The URL can be used to link to this page

08-03-10 Searcheable Packet èÛÚÐ×ÍÖùÍÎÈ×ÎÈÉ ûÕ×ÎØÛ ûÙÙÍÇÎÈÉìÛÃÛÚÐ×Ì×ÊÓÍØ×ÎØÓÎÕòÇÐÃ øÊÛÖÈê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎ ûÙÙÍÇÎÈÉìÛÃÛÚÐ×ÖÍÊÌ×ÊÓÍØ×ÎØÓÎÕòÇÐÃ øÊÛÖÈê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎ ìÛÃÊÍÐÐÖÍÊÌ×ÊÓÍØ×ÎØÓÎÕòÇÐÃ øÊÛÖÈê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎ ûÙÙ×ÌÈËÇÓÈÙÐÛÓÏØ××ØÛÎØÛÇÈÔÍÊÓÂÛÈÓÍÎÖÍÊÇÎØ×ÊÕÊÍÇÎØÅÛÈ×Ê ÊÓÕÔÈÉÛÈ ùÛÐÆ×ÊÈøÊÓÆ× ê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎ ëÇÓÈÙÐÛÓÏø××Ø ïÛÌ ûÙÙ×ÌÈËÇÓÈÙÐÛÓÏØ××ØÛÎØÛÇÈÔÍÊÓÂÛÈÓÍÎÖÍÊÇÎØ×ÊÕÊÍÇÎØÅÛÈ×Ê ÊÓÕÔÈÉÛÈ ùÛÐÆ×ÊÈøÊÓÆ× ê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎ ëÇÓÈÙÐÛÓÏø××Ø ïÛÌ ûÙÙ×ÌÈËÇÓÈÙÐÛÓÏØ××ØÛÎØÛÇÈÔÍÊÓÂÛÈÓÍÎÖÍÊÇÎØ×ÊÕÊÍÇÎØÅÛÈ×Ê ÊÓÕÔÈÉÛÈ ùÛÐÆ×ÊÈøÊÓÆ× ê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎ ëÇÓÈÙÐÛÓÏø××Ø ïÛÌ ûÙÙ×ÌÈËÇÓÈÙÐÛÓÏØ××ØÛÎØÛÇÈÔÍÊÓÂÛÈÓÍÎÖÍÊÇÎØ×ÊÕÊÍÇÎØÅÛÈ×Ê ÊÓÕÔÈÉÛÈ ðÍÙÑÅÍÍØøÊÓÆ× ê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎ ëÇÓÈÙÐÛÓÏø××Ø ïÛÌ óÎÈ×ÎÈÈÍÆÛÙÛÈ×ÛÌÍÊÈÓÍÎÍÖùÓÈÃÊÓÕÔÈÍÖÅÛÃÍÎéÈ×Æ×ÎÉ ùÛÎÃÍÎêÍÛØÛÈ êÓÙÛÊØÍêÍÛØ éÈÛÖÖê×ÌÍÊÈ ûê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎ úïÛÌ ê×ËÇ×ÉÈÖÍÊ×ÄÈ×ÎÉÓÍÎÉÍÖÛÌÊ×ÆÓÍÇÉÐÃÛÌÌÊÍÆ×ØÔÍÈ×ÐÌÊÍÌÍÉ×Ø ÖÍÊ îø×ûÎÂÛúÐÆØ éÈÛÖÖê×ÌÍÊÈ ûûÌÌÊÍÆÛÐÐ×ÈÈ×ÊÈÍÛÌÌÐÓÙÛÎÈØÛÈ×ØòÛÎÇÛÊÃ úÐ×ÈÈ×ÊÖÊÍÏûÌÌÐÓÙÛÎÈØÛÈ×ØòÇÐÃ ùûÌÌÊÍÆ×ØìÐÛÎé×ÈÉØÛÈ×ØòÛÎÇÛÊÃ ûÌÌ×ÛÐÍÖÛåÓïÛÄûÎÈ×ÎÎÛÛÈå×ÉÈæÛÐÐ×ÃìÊ×ÉÚÃÈ×ÊÓÛÎùÔÇÊÙÔ éÈÛÖÖê×ÌÍÊÈ ûìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎ úìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎéÈÛÖÖÊ×ÌÍÊÈØÛÈ×ØòÇÐÃ ùì×ÈÓÈÓÍÎÖÊÍÏûÌÌ×ÐÐÛÎÈ ø×ÏÛÓÐÖÊÍÏå×ÎÒÓ×ðÓØÛÈ×ØòÇÐÃ ûÌÌÊÍÆ×ÛÉÉ×ÉÉÏ×ÎÈÍÖÖ××ÉÍÎÌÊÓÆÛÈ×ÌÛÊÙ×ÐÉÖÍÊÈÔ×ÛÎÎÇÛÐ Å××ØÛÚÛÈ×Ï×ÎÈÌÊÍÕÊÛÏ éÈÛÖÖê×ÌÍÊÈ ûûÉÉ×ÉÉÏ×ÎÈê×ÌÍÊÈ ð×ÈÈ×ÊÍÎÉÈÛÈÇÉÍÖÙÍÇÎÈÃÊ×ÙÐÛÏÛÈÓÍÎÆÓÍÐÛÈÓÍÎÉÛÈð×ÔÓÕÔ øÊÛÖÈÐ×ÈÈ×ÊÈÍÙÍÇÎÈÃÊ×îíæÉ ûØÍÌÈÍÊØÓÎÛÎÙ×ÌÊÍÔÓÚÓÈÓÎÕÈÔ×Ö××ØÓÎÕÍÖÚÓÊØÉÓÎùÓÈÃÌÛÊÑÉ éÈÛÖÖê×ÌÍÊÈ ûøÊÛÖÈíÊØÓÎÛÎÙ× úöÐÃ×Ê ø×ÉÓÕÎÛÈ×ÛÎÛÐÈ×ÊÎÛÈ×ÚÍÛÊØÏ×ÏÚ×ÊÖÍÊÈÔ×éÓÐÓÙÍÎæÛÐÐ×Ã ê×ÕÓÍÎÛÐóÎÈ×ÊÍÌ×ÊÛÚÓÐÓÈÃûÕ×ÎÙÃéæêóû éÈÛÖÖê×ÌÍÊÈ ûÏ×ÎØÈÔ×ùÇÌ×ÊÈÓÎÍïÇÎÓÙÓÌÛÐùÍØ×Ê×ÐÛÈÓÎÕÈÍØ×ÉÓÕÎÛÈ×Ø ÚÓÙÃÙÐ×ÐÛÎ×ÉÛÎØÊÍÇÈ×É éÈÛÖÖê×ÌÍÊÈ ûíÊØÓÎÛÎÙ×îÍ úíÊØÓÎÛÎÙ×îÍ AGENDA CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL ~ REGULAR MEETING CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ~ REGULAR MEETING 10350 Torre Avenue, Community Hall Council Chamber Tuesday, August 3, 2010 6:45 PM CITY COUNCIL MEETING PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL CLOSED SESSION CEREMONIAL MATTERS – PRESENTATIONS 1.Subject: Proclamations for participants in Cupertino Library robotics mini-camp. Recommended Action: Present proclamation. Description: Proclamations for Lynbrook High School and Miller Middle School Lego Robotics Club, the Cupertino Library and the Friends of the Cupertino Library. POSTPONEMENTS WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the council on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. In most cases, State law will prohibit the council from making any decisions with respect to a matter not listed on the agenda. August 3, 2010 Cupertino City CouncilPage 2 Cupertino Redevelopment Agency CONSENT CALENDAR Unless there are separate discussions and/or actions requested by council, staff or a member of the public, it is requested that items under the Consent Calendar be acted on simultaneously. 2.Subject: Accounts Payable period ending July 16, 2010. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 10-143. Attachments:Draft Resolution 3.Subject: Accounts Payable for period ending July 23, 2010. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 10-144. Attachments:Draft Resolution 4.Subject: Payroll for period ending July 23, 2010. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 10-145. Attachments:Draft Resolution 5.Subject: Accept quitclaim deed and authorization for underground water rights at 10385 Calvert Drive. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 10-146. Description: First LJ of Cupertino, LLC, APN 375-17-027. Attachments:Resolution Attachments:Quitclaim Deed Attachments:Map 6.Subject: Accept quitclaim deed and authorization for underground water rights at 10395 Calvert Drive. Recommended Action: Adopt a Resolution No. 10-147. Description: First LJ of Cupertino, LLC, APN 375-17-028. Attachments:Resolution Attachments:Quitclaim Deed Attachments:Map August 3, 2010 Cupertino City CouncilPage 3 Cupertino Redevelopment Agency 7.Accept quitclaim deed and authorization for underground rights at 10355 Calvert Drive. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 10-148. Description: First LJ of Cupertino, LLC, APN 375-17-024. Attachments:Resolution Attachments:Quitclaim Deed Attachments:Map 8.Subject: Accept quitclaim deed and authorization for underground water rights at 10140 Lockwood Drive. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 10-149. Description: Madhukar Govindaraju and Chaya Murthy Govindaraju, APN 342-14-112. Attachments:Resolution Attachments:Quitclaim Deed Attachments:Map 9.Subject: Intent to vacate a portion of City right of way on Stevens Canyon Road at 22605 Ricardo Road. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 10-150. Description: Applicant is Harold “Bud” Barclay. Attachments:Staff Report Attachments:Resolution Attachments:Map 10.Subject: Request for extensions of a previously approved hotel proposed for 10165 N De Anza Blvd. Recommended Action: Approve extensions. Description: Request for a one year extension to a previously approved 5-story hotel and parking structure, EXT-2010-04, EXT-2010-05, EXT-2010-06, (APN 326-34-057), Dipesh Gupta/Ebrahim Kaabipour. Attachments:Staff Report Attachments:Approval letter to applicant, dated January 23, 2009 Attachments: Letter from Applicant, dated July 7, 2010 Attachments:Approved Plan Sets, dated January 20, 2009 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR (above) August 3, 2010 Cupertino City CouncilPage 4 Cupertino Redevelopment Agency PUBLIC HEARINGS 11.Subject: Appeal of a WiMax antenna at West Valley Presbyterian Church. Recommended Action: Consider denial of the appeal. Description: This is an appeal of an approved WiMax antenna to be concealed in a cupola on the roof top of the church, DIR-2010-05, 6191 Bollinger Road (APN 375-41-007), Bradley Head for Clearwire/West Valley Presbyterian Church. Attachments:Staff Report Attachments:Planning Commission Resolution 6602 Attachments:Planning Commission Staff report, dated July 27, 2010 Attachments:Petition from Appellant Attachments:Email from Wenjie Li, dated July 23, 2010 UNFINISHED BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS 12.Subject: Approve assessment of fees on private parcels for the annual weed abatement program. Recommended