complies with objective standards. The City may only disapprove the project or impose conditions on the project that would reduce density if necessary to avoid a “signiﬁcant, quantiﬁable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identiﬁed written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete” and there is no feasible method to mitigate or avoid those impacts other than disapproval or development at a lower density. 1 Gov. Code, §§ 65915, subd. (e)(1), 65589.5, subd. (d)(2). YIMBY Law 2261 Market Street STE 10416 San Francisco, CA 94114 hello@yimbylaw.org We have reviewed the project plans, the CEQA document and the various expert reports that have been prepared for the project, and there is not a preponderance of evidence in the record that would justify the City’s disapproval of the project or conditioning the project in a manner that would reduce density. Summary The Legislature has made numerous amendments to California Housing L aw in an effort to provide increased clarity and certainty for both municipalities and housing providers. Based on these laws, the project is subject only to the objective standards that were in effect on the date of the Preliminary Application; the project is entitled to the requested waivers under D ensity Bonus law; with those waivers the project is consistent with applicable objective standards; and the evidence in the record would not justify the City’s denial of the project or imposition of approval that would reduce density. Disapproval of the project or approval with conditions that would render the project infeasible at the density proposed would contravene State law. It is YIMBY Action’s understanding that City staff has processed SummerHill’s development application with professionalism and recognition of the City’s obligations under State law. We appreciate the staff ’s co operation and encourage the City Council to continue to uphold the same standard. YIMBY L aw closely monitors projects to ensure that all relevant state laws are properly applied, including the HA A. Should the City fail to follow these laws, YIMBY Law will not hesitate to ﬁle suit to ensure state housing policies are enforced. I am signing this letter both in my capacity as the Executive Director of YIMBY Law, and as a resident of California who is affected by the shortage of housing in our state. I look forward to seeing this project approved and brought to realization to help change the tides of the housing crisis in the B ay Area. Sincerely, YIMBY Law 2261 Market Street STE 10416 San Francisco, CA 94114 hello@yimbylaw.org Sonja Trauss Executive Director YIMBY L aw From:James Lloyd To:Kitty Moore; Liang Chao; Sheila Mohan; J.R. Fruen; R "Ray" Wang Cc:Piu Ghosh (she/her); City Attorney"s Office; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk; City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject:public comment re item 15 for the 6/2/26 Council meeting Date:Friday, May 29, 2026 11:54:25 AM Attachments:Cupertino - 10268 Bandley Drive - HAA Letter - CC.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Cupertino City Council, The California Housing Defense Fund (“CalHDF”) submits the attached public comment in support of item 15 for the 6/2/26 Council meeting, the proposed 27-unit housing development project at 10268 Bandley Drive, which includes 5 median- and moderate-income units. Sincerely, James M. Lloyd Director of Planning and Investigations California Housing Defense Fund james@calhdf.org CalHDF is grant & donation funded Donate today - https://calhdf.org/donate/ May 29, 2026 City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 Re: Proposed Housing Development at 10268 Bandley Drive By email: kmoore@cupertino.gov; lchao@cupertino.gov; smohan@cupertino.gov; jrfruen@cupertino.gov; rwang@cupertino.gov CC: piug@cupertino.gov; CityAttorney@cupertino.gov; CityManager@cupertino.gov; CityClerk@Cupertino.gov; planning@cupertino.gov; Dear Cupertino City Council, The California Housing Defense Fund (“CalHDF”) submits this letter to remind the City of its obligation to abide by all relevant state laws when evaluating the proposed 27-unit housing development project at 10268 Bandley Drive, which includes 5 median- and moderate-income units. These laws include the Housing Accountability Act (“HAA”), the Density Bonus Law (“DBL”), and AB 130. The HAA provides the project legal protections. It requires approval of zoning and general plan compliant housing development projects unless findings can be made regarding specific, objective, written health and safety hazards. (Gov. Code, § 65589.5, subd. (j).) The HAA also bars cities from imposing conditions on the approval of such projects that would reduce the project’s density unless, again, such written findings are made. (Ibid.) As a development with at least two-thirds of its area devoted to residential uses, the project falls within the HAA’s ambit, and it complies with local zoning code and the City’s general plan. Increased density, concessions, and waivers that a project is entitled to under the DBL (Gov. Code, § 65915) do not render the project noncompliant with the zoning code or general plan, for purposes of the HAA (Gov. Code, § 65589.5, subd. (j)(3)). The HAA’s protections therefore apply, and the City may not reject the project except based on health and safety standards, as outlined above. Furthermore, if the City rejects the project or impairs its feasibility, it must conduct “a thorough analysis of the economic, social, and environmental effects of the action.” (Id. at subd. (b).) 2201 Broadway, PH1, Oakland, CA 94612 www.calhdf.org CalHDF also writes to emphasize that the DBL offers the proposed development certain protections. The City must respect these protections. In addition to granting the increase in residential units allowed by the DBL, the City must not deny the project the proposed waivers and concessions with respect to front setback, rear setback, landscape planter, landscape setback and area, and requirement for non-residential uses. If the City wishes to deny requested waivers, Government Code section 65915, subdivision (e)(1) requires findings that the waivers would have a specific, adverse impact upon health or safety, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact. If the City wishes to deny requested concessions, Government Code section 65915, subdivision (d)(1) requires findings that the concessions would not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions, that the concessions would have a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety, or that the concessions are contrary to state or federal law. The City, if it makes any such findings, bears the burden of proof. (Gov. Code, § 65915, subd. (d)(4).) Of note, the DBL specifically allows for a reduction in required accessory parking in addition to the allowable waivers and concessions. (Id. at subd. (p).) Additionally, the California Court of Appeal has ruled that when an applicant has requested one or more waivers and/or concessions pursuant to the DBL, the City “may not apply any development standard that would physically preclude construction of that project as designed, even if the building includes ‘amenities’ beyond the bare minimum of building components.” (Bankers Hill 150 v. City of San Diego (2022) 74 Cal.App.5th 755, 775.) Finally, the project is exempt from state environmental review pursuant to AB 130 (Pub. Res. Code, § 21080.66). Caselaw from the California Court of Appeal affirms that local governments err, and may be sued, when they improperly refuse to grant a project a CEQA exemption or streamlined CEQA review to which it is entitled. (Hilltop Group, Inc. v. County of San Diego (2024) 99 Cal.App.5th 890, 911.) As you are well aware, California remains in the throes of a statewide crisis-level housing shortage. New housing such as this is a public benefit: it will increase the city’s tax base; it will bring new customers to local businesses; and it will reduce displacement of existing residents by reducing competition for existing housing. It will also help cut down on transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions by providing housing in denser, more urban areas, as opposed to farther-ﬂung regions in the state (and out of state). While no one project will solve the statewide housing crisis, the proposed development is a step in the right direction. CalHDF urges the City to approve it, consistent with its obligations under state law. CalHDF is a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation whose mission includes advocating for increased access to housing for Californians at all income levels, including low-income households. You may learn more about CalHDF at www.calhdf.org. 2 of 3 Sincerely, Dylan Casey CalHDF Executive Director James M. Lloyd CalHDF Director of Planning and Investigations 3 of 3