Cupertino Facts

Category: SB10

  • Single Family Neighborhoods at Risk Throughout Cupertino

    Single Family Neighborhoods at Risk Throughout Cupertino

    Over the years, there have been whisper campaigns on the mostly residential West side of Cupertino, suggesting the residents should support builder backed candidates for City Council. The reason given was that West Cupertino is already built out and will not be impacted by the denser developments desired by the builders, since it will be on the East side.

    However, the reality is that once zoning laws are changed to allow higher density construction, they apply to the entire city, not just East Cupertino. West Cupertino, is dominated by single family homes, and is especially vulnerable to policies which allow existing single family lots to be rezoned to permit multi-story high-density construction

    Linda Vista Drive Residents Wake Up to Plans for 87 New Homes

    Linda Vista Drive is situated  West of Bubb in North Monta Vista; it is in the subdivision which houses three schools: Lincoln Elementary, Kennedy Middle and Monta Vista High. It is a neighborhood of single family homes, zoned as R1.

    There are two projects under consideration which are going to dramatically alter the neighborhood by almost doubling the number of homes on the street.

    The first project is a plan to build more than 50 townhomes on a site originally zoned for 11 single family homes. With the relaxed guidelines for setbacks, building height and floor area, the builder plans to have multi-story buildings less than 7 ft from the adjoining single family homes. Note that R1 zoning requires a 2nd story setback of at least 25f; and 40ft for larger lots. 

    The second project, Vista Heights, is a Builder’s Remedy project to convert an old quarry originally zoned for four homes with hillside zoning, to around 35 homes along with a commercial gymnasium. The entrance to the development will be via a steep road feeding into Linda Vista Park.

    Former  Mayors: Facilitating High Density Projects in West Side R1 Zones

    We recently discovered an email sent by former City Mayor, Richard Lowenthal, to current city council members Hung Wei and Sheila Mohan. Leading up to the November 2022 elections, Richard Lowenthal ran a PAC from his home address, under the self-appointed moniker of  “Council of Mayors”. This coterie of ex-mayors supported pro-builder candidates including the YIMBY JR Fruen and YIMBY endorsed Sheila Mohan. Two members of the coterie, Rod Sinks & Barry Chang are also running for the City Council, again in 2024

    The email chain starts with Leon Chen, the builder who wants to develop Vista Heights, writing to Richard Lowenthal, with the subject line “help connect with majors (sic)”. In his email, Leon asks for an introduction to council members Hung Wei and Sheila Mohan about the Vista Heights project which he had discussed with Richard. Richard forwards that email to the council member, with a personal endorsement calling “He(Leon) and his wife as wonderful people”.

    We do wonder why:

    • Leon Chen discussed the project with Richard Lowenthal who had not been on the city council for more than a decade
    • Leon Chen did not write directly to the City Council Members, but sought the introduction from the former mayor.
    • Leon Chen sought audience with only two of the five current members of the City Council

    No Neighborhood is Safe from YIMBYs

    It is not surprising that the people who won their elections, telling West Cupertino residents that they are protecting them for high density constructions, are facilitating higher density construction on Linda Vista Drive. They are beholden to the builders, not the residents of Cupertino.

    State laws like SB10 facilitate higher density construction in single family zoned lots; all it needs is approval of the city council.

    As part of the housing element, the YIMBY controlled Cupertino City Council also proposed making all corner lots in single family zoned areas to be rezoned to the R3, without any public input, allowing multi-family (apartment/condos) developments at every corner. They also wanted to make any single family lot near a big street to be eligible to be converted into an apartment.

    The final draft changed the rezoning from R3 (multi-family apartments/condos) to R2 (duplex). With ADU laws, a lot zoned for R2 can have two main homes and up to three additional Accessory Dwelling Unit per primary home. In the future, the city council can go back to the proposal of R3 density in R1 zones, as they had originally planned.

