Cupertino Matters
- Local news – Parking controversy
- UPCOMING- Planning Commission, Apr. 22, 2025, 6:45 p.m.
- RECAP – City Council, Tues., Apr. 15, 6: 45 Regular, 6:00 Closed
Spring is definitely here as trees and plants burst into bloom citywide. Fittingly, the annual Cherry Blossom Festival will take place this weekend, April 26 – 27, in Memorial Park.
In the meanwhile, the issue of parking on Mary Avenue has become suddenly contentious with the completion of the Westport senior housing and Arroyo Village townhomes with two more developments in the pipeline: (1) Mary Avenue Villas for IDD (Intellectually and Developmentally Disabled) residents, which has been in process for about 15 years, and (2) the Westport assisted living/memory care facility on the former Oaks shopping center site, which was approved 5 years ago. During the day on weekdays, parking is plentiful. But other times, parking becomes harder to find in immediate proximity to the development site.
Cupertino is required to build more housing, and needs to build these two projects without more delays. Indeed, the Mary Avenue Villas are a Housing Element site in the city’s current General Plan, and the Westport Project was a Housing Element site in the last Housing Element. Accordingly, the city needs to use parking space more efficiently, rather than adding more car spaces at the sacrifice of spaces and housing for people. Surely, we can manage “shared parking” with multiple uses? Spaces do not have to be used 24/7 for the same use. Specifically:
- Retail spaces are empty after closing hours and overnight
- Residential spaces need overnight parking but remain largely empty during the day while residents are working
- Service providers for seniors and IDD clients generally work during the day, not on weekends.
- Festivals utilize the abundant FREE public parking at De Anza College
- The Senior Center parking lot is empty in the evenings and weekends, other than festivals.
The parking dilemma needs to be addressed holistically by the city, rather than attempting to burden individual housing projects. The current Municipal Code prioritizes housing for cars, rather than housing for people. New state laws, particularly AB 2097, are aimed at forcing cities to reduce parking requirements. Why isn’t Cupertino adjusting its requirements, especially while it is the subject of increased state-level scrutiny and multiple housing-related lawsuits?
Cupertino and other West Valley communities lack facilities to serve our unhoused population. At the Apr. 15 meeting, city council approved (4-1 with Wang voting nay) a MOU to study possibilities on an interjurisdictional basis, as described in the San Jose Spotlight article entitled West Valley cities team up to consider homeless shelter.
For research, past issues back to January 2020 of Cupertino Matters are posted on the website. Encourage your friends who would like to become better informed about our community to subscribe to our email newsletter at CupertinoMatters.org.
UPCOMING – Planning Commission, Tues., Apr. 22 , 2025, 6:45 p.m., Regular meeting
Item No. 3: Update to Vehicle Parking Restrictions on Public Roadways, and Restrictions on Oversized Vehicle Parking in Residential Districts and Customer-Facing Retail Establishments. There have been complaints about RV parking in Cupertino, which typically house “working poor” residents who can’t afford other housing. This ordinance would introduce more restrictions, and is likely overreach by restricting parking in ALL residential neighborhoods, even space on the street for a personally owned vehicle. The recommended action is to make a recommendation to the city council.
Item No. 4: Modification to a previously approved Development Permit and Architectural & Site Approval for the Westport Development including, but not limited to, dwelling count and ground floor retail, Park Land Dedication Fees and minor changes to Building 1. (Application No(s): M-2024-003, ASA-2024-003; Applicant(s): Related California (Cascade Zak); Location: 21267 Stevens Creek Boulevard; APN #326-27-048). This project was first approved by the city council on Aug. 18, 2020. Five years later, post COVID, with increased interest rates and higher construction costs, the original design for the final portion of the site can’t be financed. The developer, Related, is submitting a modified design that is financially viable by (1) increasing the number of assisted living units from 123 to 136 units, with no change to the 35 memory units, (2) reducing the retail component from 17,600 square feet to 4,000 square feet, and (3) eliminating the underground parking by 146 stalls, due to the reduction of retail space and use of a new state law, AB 2097.
The biggest issue is parking. Development of the Westport site was split into three parcels (1) 48 units of low-income senior housing, (2) 88 townhomes and (3) the senior assisted living/memory care facility in this application. The agreements involved shared parking, but that is impacted by the reduction of parking for the Related project. If the modification is not approved, and the developer is unable to move ahead, the parcel will remain vacant with no shared parking. In addition, the city may find itself in legal trouble with the state.
Item No. 5: Review of the new projects proposed in the Fiscal Year 2025 – 2026 Capital Improvement Program for consistency with the General Plan. This is a pro forma review of the council-approved Capital Improvement Plan. Only one new project was added this year: Storm Drain Outfalls Repairs. Planning Commission review is limited here to establishing General Plan consistency and does not allow for extensive discussion of the merits of specific projects.
RECAP – CITY COUNCIL, Tues., Apr. 15, 2025, 6:45 p.m., 2025, Regular meeting, 6:00 p.m. Closed Session
YouTube: 3 hr. 48 min.
Closed Session: No reportable action.
Open Session:
Consent Item No. 12: Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-26 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, Below Market Rate Affordable Housing Fund (BMR AHF), General Fund Human Services Grant (HSG), Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA), and County funding allocations. The Housing Commission reviewed applications for these funds and made recommendations, allocating them to service providers (including West Valley Community Services) which support unhoused and low income residents. Council spent almost an hour reviewing the allocations. The major controversy was the allocation of funds from the city’s BMR Housing fund to two projects (1) Charities Housing Mary Avenue Villas project for the IDD (Intellectually and Developmentally Disabled) for $3M, and (2) Eden Housing on Wolfe Road project for school district employees. Approved 4-1 with Wang voting nay.
Item No. 13: Direct Staff on Commission Review of the Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor Vision Study. Council spent over an hour debating whether this study should be reviewed by the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission based on historical practices (already on their agenda for the following night) or the Planning Commission, which has had minimal engagement with alternative transportation, but is attempting to expand its own power. Council resolved the issue by voting unanimously for review by both Commissions.
Item No. 14: Review future agenda items requested by City Councilmembers. Most of these were folded into the City Work Program. Due to overlong discussion earlier in the meeting, Items 14 to 17 on the list were continued. Item 18 on the list, regarding interest in the Finch property currently owned by CUSD, was agendized by a 5-0 vote. Public comment will remain available when the item returns to council.
CUPERTINO COURIER: April 18, 2025
The front page picture and photo on page 5 is entitled Cultural exchange blossoms: Event celebrates sister city relationship with Toyokawa, Japan, highlighting the annual Cherry Blossom Festival. Community briefs are (1) Weed abatement and (2) Recycling day on April 26. Page 8 is a previously published Mercury News article entitled Community colleges work to provide student housing: with affordability out of reach, 2-year districts in the Bay Area explore on-campus living quarters or finding apartments. Page 10 is a previously published Mercury News article entitled Deli and bakery at Whole Foods stay closed for health violations: County health officials discover evidence of rodent infestations. Page 12 is a previously published Mercury News article entitled YIMBY Law group files pair of lawsuits against the city: It alleges several housing plans were rejected in violation of state laws. The sole legal notice is a public hearing to amend the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Fee Schedule at the May 6, 2025 City Council meeting.
Warm regards,
Jean Bedord
Cupertino Matters
Publisher and Editor
