Cupertino discusses park fee reduction linked to AB 2097 and housing project plans

The Cupertino Planning Commission convened on April 22, 2025, to discuss significant developments regarding local housing projects and associated regulations. A key focus of the meeting was the interpretation of Assembly Bill 2097, which prohibits cities from imposing minimum parking requirements on developments located within half a mile of major public transit. The discussion highlighted differing views between city officials and developers regarding the applicability of this law to current projects.

Developers argued that the VTA bus routes 23 and 5 qualify as major public transit under the law, thus supporting their request for a parking reduction. They expressed strong disagreement with the city’s stance that AB 2097 does not apply to their project, asserting that their interpretation is legally sound and backed by supportive letters from the Housing Action Coalition and legal representatives.

The developers proposed a reduction in park fees as part of their housing project, emphasizing that this aligns with the city’s housing element approved by the state, which encourages exploring such reductions to enhance housing affordability. They presented plans for a new public park, measuring 12,000 square feet, arguing that the demographic of future residents would result in minimal wear and tear on park facilities.

Additional discussions included modifications to the project’s design, such as increased setbacks and the elimination of a basement parking garage. The developers noted that they would maintain their commitment to providing 39 parking stalls for below-market-rate housing units, despite reducing retail space to accommodate necessary back-of-house facilities.

Concerns about parking availability were reiterated throughout the meeting, with the developers proposing to increase parking stalls for an assisted living building from 18 to 38 in response to community feedback. They emphasized that this adjustment would help alleviate parking concerns while still adhering to their original proposal.

In conclusion, the meeting underscored the ongoing tension between city regulations and housing development needs in Cupertino. The discussions revealed a commitment from developers to collaborate with city officials to find a workable solution that addresses both housing demands and community concerns about parking and public space. As the planning process continues, the outcomes of these discussions will be crucial in shaping Cupertino's approach to future housing projects and urban development.