Exhibit CC 06-21-2016 Item No. 16 2016 Bicycle Transportation PlanCUPERTINO
Subject
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE• CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3354 www.cupertino .org
CITY COUNCIL SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT
Meeting: June 21, 2016
Amendments to Draft 2016 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan
Discussion
Amendments to the Plan
cc 6/21/16
#16
Staff recommends the following amendments to the Draft 2016 Cupertino Bicycle
Transportation Plan as presented on the following pages:
• Replace "Boltage" with "Dero" and replace "Bicycle Pedestrian Commission"
with "Transportation Division" on page 1-10;
• Remove and replace language under the "Stevens Creek Trail Extension"
heading on pages 4-1 and 4-2;
• Revise total score for Rainbow Drive to 46 points on page 6-7;
• Remove "The Hills at Vallco" from Table A-1, page A-1;
• Revise total score for Rainbow Drive to 46 points and scoring within the "School
Travel" category to 20 within Table F-1, page F-7;
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
A letter was received from the Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Department
during the circulation period of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
(IS/MND). The le tt er states that the IS/MND should have included th e Santa Clara
County Countywide Trails Master Plan in th e list of relevant regional plans. The letter
goes on to request th a t existing and proposed County trails and trail routes be
acknowledged in the IS/MND, including the Juan Bautista de Anza Historic Trail, th e
Stevens Creek Sub-regional Trail, the San Tomas Aquino/Saratoga Creeks Connector,
and Southern Pacific Rail Trail. The County also requests that Stevens Creek County
Park be mentioned in the IS/MND as a County park in Cupertino.
The comments received do not refer to the adequacy or conclusions of the IS/MND. The
revisions requested do not pertain to the analysis of potential environmental impacts or
their associated mitigation measures. Ci ty Staff recognizes that the noted facilities are
existing and planned County facilities and will collaborate with the County on future
regional trail routes as detailed plans are create d. No further response is required .
l nterna'i:io.nal VValk and Bike t o School D ays
Five of the six pilot schools posted signs and sent information
out in their newsletter about International Walk and Ride to
School Day (October 7, 2015). Sedgewick Elementary School
tracked modes of transportation and rewarded students wi.th
pencils and stickers. Figure 1-9 shows student participation.
Enforcement Programs
iarget e d Eni'oi'comeni:
The Santa Clara County Sheriff's office handles enforcement
in Cupe.rtino . The Cupertino Public Safety Committee, the
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission, and City staff consult with the
Sheriff's office for targeted enforcement efforts.
Evaluation Programs
j:>arent Survsys and Student Mand Ta llies
The. SRTS Coordinator hosts "Evaluation Team" me.etings as
part of the SRTS Program . The Evaluation Team collected in-
class student surveys and parent surveys from the six pilot
schools in Fall 2015 and Spring 2016 .
a ike Ra ck C ounts
Bike rack counts over a 4-6 month period are currently
planned , and will be used to create a "Data Report Card " for
each pilot school detailing site-specific mode split data,
trends, and recommend,ations to improve rates of active
transportation amongst school children .
2 l:ltto.;LL'tl.W..ltY.Jile re u r yoe~rn.Ls.an:iose :
nfilgbb.Qrb.Q Qd.s/CL.1.5-5229 5J?rn:Ji clL!:he i:k. = 1-
1-10 I Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan
Dero
lil &ll1£lll Dero
cc 6/21/16
#16
The City of Cupertino runs a 1!!18 1'18!8' program that uses a
tracking device to count how many students walk and bike to
school.2 The pilot program began with Lincoln Elementary and
Kennedy Middle schools. The program was run by the Public
Safety Committee. and was recently transferred to the l!il i1y11l1
i;iu1u1ri•.-••••i11i•"' Transportation Div ision
Dero
The 8,e llsgc system records walking and bicycling trips to
school with RFID tags that students scan when they arrive
each morning. Students can log into the Boltage website with
their parents and see data on their trips. Schools can use the
program to track walking and bicycling by classroom, grade
level , or school, and often develop friendly competitions or
other incentives to encourage participation
Community Resources
Cupertino has several organizations that organize and work
within the community. In addition to regional groups such as
the Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition, the following groups are
focused in Cupertino and were included as stakeholders in th is
Plan:
• Walk-Bike Cupertino
C ht.W.:LL.w.w.w~w.alk.bike.c_u.QertinQ .or.g i)
Friends of Stevens Creek Trail
C b.lliu'l.w w.w~te_ v .e.o.s er eek.tr ail... Qr gL )
• Cupertino Safe Routes to School Working Groups
C tltlQJL'N.Yiw&1.1Dj~rlinQ ,.Ql9Liodex..~.sQx1I.J.s,me=13Q Z)
,•
Chapter 4 : Trail Feasibility Study
4.Trail Feasibil ity Study
T rail Netvvork F easibility Study
From the outset of the outreach process for this Plan, interest
in a trail network throughout Cupertino has been a regular
concern for many stakeholder groups. This chapter provides a
preliminary feasibility study for potential off-street trail
networks in Cupertino.
