Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council adopts weed‑abatement order after hearing; two compliant parcels removed from list
Summary
The council conducted a public hearing under Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 9.08 and accepted staff and county recommendations to order abatement of hazardous vegetation on listed parcels, adopting Resolution 25‑6 with adjustments after property owners showed maintenance plans or recent compliance.
Cupertino’s Jan. 22 council meeting included a public hearing on the annual weed‑abatement list and a staff recommendation to authorize Santa Clara County to abate noncompliant properties if owners do not clear hazards by April 30.
Tina Kapoor (Deputy City Manager) and county abatement staff explained the program requirements under Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 9.08 and noted that compliance inspections and abatement notices are managed by the Santa Clara County Department of Agriculture. Staff summarized the minimum standards (vegetation under 6 inches, 30‑foot clearance from structures, cleared eaves/roofs/gutters, and ten‑foot clearance from chimneys).
Several property owners spoke during the hearing to contest or explain their situations. County staff and the city recommended removal of two parcels from the abatement list after owners demonstrated ongoing maintenance plans: the parcel at 10399 South Tantal (owner provided a twice‑monthly gardener schedule) and 10605 Johansen Drive (owner showed recent landscaping improvements and maintenance plans). A different parcel (18781 Tuggle Avenue) remained on the list because of a history of repeated compliance failures and will remain for county monitoring until the property demonstrates three consecutive years of compliance.
Council adopted Resolution 25‑6 ordering abatement of public nuisance from weeds and other fire hazards, as amended to remove the two compliant parcels from the city’s abatement list; the motion carried unanimously with Council Member Wong absent.
Why it matters: The abatement program is intended to reduce wildfire risk and protect public safety by ensuring private parcels and adjacent areas meet vegetation and defensible‑space standards. Parcels that remain noncompliant can be abated by county contractors and charged through the property tax rolls if owners do not correct hazards.
What council voted: Adoption of Resolution 25‑6, with the amendment removing two parcels from the program based on verified maintenance plans; property owners retain the option to hire county‑approved contractors to perform abatement before April 30 to avoid county abatement charges.
Next steps: County inspectors will continue monitoring parcels on the list through April 30 and will remove parcels once they pass three consecutive annual inspections for compliance.