Action: Conduct a hearing and adopt Resolution No. 10-151. Attachments:Staff Report Attachments:Assessment Report 13.Subject: Letter on status of county reclamation violations at Lehigh. Recommended Action: Authorize mayor to sign letter. Description: Letter to County Planning Department regarding the status of East Materials Storage Area Reclamation Plan Amendment intended to address the Notices of Violation (NOVs) issued by the County in 2006 and 2008. Attachments:Draft letter to county re: NOVs 14.Subject: Adopt ordinance prohibiting the feeding of birds in City parks. Recommended Action: Conduct first reading of Ordinance 10-2066. Description: An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino adopting Section 13.04.130 P of the Cupertino Municipal Code prohibiting the feeding of birds in City parks. Attachments:Staff Report Attachments:Draft Ordinance Attachments:Flyer August 3, 2010 Cupertino City CouncilPage 5 Cupertino Redevelopment Agency 15.Designate an alternate board member for the Silicon Valley Regional Interoperability Agency (SVRIA). Recommended Action: Select representative from Council. Attachments:Staff Report ORDINANCES 16.Subject: Amend the Cupertino Municipal Code relating to designated bicycle lanes and routes. Recommended Action: Conduct second readings and enact Ordinance Nos. 10-2063 and 10- 2064. Description: An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino amending Section 11.08.250 of the Cupertino Municipal Code relating to designated bicycle lanes"; and "An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino amending Section 11.08.260 of the Cupertino Municipal Code relating to designated bicycle routes". Staff Report Attachments: Attachments:Ordinance No. 10-2063 Attachments:Ordinance No. 10-2064 STAFF REPORTS COUNCIL REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Subject: Commission presentations to City Council on August 17. Recommended Action: Adjourn to Tuesday, August 17, 5:00 p.m., at the Quinlan Community Center, 10185 North Stelling Road. August 3, 2010 Cupertino City CouncilPage 6 Cupertino Redevelopment Agency REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Canceled for lack of business. The City of Cupertino has adopted the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure §1094.6; litigation challenging a final decision of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency must be brought within 90 days after a decision is announced unless a shorter time is required by State or Federal law. Any interested person, including the applicant, prior to seeking judicial review of the city council’s decision with respect to quasi-judicial actions, must first file a petition for reconsideration with the city clerk within ten days after the council’s decision. Any petition so filed must comply with municipal ordinance code §2.08.096. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the City of Cupertino will make reasonable efforts to accommodate persons with qualified disabilities. If you require special assistance, please contact the city clerk’s office at 408-777-3223 at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Cupertino City Council after publication of the packet will be made available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue, during normal business hours and in Council packet archives linked from the agenda/minutes page on the Cupertino web site. RESOLUTION NO. 10- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCEPTING QUITCLAIM DEED AND AUTHORIZATION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS, FIRST LJ OF CUPERTINO, LLC, 10385 CALVERT DRIVE, APN 375-17-027 WHEREAS, First LJ of Cupertino, LLC, has executed a “Quitclaim Deed and Authorization”, which is in good and sufficient form, quitclaiming all rights in and authorizing the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, to extract water from the underground basin, underlying that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, more particularly described as follows: All that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, as shown in the attached Exhibit “A”. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Cupertino accept said “Quitclaim Deed and Authorization” so tendered; and IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record said “Quitclaim Deed and Authorization”, and this resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 3rd day of August, 2010 by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: _________________________ ________________________ City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino ò ûØÍÌÈÛÊ×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎÛÙÙ×ÌÈÓÎÕÛëÇÓÈÙÐÛÓÏø××ØÛÎØûÇÈÔÍÊÓÂÛÈÓÍÎÖÍÊçÎØ×ÊÕÊÍÇÎØåÛÈ×ÊêÓÕÔÈÉ öÓÊÉÈðòÍÖùÇÌ×ÊÈÓÎÍððù ùÛÐÆ×ÊÈøÊÓÆ×ûìî ê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎîÍ èÔ×ÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈÃÍÅÎ×ÊÉÍÖÈÔÓÉÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÈÓÛÐØ×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈÛÕÊ××ÈÍÕÊÛÎÈÈÍÈÔ×ùÓÈÃÈÔ×ÊÓÕÔÈÈÍ×ÄÈÊÛÙÈ ÅÛÈ×ÊÖÊÍÏÈÔ×ÚÛÉÓÎÇÎØ×ÊÈÔ×ÍÆ×ÊÐÃÓÎÕÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈÃ RESOLUTION NO. 10- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCEPTING QUITCLAIM DEED AND AUTHORIZATION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS, FIRST LJ OF CUPERTINO, LLC, 10395 CALVERT DRIVE, APN 375-17-028 WHEREAS, First LJ of Cupertino, LLC, has executed a “Quitclaim Deed and Authorization”, which is in good and sufficient form, quitclaiming all rights in and authorizing the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, to extract water from the underground basin, underlying that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, more particularly described as follows: All that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, as shown in the attached Exhibit “A”. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Cupertino accept said “Quitclaim Deed and Authorization” so tendered; and IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record said “Quitclaim Deed and Authorization”, and this resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 3rd day of August, 2010 by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: _________________________ ________________________ City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino ò ûØÍÌÈÛÊ×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎÛÙÙ×ÌÈÓÎÕÛëÇÓÈÙÐÛÓÏø××ØÛÎØûÇÈÔÍÊÓÂÛÈÓÍÎÖÍÊçÎØ×ÊÕÊÍÇÎØåÛÈ×ÊêÓÕÔÈÉ öÓÊÉÈðòÍÖùÇÌ×ÊÈÓÎÍððù ùÛÐÆ×ÊÈøÊÓÆ×ûìî ê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎîÍ èÔ×ÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈÃÍÅÎ×ÊÉÍÖÈÔÓÉÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÈÓÛÐØ×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈÛÕÊ××ÈÍÕÊÛÎÈÈÍÈÔ×ùÓÈÃÈÔ×ÊÓÕÔÈÈÍ×ÄÈÊÛÙÈ ÅÛÈ×ÊÖÊÍÏÈÔ×ÚÛÉÓÎÇÎØ×ÊÈÔ×ÍÆ×ÊÐÃÓÎÕÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈÃ RESOLUTION NO. 10- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCEPTING QUITCLAIM DEED AND AUTHORIZATION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS, FIRST LJ OF CUPERTINO, LLC, 10355 CALVERT DRIVE, APN 375-17-024 WHEREAS, First LJ of Cupertino, LLC., has executed a “Quitclaim Deed and Authorization”, which is in good and sufficient form, quitclaiming all rights in and authorizing the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, to extract water from the underground basin, underlying that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, more particularly described as follows: All that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, as shown in the attached Exhibit “A”. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Cupertino accept said “Quitclaim Deed and Authorization” so tendered; and IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record said “Quitclaim Deed and Authorization”, and this resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 3rd day of August, 2010 by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: _________________________ ________________________ City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino ò ûØÍÌÈÛÊ×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎÛÙÙ×ÌÈÓÎÕÛëÇÓÈÙÐÛÓÏø××ØÛÎØûÇÈÔÍÊÓÂÛÈÓÍÎÖÍÊçÎØ×ÊÕÊÍÇÎØåÛÈ×ÊêÓÕÔÈÉ öÓÊÉÈðòÍÖùÇÌ×ÊÈÓÎÍððù ùÛÐÆ×ÊÈøÊÓÆ×ûìî ê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎîÍ èÔ×ÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈÃÍÅÎ×ÊÉÍÖÈÔÓÉÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÈÓÛÐØ×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈÛÕÊ××ÈÍÕÊÛÎÈÈÍÈÔ×ùÓÈÃÈÔ×ÊÓÕÔÈÈÍ×ÄÈÊÛÙÈ ÅÛÈ×ÊÖÊÍÏÈÔ×ÚÛÉÓÎÇÎØ×ÊÈÔ×ÍÆ×ÊÐÃÓÎÕÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈÃ RESOLUTION NO. 10- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCEPTING QUITCLAIM DEED AND AUTHORIZATION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS, MADHUKAR GOVINDARAJU AND CHAYA MURTHY GOVINDARAJU, 10140 LOCKWOOD DRIVE, APN 342-14-112 WHEREAS, Madhukar Govindaraju and Chaya Murthy Govindaraju, have executed a “Quitclaim Deed and Authorization”, which is in good and sufficient form, quitclaiming all rights in and authorizing the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, to extract water from the underground basin, underlying that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, more particularly described as follows: All that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, as shown in the attached Exhibit “A”. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Cupertino accept said “Quitclaim Deed and Authorization” so tendered; and IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record said “Quitclaim Deed and Authorization”, and this resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 3rd day of August, 2010 by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: _________________________ ________________________ City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino ûØÍÌÈÛÊ×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎÛÙÙ×ÌÈÓÎÕÛëÇÓÈÙÐÛÓÏø××ØÛÎØûÇÈÔÍÊÓÂÛÈÓÍÎÖÍÊçÎØ×ÊÕÊÍÇÎØåÛÈ×ÊêÓÕÔÈÉ ïÛØÔÇÑÛÊõÍÆÓÎØÛÊÛÒÇÛÎØùÔÛÃÛïÇÊÈÔÃõÍÆÓÎØÛÊÛÒÇ ðÍÙÑÅÍÍØøÊÓÆ×ûìî ê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎîÍ ò èÔ×ÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈÃÍÅÎ×ÊÉÍÖÈÔÓÉÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÈÓÛÐØ×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈÛÕÊ××ÈÍÕÊÛÎÈÈÍÈÔ×ùÓÈÃÈÔ×ÊÓÕÔÈÈÍ×ÄÈÊÛÙÈ ÅÛÈ×ÊÖÊÍÏÈÔ×ÚÛÉÓÎÇÎØ×ÊÈÔ×ÍÆ×ÊÐÃÓÎÕÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈÃ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ùóèãôûðð èíêê÷ûæ÷îç÷§ùçì÷êèóîíùû è÷ð÷ìôíî÷ ÅÅÅÙÇÌ×ÊÈÓÎÍÍÊÕ STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 9 Meeting Date: August 3, 2010 Subject Vacate a Portion of City Right of Way on Stevens Canyon Road at 22605 Ricardo Road. Recommended Action Adopt Resolution No. 10-____, expressing the intent to vacate a portion of City right of way on Stevens Canyon Road at 22605 Ricardo Road. Description 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. The resulting Stevens Canyon Road right of way, after the requested vacation, will create a better alignment to the existing roadway. On June 1, 2010, Council adopted a resolution of intention to vacate the aforementioned right of way, 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. On July 20, 2010 the Council considered the above item to Vacate a Portion of City Right of Way on Stevens Canyon Road at 22605 Ricardo Road. During consideration of the item, it was requested by the Council that a five-foot wide pedestrian access easement, along Stevens Canyon Road, be reserved. The staff was directed to re-notice the action to include this pedestrian easement. This action complies with that Council direction. If Council adopts the resolution of intention to vacate the aforementioned right of way, the City will post and publish appropriate notice of that intention, as well as 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. August 3, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 2 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 pedestrian access easement retained by the City. Sustainability Impact None. Fiscal Impact None. • Prepared by: Glenn Goepfert Reviewed by: Ralph A. Qualls, Jr. Approved for Submission by: David W. Knapp, City Manager Attachments: A-Resolution B - Map RESOLUTION NO. 10- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO EXPRESSING THE INTENT TO VACATE A PORTION OF CITY RIGHT OF WAY ON STEVENS CANYON ROAD AT RICARDO ROAD WHEREAS, Harold “Bud” Barclay made application to the City of Cupertino to vacate right of way on Stevens Canyon Road at 22605 Ricardo Road as shown and described on the attached map and description, both of which are made a part hereof as Exhibit A and Exhibit B; and WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has determined that there will be no further public need for said right of way if both a public utilities easement over said right of way is reserved, and a five-foot wide pedestrian access easement, along Stevens Canyon Road, is reserved as a condition of the vacation of said road right of way. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cupertino hereby expresses its intent to vacate the portion of public road right of way adjacent to the land at 22605 Ricardo Road, as shown and described on the attached map and description. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Cupertino that the City Clerk is hereby directed to publish notice of this resolution and set a date for a public hearing as required by law. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino rd this 3 day of August 2010, by the following votes: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: _________________________ ________________________ City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino ò ûØÍÌÈÛÊ×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎ×ÄÌÊ×ÉÉÓÎÕÈÔ×ÓÎÈ×ÎÈÈÍÆÛÙÛÈ×ÛÌÍÊÈÓÍÎÍÖÙÓÈÃÊÓÕÔÈÍÖÅÛÃÍÎ éÈ×Æ×ÎÉùÛÎÃÍÎêÍÛØÛÈ êÓÙÛÊØÍêÍÛØê×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎîÍ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ùóèãôûðð èíêê÷ûæ÷îç÷§ùçì÷êèóîíùû è÷ð÷ìôíî÷ ÅÅÅÙÇÌ×ÊÈÓÎÍÍÊÕ STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 10 Meeting Date: August 3, 2010 Subject Request for extensions of a previously approved hotel proposed for 10165 N De Anza Blvd Recommended Action Consider approval of extensions Description EXT-2010-04, EXT-2010-05 and EXT-2010-06 (CONSENT) Dipesh Gupta, Shashi Corporation (for Ebrahim Kaabipour) 10165 North De Anza Boulevard Request for a one year extension of the previously approved Use Permit (U-2008-02), Architectural Site Approval (ASA-2008-07), and Tree Removal (TR-2008-09) to demolish an existing gasoline station/car wash and construct a 5-story, 138-room hotel. Sustainability Impact None Fiscal Impact None Background On January 20, 2009, the City Council approved the project (See Attachment A) to allow the development of a hotel, associated underground parking podium and tree removals. Based on the Ordinance, the Council approval is valid for two years, expiring on January 20, 2011. Due to economic conditions and restrictive financial markets, the applicant, Dipesh Gupta, is requesting a one-year extension of these approvals to January 20, 2012 (See Attachment B). Discussion The Cupertino Municipal Code sections 19.124.100 and 19.134.100 authorize the City Council to extend the project approvals for a maximum of one year, without a public hearing. Therefore, the applicant’s request is being presented to the Council as a consent item. August 3, 2010Cupertino City Council page 2 Prepared by Colin Jung Reviewed by Gary Chao, Aarti Shrivastava Approved for Submission by: David W. Knapp, City Manager Attachments A.Approval letter, dated January 23,2009 B.Letter from Applicant, dated July 7, 2010 C.Approved Plan Set, dated January 20,2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ùóèãôûðð èíêê÷ûæ÷îç÷§ùçì÷êèóîíùû è÷ð÷ìôíî÷ ÅÅÅÙÇÌ×ÊÈÓÎÍÍÊÕ STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 11 Meeting Date: August 3, 2010 Subject Appeal of an approved WiMax Antenna at West Valley Presbyterian Church Recommended Action Consider denial of the appeal Description DIR-2010-05 6191 Bollinger Road (375-41-007) Bradley Head for Clearwire/West Valley Presbyterian Church This is an appeal of an approved WiMax Antenna to be concealed in a cupola on the roof top of the church Sustainability Impact None Fiscal Impact None Background On May 27, 2010, the Director of Community Development approved DIR-2010-05 and mailed notices of the Director’s actions to the Planning Commission, City Council and property owners within 1,000 feet radius (365 owners). The approval was subsequently appealed by Norman & Ione Yuen on June 10, 2010 and heard by the Planning Commission on July 27, 2010 after a postponement request by the appellants to accommodate their vacation plans. The Commission reviewed the project, took public testimony and recommended (4-0-1, Giefer absent) that the Council deny the appeal and uphold the Director’s Approval. Project Location The project site is the West Valley Presbyterian Church located at 6191 Bollinger Road, the northeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue. The site is surrounded by Hyde Middle School to the August 3, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 2 north and east, a shopping center to the south, duplexes and single-family residences to the west and more single-family residences to the north. A detailed response to the appeal is provided in the staff report (Attachment B). Discussion Planning Commission Commissioners noted that federal law prohibits the City from making decisions on personal wireless service facilities based on the health/environmental effects of radio frequency energy if it meets federal safety standards, which it does. Review must be limited to project design issues and there are none. One Commissioner asked if the project should be continued to provide noticing to renters and school parents. Another asked why the noticing rules should be changed for just this project and noted that the Commission should be acting on the project in front of them and not considering rule changes at this time. The Commission voted 4-0-1 recommending denial of the appeal per the model resolution with the added suggestion that the City Council consider additional, longer term radio frequency energy monitoring for compliance with federal safety standards. Public Comments The primary concerns and comments expressed by the public are summarized as follows (with staff responses in italics): ïò Noticing for this appeal hearing was inadequate. The City should have notified surrounding renters, Hyde Junior High (principal) and the parents of the children that attend Hyde. Appellants walked their neighborhood and numerous neighbors signed a petition opposing the Clearwire wireless facility (Attachment C). Appellants had insufficient time to prepare case. The church property owner has not been responsive to their communications and they could not contact the HydeParents Teachers Association because school is not in session yet. Staff response: Staff follows public noticing rules established by the City. For this particular project, required noticing includes 1,000 foot radius noticing of property owners. Property owners are responsible for notifying their tenants/renters. Notice of the Director’s action went to the Cupertino Union School District office, which is the property owner of Hyde Middle School. School District staff acknowledged receipt of the city mailing but had no comments on the Clearwire facility proposal. School District staff noted they talked to the Hyde Middle School principal, but principals do not make decisions on district-wide matters and the principal will not be commenting on the proposal. It