Loading...
CC 12-17-2024 Late Written CommunicationsCC 12-17-2024 Item No. 4 City Council meeting schedule through January 21,2026 Written Communications From:Rhoda Fry To:City Council; City Clerk Subject:12/17/2024 City Council Comments Agenda #4 council meeting schedule Date:Tuesday, December 17, 2024 5:42:48 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City Council, I would prefer to keep council meetings on Tuesdays for the sake of consistency. In the past, City Council meetings were on Mondays and it was changed after councilmember Sandy James asked for Tuesdays so as not to interfere with Monday night football. Thanks, Rhoda Fry, 40+ year Cupertino Resident CC 12-17-2024 Item No. 5 Appointment of 2025 Council Committee Assignments Written Communications From:Liang Chao To:City Clerk; sdaly@iteris.com Subject:Fw: Stevens Creek Corridor Study - Dedicated Bus Lanes Date:Tuesday, December 17, 2024 10:31:30 PM Per request of the speaker, please enter this into the written communication of the 12/17 council meeting. "This email is intended to be entered into the public record for both the 17DEC2024 Cupertino City Council Meeting and the 18DEC2024 Stevens Creek Corridor Steering Committee Meeting." Liang Chao​​​​ Mayor City Council LChao@cupertino.gov 408-777-3192 From: Sean T. Daly <sdaly@iteris.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2024 7:06 PM To: Giangreco Chris <ironwood226@sbcglobal.net>; District1 <district1@sanjoseca.gov>; Rosemary Kamei <rosemary.kamei@sanjoseca.gov>; Office of Supervisor Susan Ellenberg <supervisor.ellenberg@bos.sccgov.org>; Lisa Gillmor <lgillmor@santaclaraca.gov>; Dev Davis <dev.davis@sanjoseca.gov>; City Council <citycouncil@cupertino.gov> Subject: RE: Stevens Creek Corridor Study - Dedicated Bus Lanes CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Thank you Chris, I am going to print this and the other comments we received as of tonight for distribution at tomorrow’s meeting. I also wanted to thank you for your participation in the Community Advisory Group, your input helped shape the Vision and Implementation Plan. Sean Daly From: Giangreco Chris <ironwood226@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2024 6:12 PM To: District1 <district1@sanjoseca.gov>; Rosemary Kamei <rosemary.kamei@sanjoseca.gov>; Office This Message Is From an External Sender This message came from outside your organization. Please do not click on links or open attachments from senders you do not trust. of Supervisor Susan Ellenberg <supervisor.ellenberg@bos.sccgov.org>; Lisa Gillmor <lgillmor@santaclaraca.gov>; Dev Davis <dev.davis@sanjoseca.gov>; citycouncil@cupertino.gov; Sean T. Daly <sdaly@iteris.com>; Sean T. Daly <sdaly@iteris.com> Subject: Stevens Creek Corridor Study - Dedicated Bus Lanes Vice Mayor Kamei and Steering Committee members, I am sending this email to caution you, that during tomorrow’s 18DEC2024 Stevens Creek Corridor Steering Committee meeting, based upon what happened at the last meeting, we will experience a hugeZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd Vice Mayor Kamei and Steering Committee members, I am sending this email to caution you, that during tomorrow’s 18DEC2024 Stevens Creek Corridor Steering Committee meeting, based upon what happened at the last meeting, we will experience a huge effort calling for removal of a lane of traffic each direction for dedicated bus lanes. I urge that you do not heed those calls, which are likely not being made by your voting constituents within the corridor. What we witnessed during the last meeting was a massive effort to flood the public input process by special interest groups like TransBay Coalition & SCC4Transit, calling for dedicated bus lane conversion. Their goals appear to be transit transformation wherever possible, regardless of any other needs or concerns of their targeted communities, or negative impacts or consequences caused by such change. It is highly likely few if any of those callers are frequent corridor users. And it is highly likely even fewer are corridor residents, or property or business owners. Abiding by and prioritizing the desires, concerns and demands of those who’s only true corridor interest is transit transformation, over meeting the real world operational and economic needs of the corridor for corridor businesses, and equally if not more importantly, corridor residents – your constituents, the voters, does a huge dis-service to everyone. Rest assured, the vast majority of corridor users, residents, businesses and property owners understand what how bad an idea it is to remove a lane of traffic each direction. Doing so will severely decrease overall boulevard throughput, all while increasing traffic congestion, fuel consumption per mile traveled, GHG emissions, red light running and intersection gridlocking & crosswalk blocking. Increases in traffic queuing at through signals will decrease signalized left turn lane entry opportunities and left turn throughput, further compounding congestion. Roadway safety will decrease, as entering and exiting the roadway will be more difficult with higher traffic densities in fewer lanes. Fewer safe opportunities will exist for right turns out of driveways and right turns on red at side street red lights or stop signs. Even fewer safe opportunities will exist for roadway entry or exit by left turns from driveways, stop signs or the center left turn lane . Gaps in traffic allowing such left turns will be tighter