The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC 11-04-2025 Oral Communications_2CC 11-04-2025 Oral Communications Written Comments From:Santosh Rao To:City Clerk; City Council; Chad Mosley; Benjamin Fu; Tina Kapoor; Luke Connolly; Gian Martire; City Attorney"s Office Subject:Fw: Council hearing to vacate public right of way. Date:Monday, November 3, 2025 7:01:41 PM Attachments:street-and-easement-vacations-11-8-13-002.pdf 2010_vacate_public_right_of_way_Draft_resolution.pdf 2010_vacate_public_right_of_way_Staff_report.pdf 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, Could you please include the below in written communications for the upcoming Cupertino council meeting under items not on agenda / Mary Ave Villas. Thanks, San Rao [Writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident, voter and taxpayer] CC: CAO to duly note the attached 2013 adopted process by Cupertino public works, past precedent from 2010 by Cupertino public works for vacating public right of way, attached Cupertino city council resolution from 2010 for vacating public right of way and to also duly note the absence of public hearings at city council and no sign of a passed council resolution on vacating public right of way for Mary Ave portion of the street that was vacated with no indication any community hearings occurred. Begin forwarded message: On Wednesday, October 29, 2025, 11:10 AM, Santosh Rao <santo_a_rao@yahoo.com> wrote: [Writing on behalf of myself only as Cupertino resident, voter and taxpayer] Dear Mayor Chao, Vice-Mayor Moore, Council members, Director Mosley, Director Fu, Asst Director Connolly, ICM Kapoor, Cc: CAO Would you please share the dates when a Cupertino city council hearing was held to vacate the Mary Ave public right of way and the dates when community hearings occurred and what street noticing occurred prior to the community hearings to vacate the Mary Ave public right of way. See below for an example from 2010 when a council hearing was held to vacate public right of way. See further below the process to vacate public right of way in Cupertino. https://cupertino.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php? view_id=18&clip_id=1011&meta_id=49763 https://cupertino.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php? view_id=18&clip_id=1011&meta_id=49764 https://www.cupertino.gov/files/assets/city/v/2/departments/documents/public- works/engineering/street-and-easement-vacations-11-8-13-002.pdf If the proper process was not followed to vacate the public right of way what is the process to redo the same with a properly noticed community hearing and planning commission, city council hearings. Thank you. Thanks, San Rao (writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident, voter and taxpayer) PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 10 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3354 www.cupertino.org CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting: September 7, 2010 Subject Vacate a portion of City right of way on Stevens Canyon Road at 22605 Ricardo Road. Recommended Action Adopt Resolution. Discussion The owner of the parcel at 22605 Ricardo Road petitioned the City to vacate a portion of the existing Stevens Canyon Road right of way adjacent to his property that is no longer needed for roadway purposes. Harold “Bud” Barclay applied to the City of Cupertino requesting that the City consider vacating a portion of the existing Stevens Canyon Road public road right of way. Once vacated, the area would become part of the Barclay parcel at 22605 Stevens Canyon Road. On August 3, 2010, Council adopted a resolution of intention to vacate the aforementioned right of way, reserving a public utilities easement and a five-foot wide pedestrian access easement, along Stevens Canyon Road. The City posted and published appropriate notice of that intention, as well as of and the date, time, and place of the public hearing to consider that intention, pursuant to the provisions of Section 8320 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code. If the City Council finds after due consideration of all of the evidence submitted that the right of way described in the notice of hearing is unnecessary for present or prospective street purposes, then it may adopt a resolution vacating that right of way, reserving and excepting there from a public utilities easement and a five-foot wide pedestrian access easement, pursuant to Section 8324 of the California Streets and Highways Code. Adoption of the resolution will authorize the City Clerk to record the executed original resolution in the Office of the Recorder of the County of Santa Clara, at which time the area vacated will no longer be a public street or highway, but will contain a public utilities easement and a five-foot wide pedestrian access easement retained by the City. _____________________________________ Prepared by: Glenn Goepfert Reviewed by: Ralph Qualls Approved for Submission by: David W. Knapp, City Manager Attachments: Draft Resolution Map From:Walter Li To:City Clerk; City Council; Chad Mosley; Tina Kapoor; Benjamin Fu; Luke Connolly; City Attorney"s Office; Public Comments Subject:Request for Documentation - Mary Ave Right-of-Way Vacation (Mary Ave Villas) Date:Tuesday, November 4, 2025 7:36:02 AM 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 upcoming City Council meeting. Subject: Request for Documentation – Mary Avenue Right-of-Way Vacation (Mary Ave Villas) Dear Mayor Chao, Vice-Mayor Moore, Council Members, City Attorney’s Office, Interim City Manager Kapoor, Director Mosley, Director Fu, Assistant Director Connolly, and Senior Planner Martiere, I am writing to request complete documentation showing how the City of Cupertino complied with all required procedures for vacating the public right-of-way along Mary Avenue in connection with the Mary Ave Villas project. The vacation of a public street or right-of-way is governed by California Streets & Highways Code, Division 9, Part 3 (§§ 8300–8363), also known as the Public Streets, Highways, and Service Easements Vacation Law. The operative provisions include § 8300, § 8324, § 8325, § 8333, and § 8335. In addition, the City’s own published Engineering/Public Works procedures—Application for Vacation of a Street or Easement and Street & Easement Vacations—require the following: 1.⁠ ⁠Adoption of a City Council resolution of intent to vacate. 2.⁠ ⁠At least 15 days between notice of intent and the Council hearing. 3.⁠ ⁠A public Council hearing to approve and accept the vacation. 4.⁠ ⁠Recordation of the Council resolution with the Santa Clara County Recorder. 5.⁠ ⁠Submission of utility consent letters, title report, and a certified legal description by a licensed surveyor or engineer. Requested Records Please provide the following for the Mary Avenue / Mary Ave Villas right-of-way vacation: 1.⁠ ⁠The City Council resolution of intent to vacate, with adoption date, staff report, and agenda item. 2.⁠ ⁠⁠The Council hearing date(s), agenda, minutes, and public notices, as required under SHC § 8324. 3.⁠ ⁠⁠The final Council resolution vacating the right-of-way under § 8335. 4.⁠ ⁠⁠The recorded certified copy of the resolution filed with the Santa Clara County Recorder, including the instrument or recording number, per § 8325. 5.⁠ ⁠⁠Confirmation whether the regular or summary process was used, and if summary, how the decision was made to not use the regular process for full public engagement and transparency and why. 6.⁠ ⁠⁠Copies of all utility consent or reservation letters, title reports, survey/legal descriptions, and related staff reports. 7.⁠ ⁠⁠A timeline of actions from application acceptance to Council approval, consistent with the City’s stated 6-week (summary) or 12-week (regular) timeframe. Explanation Request If any of the above procedural steps were not performed, please identify the legal authority relied upon to vacate the Mary Avenue right-of-way without following Streets & Highways Code §§ 8300 – 8363 and the City’s adopted procedures. Response Timeframe Please provide the requested records or written explanation within 10 business days. If additional time is required, kindly specify the completion date. If any record is withheld, please cite the legal basis and provide a privilege log. The vacation of a public right-of-way directly affects public access and property rights. It is essential that the City demonstrate full adherence to the required procedures and maintain public transparency. Thank you for your attention. I look forward to your prompt response. Best regards, Walter Li Cupertino Resident