is up to the School District to decide whether it wants to notify school parents or not. The City does not keep a mailing list of school parents. îò WiMax is a new communications technology and there are concerns about locating them close to residences and schools. Power output is more continuous. Exposure meets FCC exposure limits, but there are worries that Clearwire can increase the power as needed to meet demand. Staff response: According to the Federal Communications Commission the public exposure limit for WiMax (broadband radio) and other cell phone technologies (PCS, Cellular, SMR) is the 2 same: 1.00 mW/cm. The public limit applies to continuous exposures and is intended to provide a prudent margin of safety for all persons, regardless of age, gender, size or health. The August 3, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 3 Hammett & Edison report is based on several worst-case assumptions, including the assumption that the facility is operating at full power on all channels and accounting for all other measurable, existing sources of ambient RF emissions. The estimated ground level RF emission 2 exposure is 0.0027 mW/cm or 0.27% of the applicable public limit. The applicant’s consultant stated that Clearwire cannot arbitrarily increase power, since it is limited by the type of equipment cabinets and antennas used in the facility. íò Can the City change its rules and only allow a DAS (Distributed Antenna System) with fiber optics? Staff response: The City’s master plan and ordinance for wireless communications facilities do not prohibit DAS technology, but the City’s rules do not prohibit other communication technologies in favor of DAS. It is not clear whether the City has a right to dictate what type of equipment a wireless carrier uses. ìò Numerous concerns with the health effects of WiMax energy. Facility should be located elsewhere, like the hills or near the freeway, not near residences or schools. Staff response: See the response to item no. 2. Clearwire is entitling a new network of facilities in Cupertino and the San Francisco Bay Area, much like what every other wireless carrier has done. The City has already approved a half dozen Clearwire facilities scattered all over the City. ëò Wireless communications technology is too new. Effects are not well-studied or are inconclusive. More research should be done before City decides to approve such facilities. Staff response: See the response to item no. 2. êò Why is the City considering this application when it has denied applications near schools before? Staff response: The City has not denied a wireless communications facility near a school when the facility met federal safety standards and design standards. A microcell was recently approved on North Blaney Avenue near an elementary school. A facility was approved at Monta Vista High School before the school district decided not to pursue a land lease with the wireless carrier. Three additional proposals have been cited in Monta Vista: one on Imperial Avenue was approved and built and two others were withdrawn by their applicants. Other Staff Comments Staff requests that the City Council consider placing additional monitoring requirements on this approval to address resident concerns. Presently, the approval requires testing of exposure levels to radio frequency energy after construction and before full operation of the facility. The Council may want to consider requiring additional third party RF monitoring that is paid for by the applicant for two more years. Prepared by Colin Jung Reviewed by Gary Chao, Aarti Shrivastava Approved for Submission by David W. Knapp, City Manager Attachments August 3, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 2 A. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6602 B. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated July 27, 2010 C. Petition from Appellant D. email from Wenjie Li, dated July 23, 2010 ATTACHMENT A Ü×Îóîðïðóðë Ý×ÌÇ ÑÚ ÝËÐÛÎÌ×ÒÑ ïðíðð Ì±®®» ßª»²«» Ý«°»®¬·²±ô Ý¿´·º±®²·¿ çëðïì ÎÛÍÑÔËÌ×ÑÒ ÒÑò êêðî ÑÚ ÌØÛ ÐÔßÒÒ×ÒÙ ÝÑÓÓ×ÍÍ×ÑÒ ÑÚ ÌØÛ Ý×ÌÇ ÑÚ ÝËÐÛÎÌ×ÒÑ ÎÛÝÑÓÓÛÒÜ×ÒÙ ÜÛÒ×ßÔ ÑÚ ßÒ üííøüñî÷üùôëøúéîëiê Ó×ÒÑÎ ÓÑÜ×Ú×ÝßÌ×ÑÒ ßÔÔÑÉ×ÒÙ ß ÐÛÎÍÑÒßÔ É×ÎÛÔÛÍÍ ÍÛÎÊ×ÝÛ ÚßÝ×Ô×ÌÇ ÑÒ ÌØÛ ÎÑÑÚ ÑÚ ßÒ ÛÈ×ÍÌ×ÒÙ ÝØËÎÝØô ÝÑÒÍ×ÍÌ×ÒÙ ÑÚ ÌØÎÛÛ ÐßÒÛÔ ßÒÌÛÒÒßÍ ßÒÜ ÌØÎÛÛ Ó×ÝÎÑÉßÊÛ Ü×ÍØ ßÒÌÛÒÒßÍ ÍÝÎÛÛÒÛÜ ÞÇ ß ÚßËÈ ÝËÐÑÔß ßÒÜ ß ÞßÍÛ ÛÏË×ÐÓÛÒÌ ÛÒÝÔÑÍËÎÛ ßÌ êïçï ÞÑÔÔ×ÒÙÛÎ ÎÑßÜ ÍÛÝÌ×ÑÒ ×æ Ú×ÒÜ×ÒÙÍ ÉØÛÎÛßÍô ¬¸» Ð´¿²²·²¹ Ý±³³··±² ±º ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ±º Ý«°»®¬·²± ®»½»·ª»¼ ¿² ¿°°»¿´ ±º ¿ ùÔËØÚÉÎËiÊðÔÏÎËðÎÙÔ×ÔÚÜÉÔÎÏ¿°°´·½¿¬·±²ô º·´» ²±ò Ü×Îóîðïðóðëô ¿ ¼»½®·¾»¼ ·² Í»½¬·±² ×× ±º ¬¸· Î»±´«¬·±²å ¿²¼ ÉØÛÎÛßÍô ¬¸» ²»½»¿®§ °«¾´·½ ²±¬·½» ¸¿ª» ¾»»² ¹·ª»² ·² ¿½½±®¼¿²½» ©·¬¸ ¬¸» Ð®±½»¼«®¿´ Ñ®¼·²¿²½» ±º ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ±º Ý«°»®¬·²±ô ¿²¼ ¬¸» Ð´¿²²·²¹ Ý±³³··±² ¸¿ ¸»´¼ ±²» ±® ³±®» °«¾´·½ ¸»¿®·²¹ ±² ¬¸· ³¿¬¬»®å ¿²¼ ÉØÛÎÛßÍô ¬¸» °®±¶»½¬ ½¸¿²¹» ¿®» ¼»»³»¼ ³·²±® ·² ²¿¬«®»å ¿²¼ ÉØÛÎÛßÍô ¬¸» º¿«¨ ½«°±´¿ · ½±³°¿¬·¾´» ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ¼»·¹² ±º ¬¸» ½¸«®½¸ô ·² ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸» ¿®½¸·¬»½¬«®¿´ º»¿¬«®» · ½±³³±² ¿²¼ ½±³°¿¬·¾´» ¬± ¬¸» ±ª»®¿´´ ½¸«®½¸ ¼»·¹²å · ²±¬ ¼·°®±°±®¬·±² ·² ·¦» ½±³°¿®»¼ ¬± ¬¸» ½¸«®½¸å ¿²¼ «» ¾«·´¼·²¹ ³¿¬»®·¿´ ¬¸¿¬ ¿®» ½±²·¬»²¬ ÆÔÉÕÉÕØÚÕÈËÚÕiÊÛÈÔÑÙÔÏÖÐÜÉØËÔÜÑÊÜÏÙ ÉØÛÎÛßÍô ¬¸» °»®±²¿´ ©·®»´» »®ª·½» º¿½·´·¬§ · ²±¬ ´±½¿¬»¼ ·² ¿² ·²¿°°®±°®·¿¬» ´±½¿¬·±²ô ·² ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸» º¿½·´·¬§ ³»»¬ º»¼»®¿´ ¿º»¬§ ´·³·¬ º±® ®¿¼·± º®»¯«»²½§ »²»®¹§ »¨°±«®» º±® ±²·¬» ¿²¼ ²»¿®¾§ ´¿²¼ «»ô «½¸ ¿ ¿ ½¸±±´å ¿²¼ ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸» º¿½·´·¬§ · ·¬»¼ ·² ¿² ¿°°®±°®·¿¬» ´±½¿¬·±² ¿²¼ ¼»·¹²»¼ ·² ¿½½±®¼¿²½» ©·¬¸ ¬¸» Ý·ÉÄiÊæÔËØÑØÊÊðÜÊÉØËíÑÜÏÜÏÙæÔËØÑØÊÊ Ý±³³«²·½¿¬·±² Ú¿½·´·¬·» Ñ®¼·²¿²½»å ¿²¼ ÉØÛÎÛßÍô ¬¸» ³»¬¸±¼±´±¹§ ¬± ½¿´½«´¿¬» ®¿¼·± º®»¯«»²½§ °±©»® ¼»²·¬§ · ²±¬ ©®±²¹ ¿ ·¬ «» ¬¸» »¯«¿¬·±² °®»½®·¾»¼ ¾§ ¬¸» Ú»¼»®¿´ Ý±³³«²·½¿¬·±² Ý±³³··±²ô ¬¸» ¿¹»²½§ ¬¸¿¬ °®±³«´¹¿¬» ¬¸» ®«´» ¬¸¿¬ ®»¹«´¿¬» ®¿¼·± º®»¯«»²½§ »²»®¹§ »¨°±«®»ò ÒÑÉô ÌØÛÎÛÚÑÎÛô ÞÛ ×Ì ÎÛÍÑÔÊÛÜæ Ì¸¿¬ ¿º¬»® ½¿®»º«´ ½±²·¼»®¿¬·±² ±º ³¿°ô º¿½¬ô »¨¸·¾·¬ô ¬»¬·³±²§ ¿²¼ ±¬¸»® »ª·¼»²½» «¾³·¬¬»¼ ·² ¬¸· ³¿¬¬»®ô ¬¸» ¿°°»¿´ ±º Ü·®»½¬ÎËiÊðÔÏÎËðÎÙÔ×ÔÚÜÉÔÎÏ×ÔÑØÏÎùôë ÔÊ ¸»®»¾§ ®»½±³³»²¼»¼ º±® ¼»²·¿´å ¿²¼ Ì¸¿¬ ¬¸» «¾½±²½´«·±² «°±² ©¸·½¸ ¬¸» º·²¼·²¹ ¿²¼ ½±²¼·¬·±² °»½·º·»¼ ·² ¬¸· ®»±´«¬·±² ¿®» ¾¿»¼ ¿²¼ ½±²¬¿·²»¼ ·² ¬¸» °«¾´·½ ¸»¿®·²¹ ®»½±®¼ ½±²½»®²·²¹ ß°°´·½¿¬·±² Ò±ò Ü×Îóîðïðó ðë ¿ »¬ º±®¬¸ ·² ¬¸» Ó·²«¬» ±º ¬¸» Ð´¿²²·²¹ Ý±³³··±² Ó»»¬·²¹ ±º Ö«´§ îéô îðïðô ¿²¼ ¿®» ·²½±®°±®¿¬»¼ ¾§ ®»º»®»²½» ¿ ¬¸±«¹¸ º«´´§ »¬ º±®¬¸ ¸»®»·²ò ÍÛÝÌ×ÑÒ ××æ ÐÎÑÖÛÝÌ ÜÛÍÝÎ×ÐÌ×ÑÒ ß°°´·½¿¬·±² Ò±òæ Ü×Îóîðïðóðë ø¿°°»¿´÷ ß°°´·½¿²¬æ Þ®¿¼´»§ Ø»¿¼ô ÒÍß É·®»´» º±® Ý´»¿®©·®» Ð®±°»®¬§ Ñ©²»®æ É»¬ Ê¿´´»§ Ð®»¾§¬»®·¿² Ý¸«®½¸ Ô±½¿¬·±²æ êïçï Þ±´´·²¹»® Î±¿¼ ÍÛÝÌ×ÑÒ ×××æ ÝÑÒÜ×Ì×ÑÒÍ ßÜÓ×Ò×ÍÌÛÎÛÜ ÞÇ ÌØÛ ÝÑÓÓËÒ×ÌÇ ÜÛÊÛÔÑÐÓÛÒÌ ÜÛÐÌò ïòßÐÐÎÑÊÛÜ ÛÈØ×Þ×ÌÍ ùÔËØÚÉÎËiÊðÔÏÎËðÎÙÔ×ÔÚÜÉÔÎÏüÍÍËÎÇÜÑ Ó»³±®¿²¼«³ô º·´» ²±ò Ü×Îóîðïðóðë ©·¬¸ ¿¬¬¿½¸³»²¬ ß ¬¸®±«¹¸ Ü ¼¿¬»¼ Ó¿§ îéô îðïðò îòÒÑÌ×ÝÛ ÑÚ ÚÛÛÍô ÜÛÜ×ÝßÌ×ÑÒÍô ÎÛÍÛÎÊßÌ×ÑÒÍ ÑÎ ÑÌØÛÎ ÛÈßÝÌ×ÑÒÍ Ì¸» Ý±²¼·¬·±² ±º Ð®±¶»½¬ ß°°®±ª¿´ »¬ º±®¬¸ ¸»®»·² ³¿§ ·²½´«¼» ½»®¬¿·² º»»ô ¼»¼·½¿¬·±² ®»¯«·®»³»²¬ô ®»»®ª¿¬·±² ®»¯«·®»³»²¬ô ¿²¼ ±¬¸»® »¨¿½¬·±²ò Ð«®«¿²¬ ¬± Ù±ª»®²³»²¬ Ý±¼» Í»½¬·±² êêðîðø¼÷ øï÷ô ¬¸»» Ý±²¼·¬·±² ½±²¬·¬«¬» ©®·¬¬»² ²±¬·½» ±º ¿ ¬¿¬»³»²¬ ±º ¬¸» ¿³±«²¬ ±º «½¸ º»»ô ¿²¼ ¿ ¼»½®·°¬·±² ±º ¬¸» ¼»¼·½¿¬·±²ô ®»»®ª¿¬·±²ô ¿²¼ ±¬¸»® »¨¿½¬·±²ò Ç±« ¿®» ¸»®»¾§ º«®¬¸»® ²±¬·º·»¼ ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸» çðó¼¿§ ¿°°®±ª¿´ °»®·±¼ ·² ©¸·½¸ §±« ³¿§ °®±¬»¬ ¬¸»» º»»ô ¼»¼·½¿¬·±²ô ®»»®ª¿¬·±²ô ¿²¼ ±¬¸»® »¨¿½¬·±²ô °«®«¿²¬ ¬± Ù±ª»®²³»²¬ Ý±¼» Í»½¬·±² êêðîðø¿÷ô ¸¿ ¾»¹«²ò ×º §±« º¿·´ ¬± º·´» ¿ °®±¬»¬ ©·¬¸·² ¬¸· çðó¼¿§ °»®·±¼ ½±³°´§·²¹ ©·¬¸ ¿´´ ±º ¬¸» ®»¯«·®»³»²¬ ±º Í»½¬·±² êêðîðô §±« ©·´´ ¾» ´»¹¿´´§ ¾¿®®»¼ º®±³ ´¿¬»® ½¸¿´´»²¹·²¹ «½¸ »¨¿½¬·±²ò íòßÞßÒÜÑÒÓÛÒÌ ×º ¿º¬»® ·²¬¿´´¿¬·±²ô ¬¸» ¿»®·¿´ · ²±¬ «»¼ º±® ·¬ °»®³·¬¬»¼ °«®°±» º±® ¿ ½±²¬·²«±« °»®·±¼ ±º ïè ³±²¬¸ô ¿·¼ ¿²¬»²²¿» ¿²¼ ¿±½·¿¬»¼ º¿½·´·¬·» ¸¿´´ ¾» ®»³±ª»¼ò Ì¸» ¿°°´·½¿²¬ ¸¿´´ ¾»¿® ¬¸» »²¬·®» ½±¬ ±º ¼»³±´·¬·±² ¿²¼ ®»³±ª¿´ò ìòÛÈÐ×ÎßÌ×ÑÒ ÜßÌÛ éÕÔÊùÔËØÚÉÎËiÊðÔÏÎËðÎÙÔ×ÔÚÜÉÔÎÏÊÕÜÑÑØÅÍÔËØ ¬»² øïð÷ §»¿® ¿º¬»® ¬¸» »ºº»½¬·ª» ¼¿¬» ±º ¬¸» °»®³·¬ò Ì¸» ¿°°´·½¿²¬ ³¿§ ¿°°´§ º±® ¿ ®»²»©¿´ ±º ¬¸» ³·²±® ³±¼·º·½¿¬·±² ¿¬ ©¸·½¸ ¬·³» ¬¸» Ü·®»½¬±® ±º Ý±³³«²·¬§ Ü»ª»´±°³»²¬ ³¿§ ®»ª·»© ¬¸» ¬¿¬» ±º ©·®»´» 2 ½±³³«²·½¿¬·±² ¿²¼ ½¿³±«º´¿¹» ¬»½¸²±´±¹·» ¬± ¼»¬»®³·²» ·º ¬¸» ª·«¿´ ·³°¿½¬ ±º ¬¸» °»®±²¿´ ©·®»´» º¿½·´·¬§ ½¿² ¾» ®»¼«½»¼ò ëòÐÑÍÌóÝÑÒÍÌÎËÝÌ×ÑÒ ÎßÜ×Ñ ÚÎÛÏËÛÒÝÇ ÛÒÛÎÙÇ ÛÈÐÑÍËÎÛ ÌÛÍÌ×ÒÙ Ð®·±® ¬± ¬¸» ½±³³»®½·¿´ ±°»®¿¬·±² ±º ¬¸· º¿½·´·¬§ô ¬¸» ¿°°´·½¿²¬ ¸¿´´ «¾³·¬ ¿ º·»´¼ ¬»¬ ®»°±®¬ ±² ¬¸» ®¿¼·± º®»¯«»²½§ »²»®¹§ »³··±² ¬± ¬¸» Ü·®»½¬±® ±º Ý±³³«²·¬§ Ü»ª»´±°³»²¬ ½±²º·®³·²¹ ¬¸¿¬ °«¾´·½ »¨°±«®» ¬± ¹»²»®¿¬»¼ ®¿¼·± º®»¯«»²½§ »²»®¹§ ø³»¿«®»¼ ¿¬ º«´´ °±©»®÷ ½±³°´·» ©·¬¸ º»¼»®¿´ ¿º»¬§ ¬¿²¼¿®¼ ¿¬ ¹®±«²¼ ´»ª»´ ¿²¼ ²»¿®»¬ ®»·¼»²¬·¿´ °®±°»®¬§ ´·²» ø³»¿«®»¼ ¿¬ »½±²¼ º´±±® ´»ª»´÷ò êòÜ×ÍÝÔÑÍËÎÛ ÑÚ ÐÎÛÍÛÒÝÛ ÑÚ ÐÛÎÍÑÒßÔ É×ÎÛÔÛÍÍ ÍÛÎÊ×ÝÛ ÚßÝ×Ô×ÌÇ Ë°±² ½±²¬®«½¬·±² ±º ¬¸» °®±¶»½¬ô ¬¸» °®±°»®¬§ ±©²»® ¸¿´´ ¼·½´±» ¬¸» °®»»²½» ±º °»®±²¿´ ©·®»´» »®ª·½» º¿½·´·¬§ ¬± «»® ¿²¼ »¨°»½¬»¼ «»® ±º ¬¸» ½¸±±´ ±°»®¿¬·±² ¿²¼ °®±ª·¼» ¿ ½±°§ ±º «½¸ ²±¬·½» ¬± ¬¸» Ü·®»½¬±® ±º Ý±³³«²·¬§ Ü»ª»´±°³»²¬ò ÐßÍÍÛÜ ßÒÜ ßÜÑÐÌÛÜ ¬¸· îé¬¸ ¼¿§ ±º Ö«´§ îðïðô ¿¬ ¿ Î»¹«´¿® Ó»»¬·²¹ ±º ¬¸» Ð´¿²²·²¹ Ý±³³··±² ±º ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ±º Ý«°»®¬·²±ô Í¬¿¬» ±º Ý¿´·º±®²·¿ô ¾§ ¬¸» º±´´±©·²¹ ®±´´ ½¿´´ ª±¬»æ ßÇÛÍæ ÝÑÓÓ×ÍÍ×ÑÒÛÎÍæ Ý¸¿·®°»®±² Þ®±°¸§ô Ê·½» Ý¸¿·® Ô»»ô Õ¿²»¼¿ô Ó·´´»® ÒÑÛÍæ ÝÑÓÓ×ÍÍ×ÑÒÛÎÍæ ²±²» ßÞÍÌß×Òæ ÝÑÓÓ×ÍÍ×ÑÒÛÎÍæ ²±²» ßÞÍÛÒÌæ ÝÑÓÓ×ÍÍ×ÑÒÛÎÍæ Ù·»º»® ßÌÌÛÍÌæ ßÐÐÎÑÊÛÜæ ññß¿®¬· Í¸®·ª¿¬¿ª¿ ññÐ¿«´ Þ®±°¸§ ß¿®¬· Í¸®·ª¿¬¿ª¿ Ð¿«´ Þ®±°¸§ô Ý¸¿·® Ü·®»½¬±® ±º Ý±³³«²·¬§ Ü»ª»´±°³»²¬ Ý«°»®¬·²± Ð´¿²²·²¹ Ý±³³··±² ¹æñ°´¿²²·²¹ñ°¼®»°±®¬ñ®»ñîðïðñÜ×Îóîðïðóðë ®» ßÐÐÛßÔò¼±½ 3 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK ùóèãôûðð èíêê÷ûæ÷îç÷§ùçì÷êèóîíùû è÷ð÷ìôíî÷ ÅÅÅÙÇÌ×ÊÈÓÎÍÍÊÕ STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 12 Meeting Date: August 3, 2010 Subject Assessment of fees for private parcels as a part of the annual weed abatement program. Recommended Action Conduct hearing and adopt resolution. Background Chapter 9.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code requires property owners to remove or destroy weeds on their property. The weed abatement process is in place to notify the property owners of this responsibility, to remove the weeds if the property owner doesn’t, and to recover the costs of abatement. The process consists of seven steps that begin in November and go through August of each year. At this time the process is at Step No. 7 on the list. Attached is a copy of the notice and the draft resolution showing the list of properties on the assessment report. 1. City Council adopts a resolution declaring weeds a nuisance and setting a hearing date to hear objections to the proposed destruction or removal of weeds (Nov.) 2. Notice is sent to property owners that they must remove weeds or it will be done for them and the cost will be assessed to their property (Dec.) 3. Property is inspected by the County to verify that weeds were removed. A list is created of properties that still need abatement, and those property owners receive notice of the hearing set in Step 1. 4. Council holds hearing to consider objections (Jan.) 5. County hires contractors to remove any remaining weeds 6. City Council sets a hearing date to assess the property owners for the cost of weed abatement and the City sends the hearing notice. (June-July) August 3, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 2 7. City Council holds a hearing, receives any disputes, and adopts a resolution putting a lien assessment on the properties to recover the cost of weed abatement (July-Aug.) Prepared by: Grace Schmidt Reviewed by: Kimberly Smith Approved for Submission by: David W. Knapp, City Manager Attachments: A. Draft Resolution B. Assessment Report OFFICE OF THE MAYOR CITY HALL 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 408-777-3200 August 3, 2010 Jody Hall Esser, Director Department of Planning and Development County of Santa Clara 70 West Hedding Street San Jose, CA 95110 Dear Ms. Esser, On behalf of our entire city council, thank you for your participation in the city of Cupertino’s recent study session on the Lehigh quarry and cement plant. Please also pass along our special appreciation to Mr. Rudholm for his professionalism in dealing with this very difficult subject. As part of the study session, several questions were raised regarding Notices of Violation (NOVs) which have been issued by the county for violation of the terms of the reclamation plan at the Lehigh site. It would be enormously helpful if you would help clarify the nature of the NOVs and any resulting corrections, amendments, or enforcement actions taken by the county. Thank you again for the ongoing assistance from you and your staff on this issue. Sincerely, Kris Wang, Mayor cc: Board of Supervisors Dr. Jeffery Smith, County Executive DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION ùóèãôûðð èíêê÷ûæ÷îç÷§ùçì÷êèóîíùû è÷ð÷ìôíî÷ ÅÅÅÙÇÌ×ÊÈÓÎÍÍÊÕ STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 14 Meeting Date: August 3, 2010 Subject Adopt ordinance prohibiting the feeding