CC 05-21-19 #21 Jan. 25, 2019 Junipero Serra Trail Feasibility Study_PresentationFeasibility Study
May 21, 2019
Junipero Serra Trail
Staff Recommendation
●Adopt Resolution 19-061,
Approving the Findings of the
Junipero Serra Trail Feasibility
Study
History
●On Feb 5th, Council adopted Resolution
19-020 approving Junipero Serra
Feasibility Study
●Due to an oversight, Resolution 19-
020 approved the Dec 14th draft
study, not January 25th final draft
●Resolution 19-061 approves January 25th
final draft study
Where is the Trail?
Changes
●Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (BPC) comments and
actions (Page 14 & 29)
●PG&E –information update (Page 25)
●Santa Clara Valley Water District (Page 26)
●Junipero Serra Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) –
information update (Page 28 & 29)
●City of Cupertino –response update to TAC information
update (appendix)
Staff Recommendation
●Adopt Resolution 19-061,
Approving the Findings of the
Junipero Serra Trail Feasibility
Study
●Added section on BPC comments and
actions from Dec. 19th meeting
●Page 14, Site Analysis Plan (from consultant) –
“Because a class I multi-use trail is desired to meet
the goals of the City’s bicycle and pedestrian
policies, a minimum 14’-0” overall trail width would
be required.”
●Revised “required” to “preferred” since
many/most trails are not 14’ wide.
●Page 29:Added “Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
(BPC)” section to reflect commissioners actions
made at 12/19/18 meeting.
●Updated information from PG&E
●Page 25, PG&E –Updated the 2nd paragraph
to reflect latest information from PG&E and
the mapping of the PG&E easement:
●“For these wires, 12’-0” vertical and 6’-
0” horizontal clearance is required,
pending final confirmation from
PG&E.”:
●Removed underlined segment.
●Updated information from PG&E cont.
●Page 25 (second paragraph) -“The PG&E
easement on both sides of De Anza Boulevard is
currently being mapped to better understand the
location and width of the easement.Due to the
uncertainty surrounding the easement and
potential infeasibility of a bridge or tunnel, an at-
grade crossing option has been evaluated and is
discussed further in Chapter 4.”
●Updated information from PG&E cont.
●Revised to “The PG&E easement on both sides
of De Anza Boulevard was mapped to better
understand the location and width of the
easement.With this supplemental mapping, it
was determined the various crossings under
consideration were feasible.See chapter 4
for further discussion.”
●Updated information from Valley
Water
●Page 26, Santa Clara Valley Water District
(from consultant) –“Without a guardrail, the
steep drop-off adjacent to the trail would be
hazardous and therefore cannot be
recommended.”
●Revised to “The steep drop-off
adjacent to the trail edge would
typically be mitigated with a
guardrail.”
●Junipero Serra TAC –updated agency
sections
●Santa Clara Valley Water District, 1st bullet
point:Added “SCVWD would quit claim and
transfer right-of-way to the city in the event
the channel is covered.”
●Caltrans, 2nd bullet point:Added
“Encroachment may occur at De Anza
Boulevard depending on which alternative is
pursued.”
●Appendix
●Added City of Cupertino Responses to
Junipero Serra TAC Comments