Off-street trail systems can serve a number of purposes when
implemented correctly. They can serve as a recreational
amenity, a low-stress alternative to on-street bicycle trips, a
commute corridor for longer bicycle trips, and a
neighborhood amenity that increases adjacent property
values and improves quality of life.
Recommendation: Cupert ino Loop Trail
This feasi~ility study recommends the implementation of a
loop trail through central Cupertino. This would be
accomplished by implementing Class I trails along Regnart
Creek, along the 1-280 flood control canal. and along the UPRR
rail right of way. These trail segments would be connected to
each other by a series of low-stress on-street bikeways
recommended in this Plan .
Figure 3-5 shows potential alignments for the Cupertino Loop
Trail, as well as other potential locations to implement off-
street trail infrastructure within the City. Table 4-1 provides
brief descriptions of each recommended trail section and brief
descriptions.
Further study will be required to pursue construction of a trail
network. This feasibility study presents a roadmap for future
study & prioritization of a trail network for Cupertino.
Recomm e ndat i on : Study Saratoga Creek -to-Cupertino
Loop Trail Connector
While outside of Cupertino City Limits, the freeway frontage
along the Agilent Technologies campus could potentially
connect an extension of the Saratoga Creek Trail with the
proposed Cupertino Loop Trail. The City should encourage to
the City of Santa Clara to consider such a connector if both
trails are built out.
Stevens Creek Trail Extension
coordinated Stevens Creek Trail planning effort betw
the · ies of Cupertino, Los Altos, Mountain Vie
was started in 2009 with the creation o
rdination Committee. In 2011 Joint Cities
Working Team was created and on thereafter a
Citizens CCWG) was
public
inated Stevens Creek
was issued in Se ~ber, 2015.
ir recommendations to the JCWT,
ommended a new grade separated crossing
Alta Planning+ Design I 4-1
ovide access to the Stevens Creek Trail on a direct rou
910 low-speed streets. The
alternat1 included , in order of preference: a trail
beneath 1-2 · a pedestrian overcrossing of 1 80 and the
UPRR tracks; an edestrian overcrossin only 1-280 if the
first two were infeas . The CWG al ecommended safety
trail alignments are
considered best · r select any preferr alternatives. The
JCWT reco ndations to the City Councils · not endorse
any trail -gnment from Homestead Road to Ste s Creek
Blvd e Cupertino City Council likewise
ommendations regarding a preferred alignment.
Table 4 -1: Recommended Tra il N e twork Segments
Location Start End Description
Bike/J;>ed
bridge over
UPRR
Deep Cllff Golf
Course
Carmen Rd
Bridge at
Stevens Creek
Blvd
Stevens
Creek
Blvd
McClellan
Rd
Hammond-
Snyder
Loop Trail
Linda Vista
Dr
Identified in 2015
BTP Update
Identified in 2015
BTP Update
Bicycle &
pedestrian bridge
over Stevens Creek
Blvd connecting
Carmen Rd
Chapter 4 : Trail Feasibility Study
Location Start End Description
1-280 Canal Mary Ave Vallco Access road on
Bike Path Bridge Pwky south side of canal
Regnart Creek. Pacifica S Blaney Dr Access road on
Phase 1 Dr north side of creek
Regnart Creek. S Blaney Estates Dr Access road on
Phase 2 Dr south side of creek
SR-85 Mary Ave Grand Ave Bicycle &
bike/ped pedestrian bridge
bridge over SR-85
San Tomas Stevens Sterling Identified in 2015
Aquino Creek Creek Barnhart BTP Update
Trail Extension Blvd Park
The Oaks Path Mary Ave Stevens West side of
Creek Blvd proposed
development
Union Pacific Stevens Prospect Trail-by-Rail on
ROW Creek Rd west side of ROW
Blvd
Vallco West 1-280 Stevens Identified in South
Pathway Canal Creek Blvd Vallco Connectivity
Plan
West Hammond Stevens Identified in 2015
Cupertino -Snyder Creek Blvd BTP Update
UPRR Crossing Trail
Wilson Park Rodriguez Portal Ave Identified in 2015
Ave BTP Update
Alta Planning + Design I 4-2
Proposed Amendment to Language re: Stevens Creek Trail Extension
Staff recommends replacing the two paragraphs under the heading "Stevens Creek Trail
Extension" on page 4-1 of the Draft 2016 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan, beginning with
"A coordinated Stevens Creek Trail planning effort..." and ending with " ... regarding a preferred
alignment", with the following language:
"In 2009, a coordinated Stevens Creek Trail planning effort was undertaken between the cities
of Cupertino, Los Altos, Mountain View and Sunnyvale. An advisory body composed of council
members from each city {the Joint Cities Working Team {JCWT)} was installed, and a trail
consultant engaged to assess the feasibility of potential route options.
The consultant subsequently published a Feasibility Study in March 2015. It identified three
route options through Cupertino, but made no specific recommendation. These options were:
• Mary Avenue to Stevens Creek Blvd, utilizing the Don Burnett Pedestrian Bridge
• Foothill Blvd to Stevens Creek Blvd
• Construction of a new pedestrian bridge across 1-280 connecting Cupertino's
Homestead Villa and Oakdell Ranch neighborhoods. A tunnel under 1-280 was
found to be infeasible.
A series of public outreach events then followed, intended to gauge public reaction to the study.
After considering both the feasibility study and public input, the JCWT issued its
recommendation to the four cities in September 2015. No specific route recommendation was
made for Cupertino. However, the JCWT did recognize the need for a long term trail vision, and
that should circumstances change regarding the availability of land in the area that further
studies be undertaken to identify a feasible route .
For further information, refer to the Four Cities Coordinated Stevens Creek Trail Feasibility Study
{September 2015 final version)."
'
Chapter 6 : Implementation Strategy
Improved signage/striping Bi k e/Ped Bri dge Mary Ave Ped 1280 --to delineate bike/ped Enhancement Bri dge space on Mary _Ave brid~e 0 'X $20,000 -·
Bubb Rd Stelling Rd --0 .50 ~$33 ,000 Class II Bike Lane Rainbow Dr ·-· ·' Oa ks
Development Stevens Creek Mary Ave --Class. I Path Blvd 0 .13 35 $102.000 Bike Path
cfas.5118uffe-rec(
.....
Calle de Stevens Creek M i ller Ave B.lvd 0.39 35 $54,000 B i ke Lane Barcelona cTass if suttereCi Tantau Ave Stevens C r eek Pruneri dge Ave 0 .65 35 $91 ,000 Bike Lane Blvd
Coordinate crossing with
.... ·-
Union Pacific McClellan Rd --0 34 $10,000 Trail Crossing Railroad Path s:i~nal. ·-·--···-· -·-·-· --------· ·-·-·-
Class II Bi k e Lane Pacifica Dr De Anza Blvd Torre Ave --0 .17 33 $11 .000
Add green paint to
.. ----
Freeway interchange approaches, inte r c:;-hange Wolfe Rd 1-280 Overpass --stripe bike lane through enhancement i nterchange intersection 0 30 $40,000
San Tomas-Sterling/Barnhart Cl a s$ I Path Aquino Creek Calvert D r Park 0.37 30 $294 ,000 T r ail
San -Tomas-Ste ven s Creek Cl21 s.s I Pc;ith Aquino Creek South of 1280 B lvd 0 .17 30 $138.000 Trail
"<:lass 11· Buffereci Vallco Pkwy Tantau Av e Perimeter Rd 0 .30 30 $4 2 ,000 Bi k e L ane
campus Stevens Creek Class II Bike Lane Dr/Stevens Cr eek Camp u s Dr Blvd 0 .11 30 $7,000 Blvd Connect_o.r ___
Hwy 85 to Peninsula Ave at Stevens Creek Grand Ave at Stevens Creek --0.19 Cla ss Ill Bike Route Blvd Bike Route Alhambra Ave Blvd 30 $1 ,000
class-1 r-sufTered __ cg~) __ --
Ra inbow Dr De Anza Blvd Stelling Rd 0 .57 28 $79,000 Bike Lane
Boll i n ger Rd to Stern Ave at Stevens Cre e k Johnson Ave at Stevens Creek --0.84 Cl a ss Ill Bike Route Blvd Bike Ro u te Bollinger Rd Blvd $1,500 28 (#1)
Alta Planning+ Des i gn I 6 -7
Appendix A : Plan and Policy Review
A ppendix A . Plan and Policy Review
Table A-1 provides a list of e x isting plans relevant to bicycling in Cupertino. Cupertino is compliant with a ll state and Federal laws
and policies regarding bicycles. A review of these plans is included on the following pages.
