PC 6-24-2025 Written Communications (Updated 6/25/2025)PC 6-24-2025
Oral
Communications
Written
Communications
From:E. Poon
To:City of Cupertino Planning Commission
Cc:Jennifer Griffin; Rhoda Fry
Subject:Staples site to be developed
Date:Tuesday, June 10, 2025 6:15:30 PM
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.
Many people would find it helpful to know that they can return packages at Staples. Whole
Foods Market is commonly known as a location for returns, but Staples is not.
It would be useful to have Staples eventually take up a location somewhere else in Cupertino,
with a smaller footprint.
We just heard that in San Francisco, Nordstrom is returning with a smaller store. Staples
could survive well and help the community by planning along the same lines.
The future of retail in Cupertino is really in jeopardy. More ideas are needed, or it will become
a Retail desert.
Eventually, the sea of townhouses will not be attractive, as there are not enough essential
stores for residents.
In the lot, there is the Fontana Restaurant. I have always wondered why a lovely building like
that is vacant. What was the history? It is one of the more interesting- looking buildings
around here. It is a pity to have it demolished. Is is really a relatively new building? Why
do we waste a nice looking building?
I heard the idea to preserve it as a Club House for the new townhome development. It is a
brilliant idea. The developer might object to "losing" land, which might be part of the
townhouse development, but they can be creative about land use and make up for it.
For example, they can consider an architectural style called the BackSplit, which is essentially
a stacked duplex ( 5 levels with 2 levels for the top unit, 3 levels for the bottom unit) which
has a low elevation that looks like a two story high building from the street. It is found in
Toronto, Canada, in some neighborhoods. It uses the tri-level concept to stack 5 stories and
still maintain a low profile. Such an efficient use of land as the Toronto BackSplit will allow
the developer to keep the Fontana Restaurant as the Club House. This distinctive looking
building will elevate the style of the entire complex.
We hope the developer will be open to new ideas.
Regards,
Emily Poon
Resident of 18 years
From:Vivek Sagdeo
To:sherman.wang@gmail.com; stephanieyang2010@gmail.com; 12bellabarb@gmail.com; Luke Connolly; Emi
Sugiyama; Rajiv Chamraj; City of Cupertino Planning Commission; Liang Chao
Subject:Followup on the public hearing on 20840 Stevens creek
Date:Tuesday, June 10, 2025 8:20:19 PM
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.
Hello,
It was quite illuminating to attend the hearing.
As a block leader, I would like to request a hearing with the Scofield block, which is affected
by this project. We had vigorous activity related to Scofield MFU. We had no activity at all
for this and let us discuss this before approving.
Mayor, since architectural committee did not wait to hear our feedback, hope that you will be
able to discuss it with us before approval.
Vivek
Vivek Sagdeo
block leader
20821 Scofield
From:Susanne Chang
To:City of Cupertino Planning Commission; Santosh Rao; Liang Chao
Subject:Cupertino Memorial Park - Pickleball Noise
Date:Thursday, June 12, 2025 6:16:39 AM
Attachments:Pickleball Noise at Cupertino Memorial Park.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.
To: Cupertino City Council and Planning Committee Members
Subject: Cupertino Memorial Park Pickleball Noise Issue
From: David and Susanne Chang
21143 Christensen Dr, Cupertino, CA 95014
Date: June 12, 2025
Dear Cupertino City Council and Planning Committee Members:
We raised the pickleball noise issues to Cupertino City Council and Planning Committee
Members on August 14, 2023 and again January 10, 2025, yet there are no resolutions or
improvements made to the issues, Instead, the city has allowed the problem to be further
aggravated with no visible progress to alleviate: one more tennis court has been converted into
4 pickleball courts making a total of 8 courts allowing 32 people playing as well as spectators
are present. Pickleball games tend to be much louder with players yelling and jeering during the
game and certainly afterwards. This has brought even more noise and traffic onto Christensen
Drive. Players park cars on the street, ignoring the “Permit Parking” and “No Parking Any Time”
signs. Pickup, dropoff, and food delivery cars are constantly circling our formerly quiet street
with children - including our grandchildren - playing, and cars speed off recklessly.
The Cupertino Pickleball Club has grown to 1,000+ members, majority of the players are
non-Cupertino residents who do not pay property tax to support Cupertino City matters.
Players start playing early in the morning once daylight breaks until the lights turn off at 9:09pm.