of birds in City parks. Recommended Action Conduct first reading of ordinance. Description Over the past few years, residents’ complaints about duck and geese fecal matter creating a nuisance at Memorial Park, has increased. Staff, along with the Parks and Recreation Commission, has researched different alternatives to reduce the number of geese and ducks at Memorial Park. The ideas discussed included: increased education regarding the negative impacts of feeding the ducks and geese with human food the use of a non-toxic spray for the grass and using dogs to chase the geese and ducks Cupertino Naturalist, Barbara Banfield, has developed a new informational flyer encouraging people to not feed the ducks and geese. The flyer is posted on the Cupertino website and distributed at the Senior Center and Quinlan Community Center. Staff talked with the manufacturer of the non-toxic spray and learned that it would not be a good product for Memorial Park. While the spray is non-toxic when it is on the grass, it can irritate the throat and eyes when it is in the air. This would require staff to wear protective gear when spraying and Memorial would need to be closed during spraying. Several cities have tried border collies with a professional geese busting handler. While this appears to have worked at Shoreline in Mountain View, staff did not feel it would be conducive for Memorial given the concerns people expressed during the dog park process and the close proximity of the children’s playground to the ponds at Memorial. While doing the research on this issue, staff learned that an ordinance prohibiting the feeding of birds in parks was a necessary step to address this issue. The Cupertino Municipal Code does not currently have such a prohibition. The Parks and Recreation Commission recommends to the Cupertino City Council that such an ordinance be adopted. The proposed ordinance is Attachment A. Other jurisdictions including Mountain View and Santa Clara County have ordinances prohibiting the feeding of ducks and geese. August 3, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 2 The number of geese and ducks at Memorial Park has caused problems for park users and parks maintenance staff. The fecal matter has made the park unpleasant and unhealthy for park users. Keeping the park clean of the fecal matter is also difficult. In addition, the cleanup of the fecal matter from the Memorial Park ponds is also an arduous process. One of the reasons for the increase in ducks and geese is that people feed them with human food. While this may seem like a friendly gesture, it is very hard on the birds. Ducks, geese and other waterfowl are physically designed to eat natural foods growing in the environment to stay healthy and light for flight. When ducks, geese and other waterfowl are fed human foods, their organs become engorged and fatty on the inside and they quickly die from malnutrition, heart disease, liver problems and other health complications. An overfed, malnutritioned duck or other waterfowl is sluggish and can’t escape predators. Further, feeding ducks and other waterfowl adversely affects natural migration patterns, which are critical for their ongoing survival. The flyer on the negative impacts of feeding waterfowl is Attachment B. Fiscal Impact The annual cost to keep the pond clean of the excess fecal matter is $45,000. The pond has to be drained three times a year at a cost of $15,000 per each time. If Council approves the proposed ordinance, persons cited for violation of the ordinance would be subject to a fine of $100 for a first offense, $200 for a second violation within one year, and $500 for a third violation within one year. Although, staff recommends a warning for the first violation for the first year, there could be some modest revenue from the fines. Finally, there would be a modest cost to install new signs indicating that feeding ducks and geese was prohibited and citing the specific section of the Municipal Code. Coordination This report has been coordinated with Code Enforcement, Public Works, and the City Attorney. Prepared by: Mark Linder, Director, Parks and Recreation Reviewed by: Approved for Submission by: David W. Knapp, City Manager Attachments: A. Draft ordinance B. Flyer August 3, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 3 ß¬¬¿½¸³»²¬ ß ÑÎÜ×ÒßÒÝÛ ÒÑò ïðóÁÁÁÁ ßÒ ÑÎÜ×ÒßÒÝÛ ÑÚ ÌØÛ Ý×ÌÇ ÝÑËÒÝ×Ô ÑÚ ÌØÛ Ý×ÌÇ ÑÚ ÝËÐÛÎÌ×ÒÑ ßÜÑÐÌ×ÒÙ ÍÛÝÌ×ÑÒ ïíòðìòïíð Ð ÑÚ ÌØÛ ÝËÐÛÎÌ×ÒÑ ÓËÒ×Ý×ÐßÔ ÝÑÜÛ ÐÎÑØ×Þ×Ì×ÒÙ ÌØÛ ÚÛÛÜ×ÒÙ ÑÚ Þ×ÎÜÍ ×Ò Ý×ÌÇ ÐßÎÕÍ THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1.. Code AmendmentSection 13.040.130 P of the Cupertino Municipal Code is hereby adopted to read as follows: Section 13.04.130 O. Feeding Birds Prohibited. No person shall feed or in any manner intentionally provide food to any bird in any city park. Section 2. Statement of Purpose. This Ordinance is intended to prohibit the feeding of wild birds in city parks. In the absence of such a rule, many people, while well-intentioned, create numerous adverse consequences, including the spread of disease, sickness of the birds, and competition for habitat by non-native species. Section 3. Severability. Should any provision of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unlawful, unenforceable or otherwise void, that determination shall have no effect on any other provision of this Ordinance or the application of this Ordinance to any other person or circumstance and, to that end, the provisions hereof are severable. Section 4. Effective Date.This Ordinance shall take effect thirty days after adoption as provided by Government Code Section 36937. Section 5. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall give notice of its adoption as required by law. Pursuant to Government Code Section 36933, a summary of this Ordinance may be published and posted in lieu of publication and posting of the entire text. INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the Cupertino City Council the _____ day of __________ and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the Cupertino City Council the _____day of __________ 2010 by the following vote: VoteMembers of the City Council Ñ®¼·²¿²½» Ò±ò ïðóÁÁÁ Ð¿¹» î Ayes: Noes: Absent: Abstain: ATTEST: APPROVED: ______ City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino úÔÉÄÎ×úÈÍØËÉÔÏÎ íÜËÒÊÜÏÙëØÚËØÜÉÔÎÏùØÍÜËÉÐØÏÉ Ý®»¿¬·²¹ ¿ °±·¬·ª»ô ¸»¿´¬¸§ ¿²¼ ½±²²»½¬»¼ ½±³³«²·¬§ Ði ÔÛßÍÛ ÜÑÒÌ ÚÛÛÜ ÌØÛ ÜËÝÕÍ ÑÎ ÙÛÛÍÛ 1 ~~1 Ú»»¼·²¹ ©¿¬»®º±©´ ½¿² ½¿«» ¬±± ³¿²§ ¼«½µ ¿²¼ ¹»»» ¬± ®»³¿·² ·² ¬¸· ¿®»¿ò ß³±®»¼«½µ¿²¼¹»»»®»³¿·²·²±²»¿®»¿ ¬±¬¿µ»¿¼ª¿²¬¿¹»±º¬¸»º®»»º±±¼¸¿²¼±«¬ ¬¸»·®°±°«´¿¬·±²¼»²·¬§©·´´·²½®»¿»ò Ý®±©¼»¼½±²¼·¬·±²±º¬»²´»¿¼¬±·²½®»¿»¼ ¿¹¹®»·±²¾»¬©»»²¾·®¼ò×²¬»²»½±³°»¬·¬·±² º±®¹±±¼²»¬·²¹·¬»·²¬¸·¿®»¿³»¿²±³» ¾·®¼©·´´²»¬·²°´¿½»¬¸¿¬°«¬¬¸»·® ±ºº°®·²¹¿¬®·µò Ú»»¼·²¹ ©¿¬»®º±©´ ¼»¹®¿¼» ¬¸» »²ª·®±²³»²¬ò ß´¿®¹»°±°«´¿¬·±²±º©¿¬»®º±©´·²¿²¿®»¿ ©·´´½¿«»©¿¬»®¯«¿´·¬§¬±¼»½´·²»¼«»¬±¸·¹¸´»ª»´±º¿²·³¿´©¿¬»òË²½±²«³»¼ ¾®»¿¼¿²¼±¬¸»®º±±¼¿´±º±«´¬¸»©¿¬»®ò Ú»»¼·²¹ ¼«½µ ¿²¼ ¹»»» °®»¿¼ ¼·»¿»ò Ì¸»©¿¬»®¯«¿´·¬§¼»¹®¿¼¿¬·±²¿²¼¬¸»½®±©¼·²¹¬¸¿¬®»«´¬º®±³º»»¼·²¹¼«½µ¿²¼ ¹»»»¿®»½±²¼·¬·±²¬¸¿¬±º¬»²´»¿¼¬±¬¸»°®»¿¼±º©¿¬»®º±©´¼·»¿»«½¸¿¿ª·¿² ½¸±´»®¿ô¿ª·¿²¾±¬«´·³¿²¼¼«½µ°´¿¹«»ò Ú»»¼·²¹ ©¿¬»®º±©´ ½¿² ½¿«» ²«¬®·¬·±²¿´ °®±¾´»³ ·² ¼«½µ ¿²¼ ¹»»»ò É·´¼¼«½µ¿®»¿¼¿°¬»¼¬±¿¼·»¬±ºº®»¸ª»¹»¬¿¬·±²ô»»¼¿²¼°®±¬»·²®·½¸¿¯«¿¬·½ ·²»½¬¿²¼±¬¸»®·²ª»®¬»¾®¿¬»òÝ¿²¿¼¿¹»»»º»»¼±²¸±±¬ô®±±¬ô»»¼ô¾«´¾ô ¾»®®·»ô·²»½¬ô½®«¬¿½»¿²¿²¼³±´´«µòÍ¬¿´»¾®»¿¼ô°¿¬®·»¿²¼±¬¸»®¸·¹¸´§ °®±½»»¼¸«³¿²º±±¼½¿²·³°¿½¬¬¸»·®¸»¿´¬¸¿²¼´»¿¼¬±²«¬®·¬·±²¿´¼»º·½·¬ò Ú»»¼·²¹ ½¿² ½¿«» ©¿¬»®º±©´ ¬± ´±» ¬¸»·® ²¿¬«®¿´ º»¿® ±º ¸«³¿²ò ß¸»¿´¬¸§º»¿®±º¸«³¿²°®±¬»½¬©·´¼´·º»òÉ·´¼¿²·³¿´½¿²¯«·½µ´§´±»¬¸· ·²¬·²½¬·ª»º»¿®±º¸«³¿²©¸»²¬¸»§¿®»¾»·²¹º»¼òÌ¸·½¿²°«¬¾±¬¸¾·®¼¿²¼ ¸«³¿²¿¬®·µ±º·²¶«®§ò Ð¿®µ ¿²¼ Î»½®»¿¬·±² Ü»°¿®¬³»²¬ ïðíðð Ì±®®» ßª»²«» Ý«°»®¬·²±ô Ýß çëðïì ìðèóéééóíïïð ©©©ò½«°»®¬·²±ò±®¹ OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER ùóèãôûðð èíêê÷ûæ÷îç÷§ùçì÷êèóîíùû è÷ð÷ìôíî÷ ÅÅÅÙÇÌ×ÊÈÓÎÍÍÊÕ STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 16 Meeting Date: August 3, 2010 Subject: Designate an alternate board member for the Silicon Valley Regional Interoperability Agency (SVRIA). Recommended Action: Select representative from Council. Discussion Council recently agreed to join the SVRIA, a joint powers agency created to improve the ability of different public agencies to communicate with each other on a day-to-day basis and in emergencies. Council also delegated to the West Valley Mayors and Managers organization authority to designate the board member representing those five West Valley cities. The West Valley group designated Jason Baker, Councilmember from Campbell, as the board member and further determined that the position would rotate among the five cities based on the alphabetic order of the cities. Since the first board designee is from Campbell, Cupertino is next in order. Jason finds that he may have to miss a meeting of the board and has requested that an alternate board member be designated. Accordingly, Cupertino is being asked to provide the alternate board member to represent the five West Valley cities should our representative, Jason Baker, have to miss a meeting. Prepared by: Linda Lagergren Approved for Submission by: David W. Knapp, City Manager DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ùóèãôûðð èíêê÷ûæ÷îç÷§ùçì÷êèóîíùû è÷ð÷ìôíî÷ ÅÅÅÙÇÌ×ÊÈÓÎÍÍÊÕ STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 16 Meeting Date: August 3, 2010 Subject: Amend the Cupertino Municipal Code relating to designated bicycle lanes and routes. Recommended Action: Conduct second reading and enact Ordinance Nos. 10-2063 and 10-2064. Description: An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino amending Section 11.08.250 of the Cupertino Municipal Code relating to designated bicycle lanes"; and "An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino amending Section 11.08.260 of the Cupertino Municipal Code relating to designated bicycle routes. Discussion The Circulation Element of the City’s General Plan, Policy 4-9, requires that the City “Promote a general decrease in reliance on private cars by accommodating and encouraging attractive alternatives”. Implicit in this policy is that bike lanes or bike routes be provided where feasible. Figure 4-C of the General Plan shows the locations of all existing and proposed bike lanes and bike routes within the City. Within the last several years, bike lanes and bike routes have been added in the field, as part of the City’s policy to implement the proposed bike lanes and routes in Figure 4-C. Ordinance Nos. 10- 2063 and10-2064 bring the Cupertino Municipal Code up to date with these field changes. These Ordinances also clarify existing information contained within Sections 11.08.250 and 11.08.260 of the Municipal Code by eliminating redundancies currently existing within these sections. Ordinance Nos. 10-2063 and 10-2064 were introduced at the City Council meeting of July 20, 2010. Staff recommends that Council conduct the second reading and enact these two ordinances. Prepared by: David Stillman Reviewed by: Ralph A. Qualls, Jr. Approved for Submission by: David W. Knapp, City Manager Attachments: Ordinance No. 10-2063 and Ordinance No. 10-2064 ORDINANCE NO. 10-2063 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AMENDING SECTION 11.08.250 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO DESIGNATED BICYCLE LANES The City Council of the City of Cupertino does hereby ordain that Section 11.08.250 be amended as follows: Street Description Side Foothill BouleardFreeway 280 to Stevens Creek BoulvardBoth Stelling RoadHomestead Road to Rainbow DriveBoth Bollinger RoadMiller Avenue to Narciso CourtBoth De Anza BoulevardHomestead Road to State Route 85Both Bollinger Road Westlynn Way to the East City Limit North Blaney Avenue Stevens Creek Boulevard to Bollinger Road Both De Anza Boulevard Homestead Road to Bollinger Road Both De Anza Boulevard State Route 85 to Prospect Road West INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 20th day of July, 2010 and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City of Cupertino this 3rd day of August, 2010 by the following vote: Vote Council Members AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: ___________________ ____________________ City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino ORDINANCE NO. 10-2064 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AMENDING SECTION 11.08.260 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO DESIGNATED BICYCLE ROUTES The City Council of the City of Cupertino does hereby ordain that Section 11.08.260 be amended as follows: Street Description Side Mariani Avenue Bandley Way to De Anza Boulevard Both Rodriguez Avenue De Anza Boulevard to Blaney Avenue Both Rainbow Drive Bubb Road to Stelling Avenue Both INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 20th day of July, 2010 and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City of Cupertino this 3rd day of August, 2010 by the following vote: Vote Council Members AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: ___________________ ____________________ City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino