Loading...
CC 07-01-2025 Oral CommunicationsCC 07-1-2025 Oral Communications Written Comments From:Santosh Rao To:City Council; Rachelle Sander; City Clerk; Tina Kapoor Subject:BlackBerry Farm festivities are missing on July 4th agenda. Date:Tuesday, June 24, 2025 2:53:40 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. [Writing on behalf of myself only, as a Cupertino resident] Dear City Clerk, Would you please include the below in written communications for the upcoming Cupertino city council meeting. Dear Mayor Chao, July 4th sub-committee council members, City Council, Acting Manager Kapoor, Director Sander, I am delighted to see the July 4th celebrations back. It was a dark night in the city’s history during thanksgiving week of 2023 when then Mayor Wei and the prior council majority defunded July 4th evening celebrations. It was done the week of Thanksgiving. When no residents were in attendance. What was the rush back then to defund it and that too the week of Thanksgiving. Was it to ensure that resident input could be avoided. I remember then and on many occasions since then being the lone resident voice advocating to bring July 4th evening celebrations event back. It is therefore with great joy that I see the return of July 4th all day celebrations after prolonged and lone advocacy to do so for many meetings now since that dark week of Thanksgiving 2023. I want to congratulate Mayor Chao, Council member Wang and Vice-Mayor Moore on bringing this back. I look forward to a grand and stunning July 4th celebration. I urge you to start planning immediately for July 4th 2026 when it will be the 250th year since the founding of our great nation. With all that said, I am deeply disappointed that the BlackBerry Farm day time festivities are missing in the agenda. Is this an oversight. I hope it is. Please fix the oversight and add back the BlackBerry Farm daytime celebrations to the agenda. If staff have concerns about limited BBF parking please limit it to residents only and if needed a fixed capacity of advance reservations and not for non-residents. I look forward to your correcting the agenda to add back the BlackBerry Farm daytime celebrations. https://www.cupertino.gov/Parks-Recreation/Events/Fourth-of-July Thanks, San Rao From:Devendar To:City Council; City Clerk Subject:Request for Urgent Action to Implement Resolution No. 25-13918 Date:Friday, June 27, 2025 9:00:18 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 City Clerk, Please include the below in written communications for the upcoming city council meeting. Subject: Request for Urgent Action to Implement Resolution No. 25-13918 Dear Mayor Liang Chao, Vice-Mayor Kitty Moore, and Honorable Council Members, I hope you are doing well. I am a resident of McClellan Road and one of the families directly impacted by the displacement efforts currently being carried out by Foothill-De Anza at McClellan Terrace. With sincere concern, I respectfully request that you urgently direct staff to take the next steps to implement Resolution No. 25-13918, which was adopted by the City Council on May 6, 2025. This resolution acknowledges the severe impact that converting multifamily rental housing to student housing has on our community and calls for protections to prevent such harmful transitions. Many families—including those with children attending Lincoln Elementary, Kennedy Middle, and Monta Vista High—are facing forced eviction. This situation is causing significant hardship and emotional stress to long- standing Cupertino residents. While we understand the importance of student housing, it should not come by displacing families who have made Cupertino their home. I kindly urge the Council to move forward with updates to the municipal code—similar to San Francisco Municipal Code Section 317—to protect our city’s rental housing and maintain stability for working families. Thank you for your leadership and continued support for our community. Warm regards, Cupertino resident Devendar From:LindaVistaTT To:City Council; Tina Kapoor; City Attorney"s Office; City Clerk Cc:Vikram Saxena; dennismtsao@gmail.com; avinashpd@gmail.com; Helena Cohen; tsakhi@hotmail.com; themeichu@gmail.com; derchang@gmail.com; saba_sathya@yahoo.com; uniquefamily@yahoo.com; Srinivas Raghvendra; malathi.srinivas@gmail.com; Parimal Kopardekar; akilatn@gmail.com; tsailipu@yahoo.com; vlentfer@gmail.com; Amy Chung; lconstant97@yahoo.com; constantbodies@gmail.com; rkonduri@gmail.com; andy_const@yahoo.com; James Choi; amitu26@gmail.com; jim.lentfer@gmail.com; santateresacupertino@gmail.com; dtconstantdds@aol.com; ydillaha@yahoo.com; maryjgunderson@gmail.com; davidcyan@gmail.com Subject:Request to Deny Density Bonus Approval for Summerhill Homes Development on Evulich Court Date:Tuesday, June 24, 2025 10:53:42 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. Executive Summary We, the residents, respectfully request that the Cupertino City Council deny approval of density bonus