Loading...
CC 07-15-2025 Item No. 11. Study Session BMR Housing Mary Ave_Supplemental ReportCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3308 • FAX: (408) 777-3333 CUPERTINO.GOV CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT SUPPLEMENTAL 1 Meeting: July 15, 2025 Agenda Item #8 Subject Study Session to review an application to develop new ELI (Extremely Low Income) and BMR housing units for Developmentally Disabled individuals (IDD) on City-owned property along Mary Avenue (APN: 326-27-053) Recommended Action Conduct study Session on the Mary Avenue project and provide comments to staff and applicant. Staff’s responses to questions are shown in italics. Q1-2: Disabled people often have medical equipment that needs power either to run or to charge. I see solar panels but no reference to batteries for power outages. CPAP machines, hospital beds, elevators for wheelchair bound residents, charging for electric wheelchairs, lifts, etc. These are essential for everyday living. Loss of power can be very serious. Can/will this project provide battery backup so at minimum, the elevators work? Will the windows open in case power goes out on a very hot day? Staff response: Project will be required to be in conformance with Chapter 11A of the 2022 California Building Code. All the proposed affordable units are meeting the accessible requirements for the Multi-family dwellings. Regarding battery storage, under the 2022 California Energy Code Section 170.1, installation is not mandatory. The requirement depends on the energy budget calculations of the proposed building design. If the proposed design meets the energy budget without battery storage, then batteries are not required. Q3: Currently, there are parking spaces on the east side of Mary Ave directly across from the dog park. Why are these being removed? The bike lane could continue along the edge of the sidewalk as it does right now. Please preserve what few spaces that can be preserved on Mary Ave. Staff response: The City intends to preserve and maintain the existing parking and bike lane configuration on the eastern side of Mary Ave, north and south of the project. As the plans are still currently under review, City staff will continue to work with the project team to ensure the project conforms to the existing conditions north and south of the project. Q4: There is a major confusion on the Plan Set regarding Mary Ave street parking. Are all the parking spaces on the east side of Mary Ave that are directly across from the ELI project being removed? Page 3 of 16 (Overall Illustrated Plan), shows no parking on the east side of Mary Ave across from this ELI project BUT… Page 11 of 16, Proposed ViewPoint A, right picture is the “after of Building #1” shows parking remaining on the east side of Mary Ave. Page 11 of 16, Proposed ViewPoint B, right picture is the “after of Building #2) shows parking remaining on the east side of Mary Ave. Page 12 of 16, Proposed ViewPoint C – same issue – shows parking remaining on east side Page 12 of 16, Proposed ViewPoint D – same issue – shows parking remaining on east side Staff response: Comment noted and a request to the applicant to clarify the renderings has been requested. All spaces directly across from the development along the east side of Mary Avenue will be removed. Q5: The Staff Report just mentions diagonal parking spaces being removed and replaced with parallel parking. It does not mention that all the parallel street parking spaces will be dedicated to the project to provide a total of 55 spaces. Staff Response: The parallel parking spaces on Mary Avenue are not dedicated to the project site and will continue to be available to the public. Q6: There is no discussion or even a mention that Mary Ave will be re-configured in a major way as a result of this project. Staff Response: Comment noted and this will be discussed at the City Council Study Session on this item. Q7: Since this is a BMR funded project, the units are typically available for 55 or 99 years but this is on public land, using public funds. I’ve heard these are “forever units” but I have not seen it in writing. This is a VERY important reason to support this project. Why is this not mentioned? Staff Response: The leasing of the property will most likely be for 99 years. This has been mentioned in prior public discussions on this project site, as well as in the RFP when soliciting proposals. The purpose of this study session is to introduce the project and its design to the City Council and community. Q8: COMMENT #1 – Staff Report and Plan Set differ • Staff Report says 20 units per building • Plan Set says Building #1 has 19 units and Building #2 has 21 units COMMENT #2 – Staff Report and Plan Set differ • Staff Report says 18 units for disabled • Plan Set says 19 units for disabled COMMENT #3 – Missing “Figure 1” • Staff Report says “..a Vicinity Map is provided as Figure 1” but there is no Figure 1 • Plan Set has a Vicinity Map on Page 1 of 16 (lower left corner Staff Response: There was a discrepancy between the staff report and the plan set and the correct numbers are as follows: • Building 1 has 19 units and Building 2 has 21 units, totaling 40 onsite, of which 19 units will be reserved for those individuals with intellectual and development disabilities. • The Vicinity is located on Sheet AS0.0, as well as a Contextual Plan on Sheet AS0.1. Staff will also address these clarifications during the Study Session. Attachments Provided with Original Staff Report: A. Plan Set