T a bl e A-1 : R e l e van t Plan s a nd Polic ies
Plan Date Adopted
. Local Plans
Cupertino General Pla-'-n'-------2014
Cupertino Municipal Code ·--------·-·---·--------------Heart of the City Specific Plan 2014
North Vallco Master Plan 2008 -------
South Vallco Master Plan 2008
South Vallco Connectivity Plan 2014
Joint Cities Stevens Creek Trail Feasibility Study 2015
Apple Campus 2 Development Plan 2013
Reg ional Plans
Santa Clara County General Plan 1994
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Countywide Bicycle Plan 2008
VT A Valley Transportation Plan 2040 2014
VT A Union Pacific Rail Trail Feasibility Study 2001
MTC Regional Bicycle Plan 2009
Plan Bay Area 2013
,SJ at ~ Plans and Poli cies
Assembly Bill 32: Global W arming Solutions 2006
Assembly Bill 1358: Com plete Streets 2008
Senate B i ll 375: Su staina ble Communities 2009
Assembly Bill 417: En v iron mental Quality: CEQA: Bicycle Transportation Plan 2013
Assembly Bill 2245: Envi ron mental quality: CEQA: Exemption: Bicycle Lanes 2015
Senate Bill 743: Environmental Quality: Transit Oriented Infill Projects. Judicial Review Streamlining for 2013
Environmental Leadership Development Projects, and Entertainment and Sports Center in the City of
Sacramento
Alta Planning+ Design I A-1
Appendix F: Project List
;;.. ... ... VI QJ
VI > Ill ... ;., ...
c QJ ~-..:; QJ 0 .... 0
0 I-... u ... ...... u ... >-o-0 QJ Vi IO i) Ul u "' VI ...
QJ 'iii t'. QJ Vl Q; Vl 0 QJ ~ c QJ ·v; iii .... ·o u "O 0 QJ QJ ..r: > ... c 3'; a. c Ill "' IO "ftj ... u ~ 0 .... 0 Vi c .... QJ 0 0 ;:: QJ QJ 0
Q_ _J w z z Ul Ul Ul I-zu _J I-1.9 u.. I-u
Create gap in
Reconfigure Imperial Ave ·Alcazar Ave fence to 0 0 2 0 7 10 10 10 39 $20,000 wall/fence --connect bike
routes
Class II Stevens Creek 1-280 N Buffered Bike Foothill Blvd Blvd Offramp --0.96 2 5 10 7 5 5 5 39 $135,000
Lane -------·---·-·--·---·-Foothill to Carmen Rd Class Ill Bike Stevens Foothill Blvd at
Boulevard Creek Bike Starling Dr at Stevens --0.99 0 2 10 1 10 5 10 38 $50,000
Blvd (#3) Creek Blvd
Class II
Buffered Bike Lazaneo Dr Bandley Dr De Anza Blvd --0.09 1 0 10 7 5 5 10 38 $13,000
Lane
Class II Homestead Buffere.d Bike Wolfe Rd Perimeter Rd Rd --0.62 4 2 10 7 5 5 5 38 $86,000
Lane
Class II Stevens Buffered Bike Bubb Rd McClellan Rd Creek B.lvd --0 .53 3 2 10 7 5 5 5 37 $74,000
Lane
Grade UPRR West Hammond S.eparc;ited Cupertino Snyder Loop Stevens 0 1 5 0 15 10 5 1 37 $300.000 Crossing Creek Blvd --
Study Crossing Trail
----
Improved
Bike/Ped signage/striping
Mary Ave to delineate Bridge Ped Bridge 1280 --bike/ped space 0 0 2 20 0 5 0 10 37 $20,000
Enhancement on Mary Ave 2.0 46 bridge
Class II Bike Rai.nbow Dr Upland Way Stelling Rd 0.50 2 2 \{ 7 5 5 5 v $33,000 --Lane
Oaks Stevens Creek Class I Path Development Blvd Mary Ave --0 .1 3 0 2 10 7 10 5 1 35 $102 ,000
Bike Path
Alta Planning+ Design I F-7
CUPERTINO
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Timm Borden, Director
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE -CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3266
(408) 777-3354 -FAX (408) 777-3333
DRAFT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
cc 6/21/16
#16
As provided by the Environmental Assessment Procedure adopted by the City Council of the
City of Cupertino on May 27, 1973, and amended on March 4, 1974, January 17, 1977, May 1,
1978, and July 7, 1980, the City of Cupertino City Council has reviewed the proposed project
described below to determine whether it could have a significant effect on the environment as
a result of project implementation. "Significant effect on the environment" means a
substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within
the area affect by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise,
and objects of historic or aesthetic significance (CEQA Guidelines Section 15382).