This pickleball noise is in violation of the City of Cupertino’s own Municipal Code Chapter 10.48
Community Noise Control, where this sustained level of noise is exceeding the daytime
residential and non-residential maximum noise levels of 60dBA. When the hard surface of the
pickleball racket connects with the hard surface of the ball, sound waves vibrate rapidly,
registering a decibel level of ~70 dBA at 100 feet from the court. Consider how much noise is
generated when 32 people are playing at the same time.
Our past and current feedback and complaints from the Memorial Park pickleball courts have
yet to be addressed; instead, our physical home, mental health, and general well being as
Cupertino residents of over four decades continue to be exacerbated. We request that
Cupertino City to set an ordinance in regulating the players using the USA Pickleball quiet
category-compliant paddle sanctioned for recreational use, proven to reduce noise by 50
percent. Also to set the starting time at 9am to reduce early morning noise.
Appreciate your response with proposed resolutions; other residents are also sharing similar
concerns so we’d like to resolve this respectfully and cooperatively.
Thanks
Susanne and David Chang
From: valerie <vjmc1124@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2025 7:11 PM
To: City Council <citycouncil@cupertino.gov>; City Clerk <cityclerk@cupertino.gov>;
planningcommissions@cupertino.org
Subject: CEQA and traffic impact for McClellan Rd SB 330 project
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 City Clerk,
I understand this is a bit late for today's meeting at 6:45. But please include the below
request in written communication for the ongoing meeting now.
Dear Mayor Chao and City Council Members,
As a long time Cupertino resident near McClellan Rd SB 330 project, I believe the proposed
27 unit townhomes is not a safe dwelling design for the current neighbors and the future
residents.
Please conduct a full CEQA analysis and traffic impact study for the McClellan Rd SB 330
project, and share the results with the community.
Thank you very much for your attention.
vj
From: Gill Doyle <outerdog@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2025 1:34 PM
To: Santosh Rao <srao@cupertino.gov>; Tracy Kosolcharoen
<Tkosolcharoen@cupertino.gov>; David Fung <dfung@cupertino.gov>; Seema Lindskog
<slindskog@cupertino.gov>; Steven Scharf <SScharf@cupertino.gov>; Luke Connolly
<LukeC@cupertino.gov>; Piu Ghosh (she/her) <PiuG@cupertino.gov>; Emi Sugiyama
<EmiS@cupertino.gov>; Ravi Kumar <ravi4biz@gmail.com>; Karsten Chin
<edmk6@aol.com>; Denise <denise_menon@yahoo.com>; Sarah McLaren
<Sarahkmclaren@gmail.com>; Veronica Law <veronica.law@gmail.com>; Cathy Tang
<cathyktang@yahoo.com>; Jinn Su <jinnsu@yahoo.com>; Natalie Zhu
<yzhu.natalie@gmail.com>; Howard & Janet <janhowhill@mac.com>; Dean Tatsuno
<dataai@hotmail.com>; chenglei liu <chenglei.liusjsu@gmail.com>; C F
<carlf9121@yahoo.com>; Frank's friend <Liuziqivivia@gmail.com>; Grace Hsue
<grace_hsue@yahoo.com>; Sean Leu <seanleu@yahoo.com>; Bindeeya Desai
<bindeeya@comcast.net>; Chen Yu Lee <chenyulee260@gmail.com>; William H. Kerr
<WHKerr@comcast.net>; James Wang <jameswang95014@yahoo.com>; Ashok Natesan
<ashok.natesan@gmail.com>; Huafei Wang <huafeiwang1991@gmail.com>; Rahul
Shinkre <shinkre@yahoo.com>; Chinh <chinhster@gmail.com>; Meena & Pinaki Mukerji
<mpinaki@gmail.com>; Vic Menon <victor.menon@gmail.com>
Subject: Tessellations shuttle solution
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.
I live near the school and represent 29 households that have signed a petition that asks the
City to deny Tessellations’ request for permission to operate a high school at the old
Regnart Elementary site.
In December 2023 Tessellations was granted a Conditional Use Permit that allowed it to
teach preK through 9. Tessellations promised to move grade 9 to a separate campus in the
fall of 2025. Quoting Tessellations: ”Note . . . that high school will only be 9th grade on the
current campus, and only for one year. In future years, we plan to move the high school to
another site, so from then onward the current campus will be PK-8th.” [“Tessellations
Project Description for Cupertino Planning Division” (November 2023)] Tessellations got
permission to teach a maximum of 300 students at the Regnart site and told the City
Council that it wasn’t interested in adding more students. Again quoting Tessellations: “In
terms of our philosophy on the school, we don’t really want any more than 300 students
just for our emotional safety and comfort . . . There’s social evidence that that’s a really
great number to stay at in terms of the population knowing each other.” [Co-founder Grace
Stanat at City Council meeting 12/5/23] Tessellations is applying now for a revised
Conditional Use Permit that would allow it to grow to 425 students. It’s asking for
permission to add grades 10, 11, and 12. Despite these plans to grow the school,
Tessellations says that it will keep its staff at its current max of 85.
When Tessellations opened in 2023 it had 141 students. Today it has 268 students and
plans to grow to 425. There are traffic and parking problems today that will only get worse
when another 125 cars are added to the morning drop off and afternoon pick up.
Remember: Tessellations is not a neighborhood school. Nearly all of its students come
from outside the area and must be driven to school or will drive themselves.
Before the City considers allowing the school to expand, residents around the school
would like to see the City and school address existing traffic and parking problems.
Tessellations itself has come up with a great idea that it should be encouraged to pursue.
The school has talked about having parents drop off and pick up their kids at an improvised
shuttle station — New Life Church, for instance. The school would then shuttle the children
in its minivans between this shuttle station and the Regnart campus. The residents near the
school like this idea and hope that the City will encourage Tessellations to pursue it.
Tessellations’ application for a revised CUP requires that a traffic study be done. When that
happens in the fall, Tessellations’ shuttle program should be considered as one very good
option to fixing both traffic and parking problems at the school. (The current CUP includes
a provision that requires Tessellations to implement a shuttle service in the event that the
City's Director of Community Development deems parking around the school to be a
nuisance.)
-Gill Doyle (7952 Folkestone Drive)
PC 6-24-2025
Item No.2
Oversized
Vehicle
Oridinance
Written
Communications
From:Ravi Kiran Singh Sapaharam
To:City of Cupertino Planning Commission
Subject:Support for RV Rental Ban Policy in Cupertino
Date:Sunday, June 22, 2025 8:30:00 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 Planning Commission,
I am writing to express my support for a policy in Cupertino similar to San
Jose’s recent ban on renting RVs to unhoused residents for use as homes, as
outlined in the San José Spotlight article (https://sanjosespotlight.com/san-
jose-bans-homeless-people-renting-rvs/).
I believe this policy is necessary to address the challenges posed by
“vanlording,” where individuals rent out often inoperable RVs to unhoused
people, leading to unsafe and unsanitary conditions on public streets and
private properties. This practice burdens businesses, property owners, and
residents while exploiting vulnerable individuals. A clear policy would
enable Cupertino to maintain community safety and cleanliness, similar to
San Jose’s approach.
However, I strongly urge the city to pair this policy with compassionate
solutions for unhoused residents. Cupertino should expand safe parking
programs with adequate sanitation and support services or partner with
Santa Clara County to provide housing resources. Without these
alternatives, we risk displacing people without viable options.
Thank you for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Ravi Kiran Singh
Cupertino Resident
From:Peggy Griffin
To:City of Cupertino Planning Commission
Cc:City Clerk
Subject:2025-06-24 Planning Commission Mtg ITEM2 - Vehicle Parking Ordinance QUESTIONS
Date:Sunday, June 22, 2025 4:48:50 PM
Attachments:image002.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.
PLEASE INCLUDE THIS EMAIL AND ANY ATTACHMENTS AS PART OF WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE ABOVE
MEETING AGENDA ITEM.
Dear Planning Commission and Staff,
Just for disclosure purposes, my husband and I are long-time RV owners (20 years) and have rented them before
owning so I have some insight on how/what a resident RV owner might need to do on a city street, especially in front
of their home or while traveling visiting other cities.
Thank you for providing additional information and data regarding the RV parking situation. It is very informative and
eye opening, especially having examples of how our existing laws are rendered ineffective by the actions of some RV
owners.
I have several questions regarding the STAFF REPORT:
Q1…It’s proposed to add a definition of “oversized vehicles” in Muni Code Section 11.28.010.
Q1: What would the definition of “oversized vehicle” look like?
Q2…Question regarding our existing Muni Code Section 11.28.020
According to Section 11.28.020 it is unlawful to live or sleep in ANY vehicle parked on the street.
Q2: Why is Section 11.28.020.A not enforced now?
Sincerely,
Peggy Griffin
From:Peggy Griffin
To:City of Cupertino Planning Commission
Cc:City Clerk
Subject:2025-06-24 Planning Commission Mtg ITEM2 - Vehicle Parking SITUATIONS TO CONSIDER
Date:Sunday, June 22, 2025 5:14:21 PM
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.
PLEASE INCLUDE THIS EMAIL AND ANY ATTACHMENTS AS PART OF WRITTEN
COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE ABOVE MEETING AGENDA ITEM.
Dear Planning Commission and Staff,
Just for disclosure purposes, my husband and I are long-time RV owners (20 years) and have
rented them before owning so I have some insight on how/what a resident RV owner might
need to do on a city street, especially in front of their home or while traveling visiting other
cities.
When reading these proposed options I made a list of all the large vehicles I see around our
neighborhood from time to time. Ideally, the proposed changes should cover these cases with
the desired effect, whatever that be.
Types of vehicles around town:
RVs
Long vans (over 20 ft) – either a Class-B RV or a work van
Long bed pickup trucks
Shuttle vans, Hopper vans, Apple vans
Buses
Delivery trucks (FedEx, Amazon, UPS, furniture/moving vans, 18-wheelers)
Boat trailers
Trailers
Plumber, electrician, gardeners, construction vehicles
Some situations where a resident of Cupertino would need to park their RV or boat or trailer for
more than 2 hours on a city street (in front or near their house):
Preparing to leave early the next day – Often they connect the car they are towing behind
the RV the night before and have the RV plus car parked in front of their house ready to
go in the early morning.
An RV is stored elsewhere and is brought from storage to the home to load up. It often
takes all day to load up and prep the RV. The RV probably then stays in front overnight
for an early start the next day.
The RV is stored in the backyard but needs to be moved so workers can have access,
room or prevent damage. This isn’t always planned. It can happen on the weekend. It
can happen when workers from your neighbor’s house need you to move it.
RV is rented for a family vacation – loading an empty RV can take a day. Often they wait
until the next morning to leave.
Family or friends who are traveling in an RV come to visit.
The resident has a business and does not have room to park the vehicle.
This gets dicey considering that now days developers are not providing adequate
parking.
Some newer developments are shortening the length of parking spaces from 20 ft
to 18 ft which don’t allow some trucks or vans to be parked on-site in a parking
space.
REQUEST:
When you look at changing the city’s vehicle parking ordinances, please keep these in mind
and make sure the desired outcome is obtained for these various situations. Please make the
resulting vehicle parking ordinances fit reality. When laws don’t make sense, people ignore
them.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Peggy Griffin
From:Peggy Griffin
To:City of Cupertino Planning Commission
Cc:City Clerk
Subject:2025-06-24 Planning Commission Mtg ITEM2 - Vehicle Parking Ordinance COMMENTS
Date:Sunday, June 22, 2025 5:47:25 PM
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.
PLEASE INCLUDE THIS EMAIL AND ANY ATTACHMENTS AS PART OF WRITTEN
COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE ABOVE MEETING AGENDA ITEM.
Dear Planning Commission and Staff,
I’m glad the city is revising it’s parking ordinance and addressing some of the issues the city
has been encountering.
1.I agree that once the 72 hours are expired, the vehicle should move 1500 ft away for at
least 72 hours.
a.That said, I think there should be a way a resident can get an extension.
2.Permits…I do not support requiring residents to have to get a permit every time they
need to park their RV on the street.
a.The times when this is needed are not always planned and can happen when the
city is closed (weekends, holidays, evenings).
b.It would require more staff time and overhead which results in more taxpayer
money being wasted.
c.It would require more time for the resident.
3.Some provision is needed to allow friends and/or family that are traveling in an RV to
visit and park on the street.
4.Some provision is needed to allow visitors in RVs to visit and shop in Cupertino.
In Campbell, on Dell Avenue, near the perk ponds which is a large commercial area with lots of
parking, they installed signs restricting the heights of the vehicles overnight. Maybe in
troubled areas, the city could do the same?
Q: What are other cities doing to solve this problem?
Sincerely,
Peggy Griffin
From:Jean Orr
To:City of Cupertino Planning Commission
Subject:RV Parking
Date:Sunday, June 22, 2025 8:47:09 PM
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.
Re: Planning Commission Meeting; June 24, 2025
Item 2; RV Parking Regulations Proposal:
We own an RV and only park it in the road, in front of our house, when getting it packed and
ready for a trip.
We think that short term parking should be permitted on the public road.
Keep this in mind when making any proposal for parking restrictions.
Thanks you
From:Mark Wright
To:City of Cupertino Planning Commission
Subject:Oversize Vehicles opinion
Date:Tuesday, June 24, 2025 11:51:44 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.
Hi
On the matter of oversized vehicle control in parking lots, my suggestion is to Limit parking to a specified time. E.g.
72 hours as is same for parking cars on streets. Then ticket, then tow.
Mark Wright
10620 Culbertson Dr.
Cupertino
CA95014
From:Rhoda Fry
To:City of Cupertino Planning Commission; City Clerk; City Attorney"s Office; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:6/24/2025 Planning Commission Agenda Item #2
Date:Tuesday, June 24, 2025 2:03:18 PM
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 Planning Commissioners,
Regarding 6/24/2025 Planning Commission Agenda Item #2
Please do not consider doing parking permits.
It puts a lot of time and money stress on residents and extra overhead for staff.
It seems that one of the issues is that code enforcement is not adequately responding to resident
complaints.
This is an area upon which we can improve.
Another thing that I’d like you to consider is that our storm drains lead straight to the bay.
Many people don’t realize this. Although I have no evidence that people have been dumping
effluent into our storm drains, the more people who reside in their vehicles, the greater the
possibility of it happening. Note that the City of Santa Clara storm drains go to the sewage
treatment plant.
I don’t know who is responsible for painting our storm drains, but having looked at a few this
week when I was walking around town, it looks like they could use some sprucing up. Maybe
we need a paint that doesn’t fade? Below is an image of one of the better-looking ones on my
walk.
Regards, Rhoda Fry
From:Jean Bedord
To:City of Cupertino Planning Commission; City of Cupertino Planning Dept.; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City
Attorney"s Office; City Clerk
Cc:Chad Mosley
Subject:Agenda Item #2 Oversized Vehicle Parking, Planning Commission, June 24, 2025
Date:Tuesday, June 24, 2025 2:41:26 PM
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.
Please include in Written Communications
----------------------------------------------------------------
Planning Commission,
I am writing to oppose the options presented in the staff report. First of all, this is not included
in the city work plan or received direction of the council as a whole, thus violating the
Municipal Code requiring council to approve any council member's request that exceeds two
hours of staff time. Who directed "staff" and who is this unknown Deputy City Manager who
wrote the report?
Secondly, though this report is an improvement from the original report which suddenly
appeared on the April 22, 2025, Planning Commission agenda, it proposes a punitive
permit system that would be cumbersome and expensive to implement. Permits
would cost approximately $50 each. The recommended option would require
residents with recreational RVs to obtain a permit every 72 hours AND move their
vehicle 1500 feet. Residents would be subject to the same enforcement as
unsheltered RV residents. Is the city prepared to operate a permit system 24/7 so
weekends and evenings are covered? City hall operates 8 to 5 Monday through
Friday and there is already a staff shortage. Directors’ names are not on this report,
but staff time would be required to enforce such a policy, instead of providing services
to residents. Money spent on signage is better spent on improving resident services.
The staff report fails to address the overall issue of the ongoing challenge for unsheltered
residents. It focuses on punitive actions which impact both residents with
recreational vehicles as well unhoused residents. Context is missing. It cites 200
complaints about oversized vehicles in the past year. But how many vehicles are
actually involved? Perhaps as few as 10-20 vehicles? What are the demographics?
How many are “working poor” who have to live close to their work? What outreach
has been done to the occupants of these vehicles? Due to lack of affordable housing,
“vehicle lodging” is a reality until more permanent housing is available.
Shouldn't overnight parking be addressed within the broader context of unhoused
residents which include (1) Tents, (2) Cars/vans and (3) RVs/Trailers? Mountain
View has Safe Parking programs which differentiate between cars/vans which can be
accommodated in church parking lots, and RVs in commercial areas which can
provide more space and waste disposal services. Cupertino has neither. The Prince
of Peace Lutheran Church in Saratoga does NOT accommodate RV’s (an error in the
staff report). How are other similar jurisdictions managing unhoused residents? The
San Mateo City Council adopted a “compassionate approach” to enforcing its ban
on people sleeping in vehicles, prioritizing outreach and services before citations.