and less frequent, increasing wait times, adding to driver frustration and possibly driver error that may have horrific results. Economic impacts could be heavy to severe for both San Jose and Santa Clara as drivability and accessibility would be made more difficult for more people. Valley Fair / Santana Row and the Stevens Creek Auto Mall would become much less desirable as destination shopping areas, and likely would bring some level of economic decline to the corridor. Sales tax revenues would certainly be negatively impacted. As elected officials, corridor voters will regard your choice to advocate for dedicated bus lanes as a very bad choice. Do not succumb to special interest group pressure to advocate or call for dedicated bus lanes along the Stevens Creek Corridor. This email is intended to be entered into the public record for both the 17DEC2024 Cupertino City Council Meeting and the 18DEC2024 Stevens Creek Corridor Steering Committee Meeting. Thank you for your time, Chris Giangreco Current member, SC Corridor Study Citizens Advisory Group Former member, Stevens Creek Advisory Group (S.C.A.G.) for San Jose D1 Urban Villages This Message Is From an External Sender This message came from outside your organization. Please do not click on links or open attachments from senders you do not trust. From:Sean T. Daly To:Rajesh Narayanan; City Council; City Clerk; Chad Mosley; David Stillman; stevenscreekvision Subject:RE: Feedback on Stevens Creek Blvd Traffic Plans Date:Tuesday, December 17, 2024 7:35:08 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Thank you for your input! Your experience and perspective is very important to this planning process. I am going to print out the comment emails we received by this evening to distribute to the Steering Committee at tomorrow’s meeting. The option of including a lane for busses in included as a potential option within a near-term transit speed, reliability and experience improvement project which would be developed as a next step for improvements to the corridor. This vision planning process is a consensus process, and the implementation of bus lanes was not a consensus item therefore it was only included as an option to explore. Sean Daly From: Rajesh Narayanan <rajesh.nar@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2024 4:58 PM To: citycouncil@cupertino.gov; cityclerk@cupertino.gov; ChadM@cupertino.gov; davids@cupertino.gov; stevenscreekvision <stevenscreekvision@iteris.com> Subject: Feedback on Stevens Creek Blvd Traffic Plans Dear Cupertino Mayor Chao, Steering committee rep Moore, Cupertino council members, any other Stevens Creek corridor steering committee participants, I am a regular user of Stevens Creek Blvd to commute across the city for my daily and weeklyZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd Dear Cupertino Mayor Chao, Steering committee rep Moore, Cupertino council members, any other Stevens Creek corridor steering committee participants, I am a regular user of Stevens Creek Blvd to commute across the city for my daily and weekly errands and other activities. As a Cupertino resident, I strongly and vehemently oppose any measures that aim to eliminate or reduce lanes, restrict traffic movement, or hinder the flow of automotive traffic on Stevens Creek Blvd. This includes, but is not limited to: Lane removals, Installation of concrete or cinder block bike lanes, Painted buffer zones, Prohibition of right turns on red, Elimination of street parking, or any other measures that restrict vehicular mobility. I also strongly urge Cupertino City Council to take the following actions: 1. Defund Cupertino’s participation in this steering committee. 2. Cease funding for consultant studies associated with this committee. 3. Withdraw entirely from the committee, particularly in light of unethical “Zoom bombing” incidents involving out-of-town non-residents who seek to impose radical, anti-automobile policies on our community. I respectfully request Cupertino’s committee representative, Kitty Moore, and Cupertino city council to explore options for eliminating wasteful spending on this Stevens Creek corridor steering committee and any and all other consultant projects to eliminate road lanes in Cupertino in the name of complete streets, vision zero, or in any other name. Any previously allocated funds towards these roadway projects that impact lanes should be redirected toward practical road paving and infrastructure improvements that directly benefit traffic flow and automotive mobility on Stevens Creek Blvd. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to seeing these concerns addressed in the council’s discussions. Sincerely, Rajesh Narayanan Cupertino From:Tamara H. To:City Clerk Subject:2024-12-17 City Council Meeting - ITEM5 - Commission Assignments Date:Tuesday, December 17, 2024 6:15:45 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City Clerk, My name is Tamara Hahn. I am a Cupertino resident living on Hyannisport, and I am writing in support of the Stevens Creek Corridor Project. The Stevens Creek Corridor Project will help connect us here with the rest of the county. It will bring customers to our stores, cafes, and places of business, and it will enable those of us who cannot drive to reach our friends and our jobs in other parts of the county. As a reminder, people who might not want to or cannot drive automobiles include: 1. Young people who cannot legally drive yet, or who cannot afford a