PROJECT INFORMATION AND LOCATION
Project Name:
Applicant:
Location:
Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Update
City of Cupertino
City of Cupertino
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project is the updating of the Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan. The Plan
identifies a series of bicy cle facilities that would improve upon and add to the existing bicycle
network in Cupertino. The proposed bikeways would be aligned on existing streets, right-of-
ways, and along creeks within the City. The project is made up of Class I, II, III, and IV
bikeways to be completed in three overlapping components: 1) Cupertino Loop Trail, 2)
Protected Bike Lane Network, and 3) Bike Boulevard Network. Access to the proposed
bikeways would be from existing public streets and parks. All components of the Plan would
be constructed in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Cupe1iino Bicycle Transp01i ation Plan Update
Draft Mitigated Negative D eclaration Page 1
FINDINGS OF DECISIONMAKING BODY
The City Council finds the project described is consistent with the General Plan and will not
have a significant effect on the environment based on the analysis completed in the attached
Initial Study. The City, before the public release of this draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
(MND), has agreed to make project revisions that mitigate the project's effects to a less than
significant level. The City agrees to implement the mitigation measures identified in the
attached Initial Study and summarized below:
Cultural Resources:
Impact CUL-1 : Implementation of the Class I facilities included in the proposed project could
result in significant impacts to buried cultural resources, if encountered .
MM CUL-1.1: In the event of the discovery of prehistoric or historic archaeological deposits or
paleontological deposits, work shall be halted within 50 feet of the discovery and a qualified
professional archaeologist (or paleontologist, as applicable) shall examine the find and make
appropriate recommendations regarding the significance of the find and the appropriate
mitigation. The recommendation shall be implemented and could include collection,
recordation, and analysis of any significant cultural materials.
MM CUL-1.2: Pursuant to Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code and Section 5097.94 of
the Public Resources Code of the State of California:
In the event of the discovery of human remains during construction, there shall be no further
excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie
adjacent remains. The Santa Clara County Coroner shall be notified and shall make a
determination as to whether the remains are Native American. If the Coroner determines that
the remains are not subject to his authority, he shall notify the Native American Heritage
Commission who shall attempt to identify descendants of the deceased Native American. If no
satisfactory agreement can be reached as to the disposition of the remains pursuant to this State
law, then the land owner shall re-inter the human remains and items associated with Native
American burials on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance.
MM CUL-1.3: If cultural resources are encountered, a final report summarizing the discovery
of cultural materials shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works prior to issuance of
building permits. This report shall contain a description of the mitigation program that was
implemented (e.g., monitoring and testing program), a list of the resources found, a summary
of the resources analysis methodology and conclusion, and a description of the
Cupe1tino Bicycle Transportation Plan Update
Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 2
disposition/curation of the resources. The report shall verify completion of the mitigation
program to the satisfaction of the Director Public Works.
PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD
The 30-day public circulation period for the Initial Study and draft MND began on May 20,
2016 and ended on June 18, 2016.
Timm Borden
Director of Public Works
CERTIFICATE OF THE CITY CLERK
This is to certify that the above Mitigated Negative Declaration was filed in the Office of the
City Clerk of the City of Cupertino on ____________ _
City Clerk
Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan Update
Draft Mitigated N egative Declaration Page 3