Exhibit CC 11-29-2010 No. 9 Stevens Creek Corridor ///,-)(1,c,
Gail Seeds
From: Shani Kleinhaus [shani @scvas.org]
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 1:31 PM
To: Kris Wang; Gilbert Wong; Orrin Mahoney; Barry Chang; Mark Santoro
Cc: Gail Seeds; Bob Power
Subject: Tonight Agenda Item 9 - Stevens Creek Corridor Park, Phase II
Attachments: SCVAS - Cupertino Phasell.pdf; ATT00001..htm
Dear Dear Mayor Wang, Vice Mayor Wong, and Council Members,
Please find attached Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society's comments regarding Item 9 - Stevens Creek Corridor
Park, Phase II, on tonight's City Council Agenda
Thank you,
Shani Kleinhaus
1
Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society
Founded 1926
November 29 2010
Mayor Kris Wang, Vice Mayor Gilbert Wong, Members of the Cupertino City Council
Cupertino City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014 -3202
Dear Mayor Wang, Vice Mayor Wong, and Cupertino Council Members,
Please accept my apologies for this late communication on tonight's agenda item 9 "Stevens
Creek Corridor Park, Phase II." As you know, the Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society
(SCVAS) has long advocated for the restoration of the creek and its corridor environment for the
benefit of residents and wildlife, and have partner3d with the City of Cupertino in application for
the CA River Parkways Grant.
We urge the Council to accept the CA River Parkways Grant for the purpose of widening,
rehabilitating and possibly realigning the creek through Phase II Stevens Creek Restoration
Project. Studying the staff report, we urge you to reject alternatives 1, 2 and 3, and to select
alternative 4 (A or B). We understand that full funding of Alternative 4B is unlikely, and that
Alternative 4A would create a shortfall of $800,000. We would like to offer the city an additional
alternative 5 that would allow the restoration of Stevens Creek to occur fully within budget.
Alternative 5 - Fund creek restoration only (at current channel location).
Cost: 2,100,000 (calculated by subtraction of staff proposed Alternative 3 (trail, bridge and
parking lot, 1.4m) from staff proposed Alternative, 4A(comprehensive trail, bridge, parking lot
and stream restoration, 3.5m)).
1. CA River Parkways Grant (awarded) 1,200,000
2. SCVWE/FAHCE (likely, June) 800,000
3. SCVWD —Safe Creeks Grant (maybe) 200,000
OR
Park Dedication Fees (Remaining) 150,000
Total Funding: 2,150,000 to 2,200,000
Total Cost 2,100,000
Surplus 50,000 to 100,000
p. 1 of 2
22221 McClellan Road, Cupertino, CA 95014 Phone: (408) 252 -3748 * Fax: (408) 252 -2850
email: scvas(ascv as.ora * www.scvas.org
Cupertino's commitment to the restoration of Stevens Creek and its successful implementation at
Blackberry Farm are now touted as a model for great urban stream restoration projects. We
applaud you for your efforts and investment, and hope that the spirit that guided City Council in
making all the decisions that allowed Phase I to be implemented would continue to propel us
through Phase II of the project and beyond.
We urge the City of Cupertino to accept and use funding to restore the creek now, and complete
the trail later if more funding is currently unavailable. We believe that once the creek is restored,
it would provide an engine to attract additional funding for the completion of the Stevens Creek
Trail.
Sincerely,
Shani Kleinhaus
Environmental Advocate
Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society
p.2of2
22221 McClellan Road, Cupertino, CA 95014 Phone: (408) 252 -3748 * Fax: (408) 252 -2850
email: scvas(a * www.scvas.org
cc ///09//o
Linda Lagergren
From: Debi Jamison [ddjamison @comcast.net]
Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2010 5:11 PM
To: Kris Wang; Orrin Mahoney; Gilbert Wong; Mark Santoro; Barry Chang
Subject: Stevens Creek corridor projects
I received notification after 5pm on Tuesday evening that two projects in SC corridor are on
city council agenda Monday night. Like many people, I am traveling over the long Thanksgiving
holiday weekend & will not be back home until lal:e tonight (Sunday). Tomorrow is a workday.
This does not allow any time to read & respond to the staff reports. Giving this amount of
notice may be legal, but it is not "transparent government" when interested residents do not
have any time to study these two signicant projects' staff reports & prepare comments. I
request that you postpone both items & notify ALL interested parties - For a future meeting.
The Scenic Circle Access MND comment period is now & ending soon. Why is this being agendized
now? Let public commenrs on MND be addressed first.
You know that SCCP Phase 2 is of particular interest to a number of constituencies. This
appears to be a very critical decision point which will determine the design. It requires
maximum input - For your consideration.
Thank you,
Deborah Jamison
Sent from iPhone on highway
1
GG ( , / 9/d A
Linda Lagergren
From: Susan Sievert [spsievert@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 11:10 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Stevens Creek Corridor Park, Part Two
Happy Thanksgiving, City Council? Honesty, the noticing and involvement of the community should
be treated with respect, not as a necessary evil... Phase One incompetence, brazen lies, and the lack
of transparency proved to be a taxpayer liability, resulting in the incompetent destruction of a
naturalized wetland habitat that had flourished for forty years (the golf ponds); a bait & switch
concrete slab poured the length of our only nature preserve after a "similar but better than
decomposed granite trail surface" had been publicly promised; and a significant parking error. Please
keep your guards up, and allow public scrutiny of any changes staff proposes. Project updates during
construction would be welcome so we can be reassured we are getting what we paid for this time.
Thank you.
Susan Sievert
1
/1-aq -/o .mot q' 4 /O
Linda Lagergren
From: Terry Greene
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 3:24 PM
To: Kris Wang; Gilbert Wong; Orrin Mahoney; Mark Santoro; Barry Chang
Cc: David Knapp; Carol Korade; Mark Linder; 'fryhouse @earthlink.net'; 'ddjamison @comcast.net'
Subject: FW: Fwd: Fw: Short notice to your constituents is unkind
Members of the Council, please know that two items on the agenda this evening, Scenic Circle
Access and SCCP Phase II, as noted below by Ms. Rhoda Fry and in a separate email by Ms. Debi
Jamison, are being provided as an update only. No Council action is being sought.
Scenic Circle is scheduled to go out to bid on December 3rd and bids are scheduled to be
opened on January 18th.
The CEQA comment period for Scenic Circle Access does end on December 6th. Comments provided
within the comment period will be reviewed and presented to Council in the form of CEQA
Documents on January 18th, in conjunction with a discussion of other project details. Council
will then have the opportunity to direct staff on how to proceed.
SCCP Phase II in is being provided on this agenda to give Council adequate time to
begin considering several options of scope and funding. Staff expects to be recommending a
public comment period following the January 18th meeting, depending on the alternative
chosen.
Thank you,
Terry W. Greene, AIA
City Architect
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Ave
Cupertino, California 95014
408 - 777 -3354
Original Message
From: Carol Korade
Sent: Friday, November 26, 2010 10:06 AM
To: David Knapp; Aarti Shrivastava; Terry Greene ;, Mark Linder
Subject: Fw: Fwd: Fw: Short notice to your constituents is unkind
Fyi
Original Message
From: Mark Santoro <cupertinomark @gmail.com>
To: Carol Korade
Sent: Fri Nov 26 10:01:24 2010
Subject: Fwd: Fw: Short notice to your constituents is unkind
Forwarded message
From: <cupertinomark @gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 3:12 PM
Subject: Fw: Short notice to your constituents is unkind
To: carolk @cupertino.org
1
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
Original Message
From: Rhoda Fry <fryhouse @earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 12:00:10
To: <kwang @cupertino.org>; <gwong @cupertino.org>; <omahoney @cupertino.org>;
<msantoro@cupertino.org>; <bchang @cupertino.org>; <cityclerk @cupertino.org>
Reply -To: Rhoda Fry <fryhouse @earthlink.net>
Cc: <fryhouse @earthlink.net>
Subject: Short notice to your constituents is unkind
Dear Council Members:
Happy Thanksgiving!
For public comment on Monday's council meeting - since today is Thanksgiving day, I do not
have the time to make this message as pretty or as politically correct as I'd like...
On Wednesday, I got notice that you will be making two important decisions regarding the
"Stevens Creek Corridor." I have two concerns about this:
1 - Why have your constituents gotten such short notice? The City recently spent quite a bit
of money on a dinner meeting in an effort to encourage collaborative decision - making between
City government and your voters. Monday is not a typical day for a council meeting. We got
notice on Wednesday for this meeting, if Thursday and Friday were business days, I would
expect the meeting to be on Tuesday, to provide :3 full business days notice. However, the
City of Cupertino, along with many other businesses are closed this Thursday and Friday; so
providing notice on Wednesday for a Monday meeting provides ZERO business days notice. THIS
IS NOT OKAY. I fully expect that someone from staff will spend hours in response to this
message with some sort of legal -ease that what has been done is okay - however, I would like
to appeal to your emotional reasons for being voted in as council members and for your future
aspirations in serving the community. This late notice is not appropriate and I would expect
you to postpone these agenda items and apologise to the community for the lapse in good
judgement.
2 - The agenda discusses the Scenic Circle access project. The comment period for this
project ends on December 6, well after the scheduled item. Making decisions about the project
prior to the end of the comment period sends the message to your voters that this project is
completely a done deal; you have no intention on listening (or acting upon) any community
input; and you have no interest in your voters. Another faux -pas in my book.
Best wishes for a fine Thanksgiving.
Kindest Regards,
Rhoda Fry
2