Cupertino planners seek direction on objective design standards for multifamily development

Cupertino planning staff and consultants on Oct. 28 asked the Planning Commission for detailed feedback on proposed objective design standards for new multifamily and residential mixed‑use development.

The study session, led by a City of Cupertino staff member and consultant Greg Goodfellow of PlaceWorks, reviewed five sample ODS packages from nearby cities and presented two next‑step options: bring a full administrative draft back to the commission before any City Council consideration, or return with a revised sample package for additional feedback. "What we want to do tonight is actually, as Luke said, revisit, you know, the history of the project," Goodfellow told commissioners as he opened the presentation.

Why it matters: state housing laws and streamlined approval pathways have narrowed the circumstances in which local design rules will bind developers. Consultants and staff repeatedly noted that projects that use the state density bonus (and related provisions under SB 330) may be able to "opt out" of local standards, reducing the practical reach of ODS for many larger multifamily projects. That legal context shaped much of the commission'level discussion about where ODS can be most effective and how they should be structured.

Key details

- Sample approaches: Commissioners reviewed stand‑alone ODS packages (Sunnyvale, San Mateo, Foster City, Los Gatos) and code‑embedded standards (Palo Alto). Sunnyvale's stand‑alone package, adopted in 2023, was highlighted for its mix of text, tabular standards, diagrams, photographs and an optional point‑based scoring system. Staff said such formats are commonly paired with a ministerial checklist for staff review.

- Developer waivers and density bonus: Consultants and commissioners agreed that state density bonus law frequently enables waivers of local standards when affordable units are included. "Senate Bill 330 projects certainly are using that," Goodfellow said, describing how many projects now rely on state provisions to streamline approvals. Commissioners asked whether that reality makes ODS less effective for larger projects and concluded the standards may have the most practical effect on smaller projects that are ineligible for density bonus waivers.

- Missing‑middle focus: Several commissioners urged prioritizing "missing‑middle" housing (duplexes, triplexes and fourplexes) because these smaller projects are less likely to qualify for density bonus waivers and therefore are more likely to be governed by local ODS. Staff and consultants agreed a separate section or addendum focused on missing‑middle design is feasible.

- Additions, remodels and exemptions: Commissioners asked whether ODS would apply to additions or remodels of existing multifamily buildings. Staff said the commission could distinguish new construction from remodels and even exempt certain building types (for example, existing properties that reflect historic or distinctive character) to avoid imposing standards that are incompatible with older fabric.

- Format, outreach and adoption: Commissioners discussed the tradeoffs between embedding standards in the municipal code (Palo Alto'style) and maintaining a stand‑alone package with an appendix checklist. Several commissioners favored stand‑alone documents with clear checklists and online links, while noting that including ODS in the code can carry more legal and perceived weight. Chair Rao and others asked staff to return with a draft administrative ODS for commission review prior to Council.

- Illustrations and practical conflicts: Commissioners praised Sunnyvale's use of tables and 3D graphics but raised implementation questions, including a possible conflict between recommended tree spacing and fire‑access constraints. Staff acknowledged such practical tradeoffs would be resolved during drafting.

Public comment

Jennifer Griffin, an in‑person speaker, urged the commission to reject ODS and criticized recent state housing bills, including SB 330, for what she called erosion of local control. "We need to take, just don't do it," Griffin said during public comment.

What the commission decided

Commissioners generally asked staff to prepare and return with a full administrative draft of objective design standards for Planning Commission review before any City Council hearing, and to plan community outreach (including a possible second community session and consideration of a developer roundtable). Staff said a Council hearing is unlikely until early 2026.

Next steps

Staff will draft an administrative ODS package that incorporates the commission's feedback — including a missing‑middle section, a ministerial checklist, and options for graphics and format — and return to the Planning Commission before any Council consideration. The commission signaled interest in seeing the draft sooner rather than later so members and the public can review it before it advances to City Council.