waiver incentives for the proposed Summerhill Homes development on Evulich Court. Recent devastating wildfires in Southern California and emerging fire safety research demonstrate that the proposed density bonuses—which would allow reduced setbacks and increased building heights beyond R3 zoning limits—create unacceptable fire risks in areas recently designated as Very High Fire Risk zones. These changes materially alter the public safety profile of the development. State law under Government Code § 65915(d)(2)(C) provides cities with discretion to deny waivers when they would result in a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety that cannot be mitigated. Given the site's new designation as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone by Cal Fire in 2025, combined with topographical vulnerability and limited evacuation routes, Cupertino is on strong legal footing to not approve these waivers based on safety risk. Background The subject property on Evulich Court, located on Linda Vista Drive, was originally zoned for 11 single-family homes (R1) and later changed to R3 zoning. Summerhill Homes now proposes to construct 51 townhomes by utilizing California density bonus laws to: Reduce required setbacks below R3 standards Increase building heights beyond R3 limits Critical Context: This neighborhood has recently been designated as Very High Fire Risk under CalFire's updated Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps, released following the analysis of the devastating January 2025 Eaton and Palisades fires. As documented in the City of Cupertino's own notification letter dated May 23, 2025, the City has received formal notification from CalFire about these recommendations and is required by CA Government Code Section 51175 to adopt the State's Fire Hazard Severity Zone designations by June 24, 2025. Elevated Wildfire Vulnerability: The Evulich Court development site is particularly vulnerable to wildfire as it backs directly into open space areas including golf course and nature preserves. This wildland-urban interface (WUI) location creates heightened fire risk because: Open space areas provide continuous fuel loads that can carry wildfire directly to structures Golf courses and nature preserves often contain dry vegetation during fire season The interface between developed and undeveloped land is where most catastrophic structure losses occur Key Findings from Recent Fire Research Structure Density as a Major Fire Risk Factor The Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety (IBHS) preliminary report on the Eaton and Palisades fires identified structure density as a major risk factor, specifically noting: "In tightly packed areas, flames leapt from home to home, overwhelming even some fire-resistant structures." This finding is supported by scientific research from the Fire Safety Research Institute and NIST, which demonstrates that: Radiant heat transfer from structure fires can cause neighboring structures to ignite Structure-to-structure fire spread significantly impacts loss of life and destruction of infrastructure Residential structures can catch fire when exposed to fully involved structures located as close as 8 feet from the eaves CalFire's Updated Recommendations Following the Eaton and Palisades fires, CalFire and IBHS specifically recommend: "Use setbacks to maximize the spacing between structures to the greatest extent possible" Enhanced fire-resistant construction in dense areas Elimination of "connective fuels" (fences, decks, landscaping) that enable fire spread between structures These recommendations directly contradict the proposed density bonuses that would reduce setbacks and increase height. The proposed site plan allows minimal side and rear setbacks in a WUI zone, ignoring the core firebreak strategies recommended by fire agencies. Fast-Moving Fire Risk Research shows that 78% of structures destroyed in U.S. fires in the first two decades of the 21st century burned in fast-moving fires. The Eaton and Palisades fires rank among the fastest-growing fires on record, demonstrating that when fires move quickly, traditional fire suppression becomes impossible—making structure separation even more critical. Policy Conflicts and Legal Considerations California's Contradictory Policies California has created a fundamental conflict between: 1. Housing density laws that encourage reduced setbacks and increased building height 2. Fire safety requirements that call for maximum structure separation in high-risk areas These two policies are not harmonized in current law, creating a gray area that cities must resolve using § 65915(d)(2)(C) when life safety is at risk. Local Authority to Protect Public Safety California density bonus law specifically states that local governments are not required to grant waivers or density bonuses if they would: "have a specific, adverse impact upon health, safety, or the physical environment, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact." In this case, mitigation is not feasible because the hazard stems from the reduced setbacks and increased height demanded by the developer, not design details that can be engineered away. City's Legal Responsibility as Local Responsibility Area (LRA): As stated in the City's own May 23, 2025 notification letter, Cupertino is designated as a Local Responsibility Area where "the local government, and not the State Department of Forestry and Fire Prevention, is responsible for wildfire protection." This places a direct legal duty on the City Council to prioritize fire prevention and protection measures. Failure to Fulfill Legal Duty: Approving density bonuses that contradict fire safety science in a newly designated Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone would constitute a failure to discharge the City's legal responsibility for wildfire protection under CA Government Code Sections 51177-51179. Specific Concerns for Cupertino 1. Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Risk The Evulich Court location on Linda Vista Drive, backing into open space areas (golf course and nature preserve), places this development in the highest-risk wildland-urban interface (WUI) zone. Research consistently shows that: Most catastrophic wildfire losses occur at the WUI where wildland meets developed areas Open space vegetation provides continuous fuel loads that carry fire directly to structures Golf courses and nature preserves, despite maintenance, contain seasonal dry vegetation that becomes highly flammable Increasing structural density in WUI areas compounds fire risk by creating more targets for ignition and enabling rapid structure-to-structure spread due to reduced setbacks. 2. Recent Fire Risk Designation and Legal Timeline The neighborhood's recent designation as Very High Fire Risk indicates that standard development practices are insufficient. As documented in the City's May 23, 2025 notification letter: CalFire issued official Fire Hazard Severity Zone recommendations in February and March 2025 The City is legally required to adopt these designations by June 24, 2025 The City "may not reduce the recommended designations or boundaries included on the CAL FIRE maps" These designations directly impact development standards and fire protection requirements Approving density bonuses that contradict this recent Very High Fire Risk designation would be inconsistent with the City's legal obligations under state fire safety law. The change in designation was not known or accounted for during the Housing Element rezoning process in early 2023. Because density bonus entitlements are conditioned on calculus. The City is not obligated to apply waivers or incentives under density bonus law when circumstances pose a “specific, adverse impact” on health and safety. The California Government Code explicitly provides that local jurisdictions may deny waivers or concessions when such impacts cannot be mitigated. In this case, the elevated risk is unmitigable under the current proposal, as density itself is the hazard. 3. Insurance Impact on Existing Residents Insurance companies are increasingly using their own wildfire risk models that consider structure density and separation. Some models now apply a surcharge to all properties within a set radius of high-density nodes, meaning adjacent homeowners will bear financial consequences for a project they did not choose. The proposed development could: Increase fire risk ratings for the entire neighborhood Lead to higher premiums or policy cancellations for existing residents Reduce property values due to increased fire risk 4. Evacuation Concerns The proposed increase from 11 to 51 units creates significant evacuation challenges: Wildlife Urban Interface limits the number of exit paths out of the area; Linda Vista drive is the only exit route, and there is no parallel street on the other side of the development. Potential for evacuation bottlenecks that could prove fatal in fast-moving fires. Cupertino’s current emergency evacuation modeling was based on low-density projections and does not account for a fivefold increase in residential units on this parcel. 5. Infrastructure Strain Emergency services and fire suppression resources designed for lower-density development may be inadequate for the proposed high-density configuration under the new very high fire risk designation. Recommendations We respectfully request that the Cupertino City Council: Immediate Action 1. Deny the density bonus application for the Summerhill Homes development based on fire safety concerns related to reduced setbacks and waiver of building height limits. 