CC 04-15-2025 Item No. 14 Future aenda items requested by Council_Written Communications (2)CC 04-15-2025
Item No. 14
Review future agenda
items requested by City
Councilmembers
Written Communications
From:Peggy Griffin
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk
Subject:2025-04-15 City Council Meeting - AGENDA ITEM 14-Review Future Agenda Items
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2025 2:05:40 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.
PLEASE INCLUDE THIS EMAIL AS PART OF WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE ABOVE
MEETING AGENDA ITEM.
Dear Mayor Chao, Vice Mayor Moore and Councilmembers,
In the Staff Report for this item, they recommend the following:
#1-13, accept staff recommendations
#14-18, provide staff direction
CONCERN REGARDING SEVERAL ITEMS IN STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
#1-4 are all related to remodeling/interim city hall location
REQUEST: These could be removed from the list BUT the information needs to be presented in
public when an interim City Hall comes up for discussion. Maybe move these to the City Hall
work program?
#8 Study session for CIP approval process
REQUEST: Once a CIP project gets “approved” by being added to the list, it still needs to be
reviewed like any private development project. It should come before the Planning
Commission for review. Many of these projects have designs which should be vetted by staff
but also by commissions and the public.
ITEMS NEEDING STAFF DIRECTION:
#14 Sound amplification devices in parks – REMOVE IT!
We don’t need music blaring when we go to our parks to relax and enjoy the peace and quiet of
our open spaces. There is so much noise all around us from I-280, Hwy 85, airplanes, etc.
Please remove this item. We have a process for people to get an exception via a permit. Keep
it that way.
#15 Restore previous Audit Committee responsibilities – AGENDIZE IT-as soon as
possible!
#16 Put transportation projects under Planning Commission – AGENDIZE IT-as soon as
possible!
#17 Proclamations and Certificates-guidelines and procedures – AGENDIZE IT!
#18 Consider Finch Property for purchase or partnership w CUSD – AGENDIZE IT-as soon
as possible!
I’d like to thank the staff and the council for making progress on these items.
Sincerely,
Peggy Griffin
From:Jennifer Griffin
To:City Council; City Clerk
Cc:grenna5000@yahoo.com
Subject:Purchase of Finch Property by Cupertino
Date:Monday, April 14, 2025 6:57:14 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.
(Please include the following as public input for Item #14 on the City Council agenda
For the 4/15/25 meeting concerning the purchase of the Finch Property adjacent to Sedgwick
Elementary School by the City of Cupertino, hopefully for parkland)
Dear City Council:
Thank you for having the potential purchase of the Finch Property, directly adjacent to Sedgwick
Elementary School, by the city of Cupertino, be an item to be considered by the City Council.
I am very happy that the city is considering purchasing the property as it is in an excellent
Location for a park, being so deep into the neighborhood of Rancho Rinconada, Loree Estates
And Fairgrove and other communities. It is also adjacent to the three schools of Cupertino High
School, Hyde Middle School and Sedgwick Elementary School, all within the boundaries of the
City of Cupertino.
I have attended many meetings over the past years concerning the Finch property, and I am greatly
In favor of Cupertino purchasing the land for parkland. It is not a good location for high density
Housing because of the traffic impacts on the adjacent areas and roadways, especially with children
From the three schools so close by, coming and going etc. The property sits on a tight corner
And with many intersections close by and wound not be suitable for an increase of traffic.
There is also a very large redwood tree on the Finch property that is at least eight feet in diameter.
I would imagine this tree is at least 80 years old or more as it is the size of the redwood tree
On my brother's property in Los Gatos where the Victorian house was built in 1893. The redwood on
His property was planted at about the same time as the house and is the same size as the Finch tree.
That redwood is now about 130 years old so the Finch Redwood could be 100 years or more.
The Finch Redwood could not be taken down and it is perfectly located on the Finch Property for
A park tree. It is truly a specimen tree. It is amazing to have a potential park come already housing
Such a perfect specimen tree! Imagine the wildlife and birds that call that huge tree home!
The eastern neighborhoods of Cupertino do not have very many parks. Acquiring the Finch Property
As potential parkland would benefit so many people. It is a jewel that is waiting to become a much
Beloved park. The work we do today ensures that generations to come have parkland to enjoy!
It appears that there is adequate money in the city's park dedication fee fund to purchase the
Finch Property for a park.
One idea might be to have Cupertino take the half of the property with the large redwood tree and
Have that become a community park for the neighborhoods and Cupertino. The other half
Of the parcel adjacent to Sedgwick School could be retained by the school district as an annex of
Land for Sedgwick Elementary School to house more classrooms or as sports fields.
I am so happy to think that Cupertino may be able to purchase the Finch Property for a future
Park. This is such a wonderful prospect to imagine!
Thank you very much.
Best regards,
Jennifer Griffin
Resident of Eastern Cupertino
From:Tracy K
To:City Council; City Clerk
Subject:Written Comment -- Please Involve the Planning Commission in Transportation Projects
Date:Tuesday, April 15, 2025 3:49:59 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.
Dear Council & City Clerk,
Please include the below in written communications for the 04/15/25 city council meeting for
Agenda Item 13, which asks Council to vote on whether the SCB corridor vision study should
go to the Bicycle Pedestrian versus Planning Commission.
Writing on behalf of myself -- Rather than placing a single project on the agenda for Council
to assign, why not have an agenda item that allows Council to discuss and adopt a
comprehensive framework for how all future transit-related projects should be routed to
commissions? Without this, will Council need to vote on commission assignments for every
individual transit project moving forward?
Last year, several City Councilmembers already asked to agendize the addition of transit to the
Planning Commission scope, which technically would solve the question raised above. To
more efficiently use Council time, I would ask that transit-related projects requiring
commission input automatically go past the Planning Commission, rather than requiring
Council time to deliberate and vote. Our Council and staff both have many important priorities
to handle, and having a clear framework for routing projects to commissions would remove
one administrative burden from the load.
The norm for many neighboring cities is to involve the Planning Commission in transportation
decisions. In fact, both Los Altos and Palo Alto have a joint Planning & Transit Commission.
Our city’s General Plan (Mobility Element) states that transportation is part of our planning
policy. That means the Planning Commission should have the opportunity to hear and discuss
these matters in a public meeting before decisions are finalized.
I respectfully ask the City Council to:
- Reaffirm that transportation and mobility fall under the Planning Commission’s
responsibilities
- Direct staff to bring all current and future transportation projects to the Planning Commission
and/or City Council for public hearings
- Ensure no changes to streets, parking, or traffic proceed without review at a public Planning
Commission or City Council hearing
Thank you,
Tracy