    Save our Home Values: End Builders Control


    The builders’ lobby control of Cupertino’s local governments institutions has resulted in major negative changes in our quality of life.

    They were successful in closing down multiple schools in CUSD right in the middle of the pandemic, even though CUSD schools are very crowded, and the school district was projecting a surplus of $39M over the next five years, when the schools were closed. (Read CUSD: Dispelling Disinfo with Data)

    Going forward, they want to allow construction of multi-story buildings right in the middle of single family neighborhoods, with very low setback requirements. These will make existing single family homes in Cupertino be less attractive to future buyers, since they run the risk of having a five story condominium towering over their backyard, less then six feet away from their property.

    It’s time residents of both East and West Cupertino unite to end builders’ control of our local governments, and preserve the character of our single family neighborhoods.

  • One & a Half Years of Builder’s Remedy: How We Got Here

    One & a Half Years of Builder’s Remedy: How We Got Here

    Last December we highlighted how the Cupertino City Council was making changes which would drastically alter the character of its Single Family Neighborhoods. Another risk to the single family neighborhoods is what is called Builder’s Remedy.

    Builder’s Remedy is a new interpretation of a California Housing Accountability Law (1990) which allows developers to ignore the zoning requirements of the area. They can build whatever they want as long as 20% of the homes are reserved for low income housing or 100% for middle income housing. Builder’s Remedy comes into play if the City does not have an approved Housing Element (HE) plan with the state’s Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)

    October 2022 HE Plan

    In spite of the challenges posed by the pandemic, the City of Cupertino had a draft of the Housing Element (HE documents available here) ready in October 2022 for public review. This was a quarter before the filing deadline of January 31, 2023. The plan had provisions for 117% of the requirement the city was expected to fulfill.

    Default by Three Days

    After the November 2022 elections, JR Fruen & Sheila Mohan replaced Darcy Paul & Jon Willey in the Cupertino City Council. Along with the incumbent Hung Wei, this led to shift in control of the council, with the resident-focussed leaders being in the minority. JR Fruen is the founder of Cupertino For All, a YIMBY lobbying group, and has received substantial funding from real-estate related interests both for his City Council Campaign, and for running a PAC (2018) supporting builders interests.


    The new city council submitted the HE to the HDC on February 3, 2023,  three days after the official deadline of Jan 31, 2023. Not having the plan on file, by the January 31st deadline, put Cupertino in automatic default of the HAA and opened the flood-gates for Builder’s Remedy projects and YIMBY lawsuits.

    Delaying the Housing Element Plan by Nineteen Months

    HCD reviewed Cupertino’s Feb 2022 submission, and wrote back to the city on May 4, 2023 with the ruling that:

    “The draft housing element addresses most statutory requirements; however, revisions will be necessary to comply with State Housing Element Law (Article 10.6 of the Gov. Code)

    It also stated that:  

    “HCD considered comments from South Bay YIMBY, YIMBY Law and Greenbelt Alliance, YIMBY Law, David Kellogg, Cupertino For All”. 

    Yes, you read it right. Cupertino For All, the organization incubated by JR Fruen, demanded changes in the HE submitted by Cupertino, where JR Fruen himself is a council member! 

    Earlier in August, 2022, JR Fruen, had written to the City, as the Policy Director for Cupertino For All, asking the council to not consider the pipeline projects at Vallco & Hamptons as part of the HE, asking for a larger buffer, and questioning why more sites were not being up-zoned. (Page 81-83 of communications for Aug 16 meeting)


    After getting elected to the City Council, with the support of Mayor Hung Wei & Sheila Mohan, JR Fruen drove the process of redoing the HE with the final plan submitted in March 2024, more than an year after the Jan 31, 2023 deadline; it was accepted in September 2024. During the nineteen months period the HE was delayed, the council removed many pipeline projects from the HE, added more sites, upzoning them along the way without adequate community input. 

    The final HE is expected to increase the total number of housing units in Cupertino by 30%! Delaying the HE by nineteen months, to satisfy YIMBY organizations’ desire to upzone sites showed a complete disregard to the risk posed by Builder’s Remedy.

    During these one and a half years, Cupertino had no defenses against Builder’s Remedy projects

    Builder’s Remedy Proposals

    There are two projects which we want to discuss in this post which give us a window for what is in store for us in the future. 

    20739 Scofield Drive

    This proposal is to construct a FIVE story, 20 unit condominium to replace a single family home on Schofield Drive near Faria Elementary School.

    Proposed five-story condominium complex in a single family neighborhood

    The single family home which will be replaced by the five story condominium


    Vista Heights (former McDonald Dorsa quarry)

    This proposal is combining three parcels zoned for Residential Hill Side (RHS) and converting them to a development with 35 homes and a commercial gymnasium. The entry to the complex will be via a road which ends inside Linda Vista Park. The City RHS Ordinance is designed to preserve the natural setting of the hillside and protection from natural hazards like fire & landslides, but it will no longer be applicable since this is a Builder’s Remedy project.

    A similar proposal on this site requesting a General Plan Amendment  had been considered by the City Council in 2019 but did not receive a go-ahead due to the steepness of the land, and the amount of regrading needed to make the plan feasible.

    Neighborhood Impact

    Both these projects are fundamentally altering the nature of the neighborhoods. The Scoffield drive plan is putting a five-story building in the middle of a quiet tree-lined street in a single family neighborhood.

    Street View of Scofield Drive: A quiet residential street

    The Vista Heights project will require significant regrading to carve out building-pads for the 30+ homes, on a steep hill. This will impact the stability of the hill, possibly increasing the risk of landslides and putting neighboring homes at risk. It will also route commercial traffic through Linda Vista Park, coming down a steep sloping road, impacting the safety of the residents, especially children using the park.

    This trend of building five story buildings on single family lots will drive existing homeowners out of Cupertino and also discourage future single family  home buyers from Cupertino. Cupertino homes demand a premium pricing, and new buyers will be reluctant to pay that premium if the lot next door can be converted into a five story condominium.

    What Can We Do?

    These projects serve as a reminder of the risk to our quality of life when our city council does not represent the interests of existing residents, but prioritizes maximizing the profits of real estate developers.

    For the time-being, the city will not be required to accept any new Builder’s Remedy projects since the Housing Element Plan has been accepted by the HCD. However, there are other laws which can lead to similar construction (eg: SB10 which allows 14 units on a single family lot). A new Housing Element plan will also be required in a few more years.

    The residents of Linda Vista neighborhood are petitioning the City Council to review those decisions, and Scofield residents have actively pushed back against the developer. However, the best way to preserve our neighborhoods is to elect a city council which is not beholden to builders’ interests and will keep existing residents’ interests in mind when developing the city.

  • Balanced vs Unbalanced Development: Contrasting Visions

     

    Article was updated in September 2024 to add more pictures of the original proposal for Westport which was negotiated down by the resident oriented council to have one third square footage of the original proposals. Many of the concerns expressed in the article have unfortunately come true after JR Fruen's election in 2022. The city is dealing with many plans for large multi-story condo/townhome complexes in the middle of single family neighborhoods.

    This email is about two different visions about new development in Cupertino


    – The balanced approach which considers the impact on the residents, the city infrastructure especially traffic & schools, and the viability of the project.

    – The unbalanced approach which focuses on maximizing investors’ profits without regards to impact on the quality of life of residents.


    What Balanced Development Looks Like

    Westport is the name of the redevelopment of the Oaks Plaza on the corner of Hwy 85 and Stevens Creek Blvd opposite De Anza College. The project had been in the pipeline since 2016, and the original proposal was to build a mixed-use gateway with office, hotels and some homes or a large mixed use residential.


    The two drawing below are visualizations of the two proposals which were under consideration.


     


    The resident oriented city-council elected in November in 2018, collaborated with the developer to redo the project to a combination of market rate homes, senior care, affordable homes and retail. You can see renderings of the project on the developer, KT Urban’s website.



    The density of the approved project is less than one third of the original proposal, and it is traffic neutral. 


    Another mixed-use redevelopment project is Canyon Crossing on the corner of McClellan Rd and Foothill Blvd which is a mixture of housing and much needed retail.  The developments approved by the resident oriented council elected in 2018, balance various competing goals and many are in the process of being constructed..You can read more about the new developments approved by the city here. 

    What Unbalanced Development Looks like


    The contrast with the coterie of ex-mayors approach could not be more stark. Lets consider the the Vallco project which they often refer to while denigrating the resident oriented city-council the voters chose.

    What the coterie of ex-mayors fails to mention is that the Vallco SB35 plan was approved when the coterie (or their proteges) were a majority in the city-council (2018) over the objections of the City Attorney whom they fired.


    Or how they scuttled efforts by councilmen Paul & Scharf to add some height limits (November 2017) right before SB35 became law. 

    Or how they amended the City General Plan to add 2M sq. ft of office space, right after SHP bought the mall, while removing height limit (2014) in spite of overwhelming resident opposition.

    The Vallco project needs site-cleanup to remove toxic waste and contaminants which is being supervised by the County of Santa Clara. The builder sponsored council (Rod Sinks, Barry Chang, Savita Vaidyanathan) ignored residents’ pleas on this topic even though the developer was aware of the contamination as early as 2016, two years before the approval of the plans (2018)



    Hopefully, you now have a better idea of what balanced vs unbalanced development looks like.


    Unbalanced Development: 14 unit buildings on Single Family Lots (SB10)


    A new state law, authored by Sen. Scott Wiener (real-estate industry favorite), SB10 gives local city councils the authority to permit the building of 14 housing units (10 + 2ADU/2JADU) on a single family lot, as long as the home is in a transit priority area, 


    A transit priority area is defined as the region within one-half mile of a major transit stop that is existing or planned. In the map below, the blue circles represent the current areas in Cupertino which would become eligible for 14 unit buildings on single family lots under SB10. In the future, more areas can be included due to a change in the route of the existing VTA bus-lines or a new route being added (even if it is just planned). 

    For example, Rainbow/De Anza, Stelling/McClellan, Stelling/De Anza or Foothill/Stevens Creek can be the centers of new half a mile circular zones (red circles) which will then permit 14 unit homes on single family lots if an eligible service is planned connecting De Anza College to Los Gatos via 85/Prospect or De Anza College to Foothill College via Foothill Expressway/280.



    The silver lining is that local city councils can decide whether to allow such construction under SB10. Unlike other state laws like SB35 or SB9 (lot-split) the law is not mandatory for cities.
    JR Fruen: Endorsed by SB10 Author, Sen. Scott Wiener


    One of the candidates for Cupertino City Council, who has the strong financial and endorsement support of the coterie of ex-mayors, endorsements by the three CUSD trustees who shut down CUSD schools, and a long association with construction related interests is JR Fruen. JR has been endorsed by Sen. Scott Wiener, the author of SB10, on his twitter feed.

    For residents who are interested in preserving the character of their single family homes, a vote for JR Fruen would be a step in the wrong direction, increasing the chances of SB10 approval.



    Vote SmartTo preserve home values and our suburban life, please VOTE for Govind Tatachari, Liang Chao, and Steven Scharf for Cupertino City Council, and Darcy Paul, Satheesh Madhathil & Jerry Liu for CUSD Board. They have taken a public stand to keep school closure off the table and roll back the past decisions. They are not funded by special-interests and will keep the interests of residents foremost, supporting balanced growth.


    Please do NOT vote for JR Fruen, Sheila Mohan for Cupertino City Council, and Ava Chiao (CUSD).  They have been supportive of school closure and giving the land to developers, and have strong endorsements from the three CUSD trustees who closed the schools.  They also receive extensive funding from construction interests, who covet the land our schools stand on. 


  • Whose Interests does JR Fruen Represent?

     JR Fruen is running again as a candidate for Cupertino City Council. The questions for voters to ask is:

    Whose Interests does JR Fruen Represent?

    This election is primarily a battle between

    • Those who want to preserve their neighborhood, and vote out those who support school closures
    • Those who want to serve investor’s interests which include closing schools to free up land for construction.

    Who Funds JR’s Campaign?

    JR has had close ties with the investor community. In 2018 he ran a PAC which received tens of thousands of dollars from investors and construction related entities:
    • Vallco owners $29,000.00
    • Plumbers / Steamfitters Union $10,250.00
    • Electrical Union $10,250.00
    • Sheetmetal Union $10,000.00
    • Sprinklers Union $10,700.00
    His 2022 campaign contributors include:
    Construction Related Entities:
    CREPAC (California Real Estate PAC) $2500
    IFTPE 21 (Worker’s Union PAC) $2000
    Plumbers Steamfitters & Refrigeration Fitters (Worker’s Union PAC) $1000
    Real Estate Broker (Milpitas) $1000
    People who advocated for School Closures:

    Richard Lowenthal who sponsors and nurtures a lot of the anti-resident candidates  ($4900)

    Hung Wei the Cupertino Council Member who opposed the City Council writing to CUSD to reconsider school closure ($4900)
    Rod Sinks who made a U-Turn to not put height limits on Vallco ($1000)
    Lorien Cunningham the CUSD Trustee who spearheaded the campaign to close schools
    Sheila Mohan who is standing for the Cupertino City Council because others asked her to un

    Ava Chiao the CUSD candidate who wants to shut down more schools and construct over the land

    Who is Endorsing JR’s Campaign?

    JR is endorsed by all the three CUSD trustees who voted to close CUSD schools in spite of strong opposition by the residents.

    SB10: Scott Wiener endorses JR!

    Senator Scott Wiener who authored SB10 which gives cities the choice to allow up to 14 units on a single family lot, has endorsed JR Fruen. JR is much more likely to to support SB10 than resident oriented candidates. Learn more about SB10 here.

    What is JR’s Past Record?

    As part of the Citizens’s Advisory Committee he was supportive of closing schools (and hence endorsed by all the three CUSD trustees who led the campaign to close schools)
    He runs an organization called Cupertino For All, which endorsed Prop-16, the proposition which was soundly defeated by the voters of California, and would have led to more discriminatory practices against Asian students.

    Please do not vote for JR Fruen if you do not want more schools to be shut down
    Please do not vote for JR Fruen if you do not want investors to control your city and SB10 construction permitted


    Please vote for Govind Tatachari, Steven Scharf & Liang Chao for Cupertino City Council


    Please vote for Darcy Paul, Satheesh Madhathil & Jerry Liu for CUSD Board.

  • Responsible Governance in Action: Cupertino City Council on SB9

     What is SB9?

    SB9 is a California state law that allows single family homeowners to split their residential lot into two separate lots. Further it permits the construction of up to two new housing units on each of the separate lots.

    SB9 requires all cities to comply with the law.

    How did the City Respond?

    In order to respect the letter and the spirit of the law the City of Cupertino has taken steps to define objective standards to govern lot splitting and the building of new units on them.

    Interim Urgency Ordinance

    The first step was to issue an Interim Urgency Ordinance 21-2235. The city followed the following principles. (Page 4 of Staff Report [2])
    The key guiding principles in development of the Interim Urgency ordinance were to: 

    1. Preserve neighborhood character while accommodating increased density; 
    2. Maintain privacy protection for existing residents; 
    3. Minimize pedestrian, motor vehicle, and bicyclist conflicts from changes to sidewalk and roadway infrastructure necessary to accommodate increased density; and 
    4. Protect environmental resources while maintaining the ministerial level of review required by State law. 

    This ordinance was temporary and is going to expire by the end of the year, 2022

    Public Comments & Feedback

    In September 2022, the City conducted multiple sessions to gather community feedback about the interim ordinance and what changes the residents’ preferred before it became final. 
    One specific area of feedback was on flag lots: many residents expressed that the city permit the creation of flag logs when the existing lot is larger than a typical lot. As a result the City is now proposing a revised draft which clearly defined rules on when the lot split could be used to create flag lots (Pages 6-7 of Staff Report [2])

    Transparency & Objective Standards

    While the city does not control what laws are passed at the state-level, we do have influence on how the laws are interpreted. The objective standards allow for clear guidelines, which reduce uncertainty both for the property developers and the residents.
    The City also demonstrated how the residents have a say on how the objective standards are set by incorporating the suggestions on flag lots.

    Thank You, City Council!

    Laws which bring objectivity and reduce discretion enable a level playing field, for all developers and property owners. That transparency ensures that special interests are not able to exert influence to get undue favors for themselves, without incorporating the interests of the residents, especially the neighbors of the property under redevelopment.
    [1] https://www.myhomestead.com/sb9-handbook-for-homeowners

  • SB10: 10 (+4) Units on Single Family Lot

    What does SB10 Permit?

    The SB10 law allows a 10 unit apartment building (upto 14 units including ADUs/JADUs) [1] on a single family lot located within half a mile of transit. Most of Cupertino is within half mile of public transit (VTA) on Stevens Creek Blvd, De Anza Blvd, Foothill Blvd etc.
    Unlike other laws like SB9 and SB35, SB10 is not mandatory. Local cities can chose to implement it or not.

    City Council Ordinance

    To permit the construction of 14 unit buildings on single family lots, all the City Council needs to do is to pass an ordinance permitting such construction. The ordinance will override any restriction due to voter approved resolutions.

    SB10 effectively allows the City Council to enable construction of multi-story, 14 unit buildings in a lot currently occupied by a single family home. [2]

    Flashback: Height Limits at Vallco

    During the Fall of 2017, Cupertino Council Members Darcy Paul and Steven Scharf had proposed that the city enact height limits on buildings in commercial areas. The proposal was welcomed by Rod Sinks.

    However, when it came to vote two weeks later Rod, Savita & Barry voted against it.
    You can watch the video below to understand how, in November 2017, the City Council ignored residents’ interest to permit buildings without height limits.

    That failure to not put any height limits, allowed Vallco investors to propose a design with 26 story high towers in their SB35 proposal. [3]

    Why does it Matter: History Can Repeat Itself

    Like the Vallco case, an investor friendly council can also relax height and Floor Area Ratio limits in our  single family neighborhoods, 

    That would allow the construction of multi-storied buildings with 14 residential units, on the lot next to your single family home!
    For investors buying a lot for $2M and building up to 14 units, each selling for $1-$1.5M+ is a windfall.

    JR Fruen: Whose Interests do you think he will represent?

    Endorsed by the Author of SB10
    Senator Scott Weiner, who gets the highest amount of funding from real estate interests, and is the author or co-author of SB9, SB10 and SB35 bills has endorsed JR Fruen.
    Note that Cupertino is well ahead of most nearby cities when it comes to housing obligations; something  Scott Wiener failed to mention.

    Funded by Vallco

    J R Fruen, used to run a PAC which received $29,000 [4] from Vallco investors in 2018. He represents the same investor interests’ who influenced the city to not put any reasonable height limit on the Vallco property.


    Cupertino For All: Support for SB Laws

    JR Fruen is the co-founder of Cupertino for All.

    Cupertino For All is very supportive of state laws like SB9/SB35 which take away local control. How do you think he will vote on SB10 approval related ordinances?


    Please do not vote for candidates like JR Fruen, who will be inclined to permit SB10 projects; it can mean the end of Cupertino’s Single Family Home Districts.