2. Reduce density of the site: The proposed site had one of the highest increases in permitted density; from R1 (5 DU/acre) to R3/TH (up to 35 DU/acre). The 7x increase in density was approved prior to the designation of the neighborhood as a Very High Fire Risk zone. Long-Term Policy Development 1. Establish local fire safety standards that guide the interpretation of state density bonus provisions in Very High Fire Risk zones 2. Develop objective criteria for evaluating density bonus applications in fire-prone areas 3. Engage with regional partners to address the conflict between housing production and fire safety Conclusion The devastating Eaton and Palisades fires have provided clear evidence that increasing structural density in Very High Fire Risk zones can have catastrophic consequences. The proposed Summerhill Homes development, which relies on density bonuses to exceed safe development standards, directly contradicts current fire safety science and CalFire's updated recommendations. The City's Legal Duty is Clear: As a Local Responsibility Area, Cupertino bears direct legal responsibility for wildfire protection under CA Government Code Sections 51177- 51179. The City's own May 23, 2025 notification letter acknowledges this responsibility and the requirement to adopt Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone designations by June 24, 2025. We urge the City Council to prioritize public safety over housing production goals and deny the density bonus provisions for this development. Granting density bonuses that increase fire risk in a newly designated Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone would constitute a failure to discharge the City's legal duty to protect residents from wildfire. The City has clear discretion to deny waivers that would erode defensible space, vertical separation, and emergency access in a known fire corridor. Cupertino would not be the first city to invoke § 65915(d)(2)(C) in a high-risk area. The state housing laws recognize that public safety must remain a non-negotiable floor. The lessons learned from Southern California's recent fires must inform our local development decisions to protect our community from similar tragedies. The choice before the Council is clear: approve a development that contradicts fire safety science and the City's legal obligations, or uphold the community's safety by requiring development that conforms to underlying zoning designed to protect residents in this newly recognized high-risk area. We trust that the City Council will make the decision that prioritizes the safety and welfare of Cupertino residents and fulfills the City's legal responsibilities as a Local Responsibility Area. Supporting Research URLs: CalFire Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/what-we- do/community-wildfire-preparedness-and-mitigation/fire-hazard-severity-zones/fire- hazard-severity-zones-maps IBHS Heat Transfer from Structure Fires Research: https://fsri.org/research/heat- transfer-structure-fires NIST Structure Separation Experiments: https://www.nist.gov/el/fire-research- division-73300/wildland-urban-interface-fire-73305/structure-separation-experiments CalFire Official Fire Information: https://www.fire.ca.gov/ IBHS Resilient Rebuilding Report: https://ibhs.org/ibhs-news-releases/ibhs-releases- resilient-rebuilding-a-path-forward-for-los-angeles-a-blueprint-for-survivable-and- insurable-homes-and-communities/ Reuters Analysis on LA Fire Speed and Structure Density: https://www.reuters.com/graphics/CALIFORNIA-WILDFIRE/SPEED/akpeewrodpr/ Scientific American on Fast-Moving Fire Dangers: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/palisades-and-eaton-fires-show-rising- dangers-of-fast-moving-fires/ UCLA Analysis of Altadena Fire Impacts: https://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/altadenas-black-community-disproportionately- affected-eaton-fire-report-shows This letter is based on peer-reviewed fire safety research, CalFire recommendations, and analysis of recent wildfire events. Residents are available to provide additional technical documentation and expert testimony as needed. Residents who endorsed this email Deshpande avinashpd@gmail.com 95014 Helena Cohen 4helenacohen@gmail.com 11105 La Paloma Drive. Cupertino, CA 95014 Tsakhi Segal tsakhi@hotmail.com 95014 Michu Huang themeichu@gmail.com 95014 DerChang Kau DerChang@gmail.com 95014 Saba Sathya saba_sathya@yahoo.com 22023 Baxley Court, Cupertino, CA 95014 Selvi Sathya uniquefamily@yahoo.com 95014 Raghvendra srini.email@gmail.com 22004, Baxley Court, Cupertino, CA Nagamangala mnagaman@yahoo.com 22004 Baxley Ct , Cupertino CA 95014 Parimal Kopardekar parimal.kopardekar@gmail.com 22083 Baxley Ct, Cupertino, CA Philip Tsai tsailipu@yahoo.com 11046 Linda Vista Dr, Cupertino, CA Veronica Lentfer vlentfer@gmail.com 22024 Baxley Court, Cupertino, CA LeeAnn Constant lconstant97@yahoo.com 11097 Linda Vista Drive, Cupertino, CA Constant constantbodies@gmail.com 11056 Linda Vista Dr. Cupertino Amit amitu26@gmail.com 10881 Santa Teresa drive Cupertino Jenny Chui santateresacupertino@gmail.com 95014 Ying Sosic ydillaha@yahoo.com 11137 Linda Vista Drive, Cupertino, CA Gunderson maryjgunderson@gmail.com 22074 Baxley Ct Cupertino Ca Vikram Saxena vsaxena@gmail.com 95014