car yet. 2. Anyone who can no longer drive due to disability 3. Anyone who wants to reduce their personal carbon footprint I have lived in Los Altos and Cupertino for over two decades now. I started working before I could afford a car ( and later, a car that didn’t break down at the worst moment). I was very disappointed in how difficult public transportation was to access around here. Let’s make things better for the next generation. Best Regards, Tamara Hahn From:Neil Park-McClintick To:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Council Subject:Support a More Robust Stevens Creek Corridor Plan Date:Tuesday, December 17, 2024 4:39:59 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello Mayor and City Council, In anticipation of review of Councilmember assignments later tonight, some opponents of the Stevens Creek Corridor improvement plan have expressed a desire for the City to pull out of the joint vision study entire—this would be an absolutely shameful decision that would harm our planet, destabilize our community, and further car dependency in Santa Clara County. Cupertino does not exist in a siloed bubble, and we need to govern in collaboration with our neighbors across the street. Realistically, the current plan for the corridor does not go far enough—it still focuses on the convenience of drivers and a fictional longterm mass transit project, rather than short term improvements that will improve service and convenience. I, like thousands of other residents throughout the county, do not own a car—the effectiveness of transit determines whether we get opportunities, where we can live, which jobs we can have, if we have an enjoyable standard of life and can spend time with family and friends. We already take transit, including the bus, and more specifically—the 23 and 523, the main bus lines which run down the corridor. These are some of the MOST used lines in the entire system—it's simply untrue to say that this would not serve a high volume of riders, often these two lines are completely full, without seating room. And let's be clear—these sorts of decisions, such as the outcome of this committee, are not simply about whether a driver is inconvenienced by 1-2 minutes or even if a bus rider is able to get to their destination 15-20 minutes faster. Every single time someone uses transit, it becomes a foundation for how they view alternative transportation altogether—when any line poorly serves a community, that is another person who shifts their financial priorities to save up for a cheap car, and another potential crash that kills or injures someone. It's another car on the road that, in totality, leads to an over-saturation of congestion that lowers all of our quality of life and makes our cities far less pleasant, including for other drivers. This is a years-long project in the making, and it's far from perfect—I would like to see a much stronger short term plan that promotes better transit and safer bicycle/pedestrian infrastructure, but we will never be able to realize this future if we do not commit to staying in this visionary study. From:Helene Davis To:City Council; City Clerk Subject:Please Support the Vision Study - Agenda item 5—Committee Assignments Date:Tuesday, December 17, 2024 4:18:50 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City Council, I am a long time resident of Cupertino and have seen many changes to our community. Growth in inevitable but how we manage the growth is critical. Growth brings traffic problems and now the city has a great opportunity to be part of the solution by participating in the Stevens Creek Corridor Vision Study. There are so many amazing things that could be envisioned for this corridor that would improve the experience for all of our road users whether they drive, ride the bus, cycle, or walk. The Stevens Creek Corridor Vision Study is just that, a study. It is important for the City of Cupertino to be a part of this vision and planning. It will give our community a voice and the city the potential to receive grant funding. Thank you for your consideration. Helene Davis 1. It is fiscally responsible to continue to participate in the Vision Study. We have the potential to receive significant grant funding as applications from multi-municipalities are prioritized over single municipality applications. 2. We lose our voice in what happens on the Stevens Creek corridor if we pull out. Decisions could be made by neighboring cities which negatively affect Cupertino without any input from our city. 3. This is a vision for the corridor—a first step--not final plans. It does not implement any lane reductions, which would be impossible anyway as they are currently disallowed by municipal code in Cupertino. It does not implement elevated transit or dedicated bus lanes. Anything considered for the corridor will require multiple rounds of approvals and further study. As usual: Please start your email with a line or two that is personal, such as that you are a resident, care that our city has a voice in what happens locally, etc. Also please sign your email. Send an email to: CC 12-17-2024 Item No. 6 City Work Program and Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) Program prioritization process Written Communications From:e.wong@yahoo.com To:City Clerk; City Council Subject:Opposition to 20865 McClellan Rd rezone Date:Tuesday, December 17, 2024 4:34:04 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City Clerk, Please include the below in written communications for the 12/17/24 city council meeting. Thank you. ——————- Dear Mayor Chao and Cupertino city council members, I’m writing to express my concern about the rezoning of the 1 acre lot next to my home. The last I heard was there would be four homes built on the property which would be cohesive with the character of the neighborhood. To my surprise, the four homes had already been re-zoned to up to 20 homes without any notification of neighbors, especially the neighbors that are adjacent. A sign went up to announce a planning commission meeting to rezone the property to R3/TH. I had no idea what that meant, but learned that this would be 27 three-story townhouses. The planning commission listened to our concerns, but went ahead and approved R3/TH and ignored an entire room of residents that expressed concerns from lack of notification, narrow and busy road feeding Monte Vista high school, Lincoln Elementary Kennedy middle school, Faria elementary, De Anza, and the private school directly across the street leadways. There is absolutely no parking on McClellan nor has the developer set aside guest parking. Most residences have at least 2 cars and this would equate to at least 54 cars in a 27 unit complex. Many of us indicated that IF the planning commission used our local newsletter to inform us of rezoning..... this approach is completely inadequate! Mr. Fung closed the meeting by saying we were notified by newsletter that is absolutely a ridiculous justification. We are feeling cheated, and this lack of transparency is incredibly nefarious and disrespectful to the neighborhood!!!! It’s hard to believe how greedy developers have hijacked our planning commission Most of us are single story homes and three stories packed like sardines next-door would destroy our privacy. I, along with the neighborhood, would like to understand how this was upzoned without adequate notification or input from residents. What actions are needed to bring this back to R1 zone and be cohesive with this neighborhood. Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter! Esther Wong From:valerie To:City Council; City Clerk Subject:stop the 20865 McClellan 27 units townhomes project Date:Tuesday, December 17, 2024 4:08:35 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City Clerk, Please include the below in written communications for the 12/17/24 city council meeting. Thanks! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Mayor Chao and Cupertino city council members, I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed development of a three-story, 27- unit townhome complex on 20865 McClellan. I believe this development would significantly compromise the safety, well-being, and quality of life of our community. Below are the primary reasons for my opposition: 1. Safety Concerns: The 0.99-acre lot designated for this project is far too small to accommodate 100+ residents, especially considering that each townhome is likely to house families with multiple members, including young children and older adults. In the event of an emergency, there is only one access point for residents to evacuate, which would likely be insufficient to allow for a safe and quick evacuation. Furthermore, this single access road must also accommodate emergency vehicles, which could further delay response times and put lives in danger. 2. Overburdened Infrastructure: The only access point to this development is connected to McClellan, a two-lane street that already serves as a thoroughfare for multiple schools in the area, including 4-5 nearby schools. This street is already heavily congested, and adding significant traffic from 27 new units will exacerbate the problem, creating a hazardous environment for pedestrians, particularly children. The increased traffic will put the lives of schoolchildren and other residents at greater risk. 3. Negative Psychological Impact on the Neighborhood: The proposed townhomes will be much taller than the surrounding homes, which could have a negative psychological impact on the existing residents. The feeling of being overshadowed, both literally and figuratively, may diminish the sense of autonomy and community. Furthermore, the additional height and density of the new development will lead to a loss of privacy for neighboring homes, making residents feel vulnerable and insecure. To maintain some sense of privacy, neighbors may be forced to keep their blinds closed, which not only blocks out sunlight but also limits their ability to enjoy their own homes freely. 4. Prioritization of Developer Profit Over Community Well-being: Ultimately, this development seems to benefit the developers, who are motivated by profit, rather than considering the needs and concerns of the current as well future residents in our neighborhood. It is disheartening to think that decisions being made may prioritize financial gain over the safety, privacy, and quality of life of long-time residents. I urge you to carefully consider the significant negative impacts this development will have on our community and to take appropriate action to prevent this development from moving forward. The well-being of all the residents should be the top priority, and this project, as currently proposed, does not serve our best interests. Thank you for your time and attention to this important matter. I hope that you will consider the concerns of the community before making any decisions. Sincerely, vj