I urge you to take the compassionate approach to provide outreach and services to
address the underlying issue, rather than a punitive approach which also impacts
residents who have recreational vehicles, as well as their visitors who should be
allowed to park (with homeowner permission) in residential areas without the hassle
(and expense) of a permit system. Cupertino can do better.......
Housing and Community advocate,
Jean Bedord
From:Venkat Ranganathan
To:City of Cupertino Planning Commission
Subject:Input on Oversized Vehicle Parking
Date:Tuesday, June 24, 2025 2:48:35 PM
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 Planning Commission Members,
This is Venkat Ranganathan, a long time Cupertino resident.
Thank you for your continued efforts to address the growing concern around oversized
vehicle parking in Cupertino.
I support the direction outlined in Option 1 of the June 24 staff report, which proposes
requiring a City-issued permit to park oversized vehicles on public rights-of-way, along
with mandatory 1500-foot relocation every 72 hours. This strikes a reasonable balance
between the needs of residents, enforcement feasibility, and community aesthetics.
However, I urge the Commission to strengthen this option further through two key
amendments:
1. Restrict permits to 3 per month per vehicle rather than 5. The current proposal allows
oversized vehicles to legally occupy public streets for up to half the month. Reducing
this to 3 permits ensures such parking remains transitional, not semi-permanent.
2. Establish designated zones for oversized vehicle parking—especially in commercial or
less trafficked areas—rather than allowing dispersed parking throughout the city.
Without clear zones, enforcement becomes difficult and neighborhoods may still see
clustering despite the permit requirement.
Additionally, while daytime and short-term exceptions (2 hours during the day, 1 hour at
night) offer flexibility, these should not become loopholes for routine overnight dwellers.
With the suggested improvements, Cupertino can better manage public space while
respecting occasional residential use.
Thank you for considering this feedback.
Sincerely,
Venkat Ranganathan
Get Outlook for Android
From:Greg Endom
To:City of Cupertino Planning Commission
Subject:Over-sized Vehicle Parking City of Cupertino
Date:Tuesday, June 24, 2025 3:08:40 PM
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.
Chair Rao:
I received your email to Amy Chan, who forwarded it to
me. I represent the ownership of the Marina Plaza
Shopping Center, specifically with respect to its planned
redevelopment of the Marina Plaza Shopping Center
property into a mixed-use residential and retail project.
In response to your request for commentary related to
the current oversized parking of vehicles on Alves
adjacent to the Marina Plaza center, I can offer you
these thoughts…
While the current parked vehicles and their residents
have not caused any material problems or generated
concerns/complaints that the center ownership is aware
of, the long-term viability of this type of parking pattern is
in question at this location.
When the redevelopment of the center occurs, the
construction activities and changes to the property during
its redevelopment will not be conducive or most likely
allow for this type of long-term parking. Once the
redevelopment is complete, I would envision Alves being
more conducive to bicycle lanes and parallel parking for
the retail tenants, customers, and visitors to the
residential units being planned at the site. The nature
and use of Alves after the planned redevelopment will be
substantially different from its current level of activity.
The new mixed-use project envisions an activation and
upgrade of this secondary street into a more pedestrian-
friendly and neighborhood-welcoming thoroughfare.
Thank you for the opportunity to offer comments.
Sincerely,
Marina Plaza Shopping Center
/s/ Greg Endom
By: Greg Endom
Project Manager
Greg Endom
925-550-8082
DRE# 00766333
From:Ram Sripathi
To:City of Cupertino Planning Commission
Subject:Rv parking menace
Date:Tuesday, June 24, 2025 3:31:17 PM
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.
Hello planning commission
We are seeing a rampant use of rv parking behind target in Cupertino. They park in and around the xyz hotel.
I’m a long time resident of Cupertino and pride our city. But allowing these rvs that don’t belong to Cupertino and
the occupants don’t contribute to cupertinos welfare or well being. I’d say strongly that they are a menace and
should be asked to leave and further not allow any rv parking in public spaces.
It’s a menace because they slowly start dirtying the surrounding and because they don’t want to leave for fear of
losing the spot , start doing things like throwing garbage, emptying water, lounging around etc.
They also probably hurt the hotel xyzs look and that impacts the city revenue .
If we continue to allow there maybe other spots people will park. We should further go ahead and pass an ordinance
banning Rv parking.
I hope the commission listens to its loyal long resident citizens and does the right thing.
Thanks
Ram Sripathi
Cupertino resident
Sent from my iPhone
From:Deborah
To:City of Cupertino Planning Commission
Subject:Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance
Date:Tuesday, June 24, 2025 3:39:35 PM
Attachments:CCHC New logo Signatures-02.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.
Hello Planning Commissioners,
Thank. You for reviewing the CMC regarding oversized vehicles in the City.
I know that in other cities, it appears they have designated areas that these vehicles can park,
but they they are highly industrialized. Out local businesses have some issues with trailer
homes being parked near their entrances as it deters customers from entering or using the
business. I am not sure what new rules would prevent this.
Nominally near some of our hotels some have parked for the regulated amount of time (I
believe it’s still 72 hours before they have to move) but you can see how this would hurt hotel
business specifically, particular when they have not quite recovered from the effects of the
pandemic like a lot of our small businesses.
I just ask that the business community be considered when making changes to these
regulations as it will effect the health of our economy and therefore revenue to the City.
Thank you for your consideration.,
Deb
Deborah L. Feng, MBA
CEO
O. 408 2527054 ext.101
Deb@cupertino-chamber.org
www.cupertino-chamber.org
From:Rinal Shah
To:Santosh Rao; City of Cupertino Planning Commission; City Attorney"s Office; City Clerk; Tina Kapoor; Benjamin
Fu; Chad Mosley; Daniel Degu
Cc:Dipesh Gupta; Manish Gupta
Subject:Re: Cupertino Planning Commission Study Session: Oversized Vehicle Parking Regulations – June 24
Date:Tuesday, June 24, 2025 3:53:51 PM
Attachments:Aloft Cupertino_Comments on Oversized Vehicle Parking.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 Members of the City Planning Commission -
Please find our comments/feedback on the City of Cupertino's parking regulations for
oversized vehicles.
Thank you for your time and for considering our perspective.
Best Regards,
Rinal
Rinal Shah
VP of Operations
Aloft Cupertino
From: Daniel Degu <DanielDe@cupertino.gov>
Date: June 23, 2025 at 11:59:10 PM PDT
To: dgupta@shashigroup.com
Subject: Cupertino Planning Commission Study Session: Oversized
Vehicle Parking Regulations – June 24
Hi Dipesh,
The Planning Commission will hold a study session on Tuesday, June 24 at
6:45pm in Cupertino Community Hall to discuss potential updates to the
City’s parking regulations for oversized vehicles on public streets. During
the meeting, the Commission will review and consider multiple options
presented by City staff and may choose to recommend one of the
proposals for City Council consideration in a future ordinance.
The staff report is attached for your reference, should you wish to learn
more. Public input is welcome. You may:
Attend the meeting in person or via teleconference
Share your feedback by emailing Planning Commission Chair
Santosh Rao at srao@cupertino.gov or the full commission at
planningcommission@cupertino.gov.
For additional details, please refer to the attached documents.
Daniel Degu
Economic Development Manager
City Manager's Office
DanielDe@cupertino.gov
W:(408)777-3233/C:(669)251-1804
From: Ty Bash <tybash@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2025 4:53 PM
To: Planningcommission@cuprtino.gov <Planningcommission@cuprtino.gov>
Cc: Santosh Rao <Srao@cupertino.gov>
Subject: RV ordinance
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 commission,
My name is Ty Bash and I am the operations manager at Happy Days. Since we opened our
doors in 2001, we at Happy Days have provided early childhood education for infants,
preschoolers and kindergarteners to families in the Cupertino community.
As we have recovered from Covid restrictions, the challenges of remote work and return to
work are compounded by challenges of the people living in RVs in front of our school. On a
daily basis one could find an RV or two parked in front of our school, or across the street in
front of the Target parking lot. Many addition RVs are parked along Alves, behind
Target. Perspective parents frequently inquire about the status of the vehicles, while we
can only assume that others are altogether deterred and do not come in. Fortunately, we
have not had an incident with those who occupy the RVs, but the fear of the parents,
children and our employees is real.
While we empathize with plight of the RV residents, other resident solutions must be
found. We are happy that the mayor is looking into addressing the situation and are in full
support of legislation that will restrict RV parking on public streets.
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone