CC 09-15-2020 Oral Communications_Late Written CommunicationsCC 09-15-20
Special Meeting
Study Session #1
Small Cell Facilities
Written Comments
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, September 15, 2020 6:03 PM
To:City Clerk
Subject:Small cell Study Session Question-
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.
Could you please read if my Fire Kindle is overheating or my audio is
garbeled? Thanks.
Dear City Council:
I am concerned that there are now 80 applications. This is a lot of applications.
Were these by all the major telecommunications vendors? Are these requests
equally distributed among the five or six vendors or was one more dominant in the
applications in the last month?
How many vendores are there in the telecommunications requests? I am assuming it
was Verizon, Sprint , At and T, etc. Any others or small ones that maybe are new
and no one is familiar with?
Thank you very much.
Jennifer Griffin
CC 09-15-20
Oral
Communications
Written Comments
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Jean Bedord <Jean@bedord.com>
Sent:Tuesday, September 15, 2020 6:13 PM
To:City Clerk
Subject:Oral Communications - Bedord
Attachments:Bedord-Council 2020-09-15.pptx; Bedord-Council-Report-Card-2020-09-15.docx
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.
Kirsten,
I'd like to speak tonight using this PPT presentation.
I'm also attaching the Word version of my speech,which I would like to have included in the public record.
Thanks for accommodating my lateness.....
Warm regards,
Jean Bedord
Cell:408 966 6174 Land line:408 252 5220
Title slide:
Good evening,Mayor Scharf and council members,
My name is Jean Bedord,and I am a long time resident.For past several years,I
have attended every single council meeting,including those that ended at 4 a.m.
I’m here tonight to present a Report Card on the performance of this council
which I would rate as highly unsatisfactory.
Side 2
This council claims to be transparent but look at the record.In the last two years,
there have been more closed door meetings than meetings open to the public.
Your performance has improved in 2020,but 2019 was abysmal.
Then there are the meetings which go beyond midnight.Most residents would
say that 11 o’clock is their upper limit,but this council likes to do their
deliberations in the wee hours of the morning.How many residents are engaged
at 1,2 or 3 am in the morning?I’ve been through all of the late nights,and your
decision making deteriorates at that hour.
Slide 3
Now let’s talk about the cost of lawsuits by members of this council and their
appointees.These are avoidable yet look what they cost the city.This is
taxpayer money,my money,that this council has wasted on unnecessary legal
actions.And next year,it doesn’t look any better since you have budgeted over
2 million for the city attorney.
Slide 4:
Now let’s look at where you are spending money to benefit residents.You paid
your former city attorney more money than you are spending next year on library
services.Mayor Scharf’s appeal cost more than the city Tenant Eviction Program.
What are the values of this community?Shouldn’t you be spending money for
the benefit of residents,not full employment for lawyers?Isn’t it time for
changes?
Thank you.
9/16/2020
1
Cupertino City Council
September 15,2020
Jean Bedord
This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY SA
Lack of Transparency and Accountability
Council governs behind closed doors NO resident engagement
2020 through 8/12/2020: 13 regular and 13 closed sessions
2019: 22 regular meetings and 27 closed meetings
Meetings lasting after midnight limits resident engagement
15 meetings in 2019 (22 regular meetings)
6 meetings in 2020 through 8/22/2020
Too much time on non-policy agenda items
1
2
9/16/2020
2
Legal costs of self inflicted lawsuits
225,441 Mayor Steven Scharf Measure C appeals lost)
341,531 City attorney,Randy Hom (payoff wrong on SB35)
Vallco SB35 Planning Chair Kitty Moore,et.al lawsuit lost)
241,382 2018,2019,2020 Attorney’s Fees)
171,072 2018,2019 Wendel Rosen)
70,310 Shute Mihaly Weinberger)
Unknown for city staff and staff city attorney
2,036,404 budgeted for City Attorney in 2021 Adopted Budget
Resident Funding
318,340 Library Services FY 2020 21
90,000 Community Funding
200,000 Tenant Eviction Programs Meriwest,WVCS,Earnin)
229,017 Small Business Relief Grants
Support Residents NOT lawyers
3
4
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Rhoda Fry <fryhouse@earthlink.net>
Sent:Tuesday, September 15, 2020 7:11 PM
To:City Clerk; City Council
Cc:fryhouse@earthlink.net
Subject:September 15 City Council Public Comment
Attachments:2020-05-12 Agenda - Tuesday, May 12, 2020-compressed page 19.pdf; Letter from Water Boards -
highlighted.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.
There is a landslide at Lehigh’s Permanente Quarry in Santa Clara County that is a threat to public health and safety.On
February 13,the Water Board stated we are concerned about the long term stability of the WMSA,especially the
Yeager Yard area County oversight of this issue is most appropriate,given the potentially significant health and
safety concerns.”And a Santa Clara County geologist report warned on February 18,The Yeager Yard Landslide mass is
moving towards Permanente Creek and its mass is sufficiently large to block the creek.Should this happen during winter
months,the runoff from the upper watershed would likely pond,creating a new debris flow hazard to structures and
residences downstream.”Slope instability at the Yeager Yard,also known as Subarea 3,has been monitored by Santa
Clara County since at least 2015.Don’t you think that it is about time that the County stop monitoring and start
protecting the Citizens of Santa Clara County and the Permanente Creek Watershed?The last thing we need is another
disaster.Especially because we are approaching rainy season,I have gotten nowhere with the County and once again
asked the State Mining and Geology Board and the Division of Mining Reclamation to intervene.If the Yeager Yard
landslide does move into the creek,the County and the State will have played a part in Lehigh's willful negligence.
San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
February 13, 2020
Place ID 2020435 (LW)
Lehigh Southwest Cement Company
and Hanson Permanente Cement Inc.
Attn: Erika Guerra
24001 Stevens Creek Blvd.
Cupertino, CA 95014
Sent via email to Erika.Guerra@LehighHanson.com)
Subject: Conditional Concurrence for Yeager Yard Corrective Action Plan for
Permanente Quarry and Cement Plant (Lehigh), Cupertino, Santa Clara County
Dear Ms. Guerra:
We have reviewed the January 24, 2020, submittal responding to our November 25, 2019,
requirement for a corrective action plan (CAP), as a follow-up to a notice of violation (NOV)
issued on July 9, 2019. These requirements were to address evidence of seep discharge, slope
erosion, and earth movement in the Yeager Yard area of the West Materials Storage Area
WMSA). We appreciate your response and concur that you have complied with NOV and CAP
requirements, with minor conditions regarding reporting of monitoring and planning outlined at
the end of this letter.
Our November 25, 2019, letter required specifically that you identify and address the cause of
seeps and erosion. The CAP detailed that increased stormwater infiltration due to an “extreme
wet year” was a primary cause, with contributions from mining and disposal operational
changes, including modifying locations of material excavation and placement along the slope
face. The Yeager Yard slope was therefore regraded and BMPs were improved. In addition, a
standard operating procedure was developed to predict and prevent similar occurrences during
operational changes. Our letter also required you to collate the data and analysis collected in
response to requirements from Water Board and Santa Clara County staff, including a slope
stability analysis. This was submitted. Finally, our letter required you to address six specific
concerns in the CAP, update the Operations, Monitoring, and Contingency (OM&C) Plan
required by the Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs, Order No. R2-2018-0028) to address
changes necessary to mining and disposal, and update the Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP) required by the NPDES permit (No. CA0030210, Water Board Order No. R2-
2019-0024) to address changes to stormwater/erosion controls. These can be summarized as
follows:
1. The boundary between native material and placed waste was identified and it was
determined that it is unlikely that solid wastes were discharged to Permanente Creek.
2. A Grading and Drainage Plan was included, its implementation is complete and the
SWPPP was updated to reflect changes.
2 -
3. The large corrugated metal pipe was investigated and confirmed to be out of service; in
lieu of removal, which was deemed unsafe, the pipe will continue to be monitored for
changes.
4. Data related to seeps and slope stability was presented and monitoring was added to
the schedule outlined in the SWPPP;
5. The OM&C was updated to outline plans for operational changes (e.g., road construction
and modification to stockpiles) along creek-facing slopes to maintain stability, including
conducting a desktop analysis, site reconnaissance, and (as needed) consultation with a
licensed professional geologist or engineer prior to the start of work; and
6. The SWPPP was updated to address the Yeager Yard slope, specifying that a
sedimentation basin was installed to collect seepage for treatment prior to discharge.
We concur with these actions and updates with the following minor conditions:
A. The slope stability monitoring outlined in item 4 is associated with the OM&C required by
the WDRs. Therefore, reporting of monitoring results and analysis should be included in
the self-monitoring reports (SMRs) required of that Order.
B. Similarly, the standard operating procedures outlined in item 5 are associated with the
OM&C and therefore reporting of the process should be included in the SMRs required
of the WDRs.
Please note that SMRs must be certified by a licensed professional geologist or engineer as
indicated in Specification 2 of the WDRs. Therefore, the slope stability monitoring and
operational change planning outlined in items 4 and 5 should be conducted under the oversight
of a licensed professional.
Lastly, we appreciate the slope stability analysis and supporting documentation submitted in
response to our requirement and concur that actions you have taken were critical and
appropriate to address immediate problems. However, we are concerned about the long-term
stability of the WMSA, especially the Yeager Yard Area. Santa Clara County staff overseeing
SMARA implementation and Water Board staff have jointly determined that County oversight of
this issue is most appropriate, given the potentially significant health and safety concerns.
Therefore, we consider the slope stability analysis requirement in our NOV resolved and are
available to provide technical input on water quality related stability issues, as needed. If you
have any questions, please contact Lindsay Whalin (lwhalin@waterboards.ca.gov) or John
Madigan (jmadigan@waterboards.ca.gov).
Sincerely,
Lisa Horowitz-McCann
Assistant Executive Officer
CC: Rob Eastwood, Rob Salisbury, and Jim Baker – Santa Clara County
rob.eastwood@pln.sccgov.org, Jim.Baker@pln.sccgov.org, Robert.Salisbury@pln.sccgov.org
Lisa Horowitz
McCann
Digitally signed by Lisa
Horowitz McCann
Date: 2020.02.13 11:43:19
08'00'
However, we are concerned about the long-term
stability of the WMSA, especially the Yeager Yard Area.
County oversight of
this issue is most appropriate, given the potentially significant health and safety concerns.
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
RE: COMMENTS ON THE DECEMBER 20, 2019 AND JANUARY 17, 2020 PERMANENTE QUARRY MONTHLY
INSPECTION
FEBRUARY 18, 2020
Page 9
provide the County with the coordinates, ground surface elevation and reference elevation for
water level measurements at this new well. In addition, the mine operator should provide
accurate groundwater level elevations at well WMSA-DMW-11A and the five vibrating wire
piezometers since the beginning of 2018 up to and including the most recent monitoring
measurements. Also, the mine operator should provide the well log for the monitoring well
WMSA-DMW-11A and the five piezometers.
I also recommend that the mine operator take frequent measurements of groundwater levels in
the Yeager Yard Landslide during winter months to track the rise and fall of groundwater levels.
The rate and magnitude of rise and fall is an indication of how effective the mitigation measures
are at preventing deep percolation of runoff into the landslide. If the elevation of groundwater
increases above historical levels, the mine operator should notify the County immediately and
provide an analysis of the Yeager Yard Landslide stability and potential for mass movement of
the landslide into Permanente Creek.
Landslide Movement Monitoring
Information is provided on the depth and direction of landslide movement from the shearing of three
slope inclinometers, WMSA-3, WMSA-4 and WMSA-5, in the February 7, 2020 CAP Addendum, section
5.0. These inclinometers sheared at elevations from 1341 to 1473 feet, msl, see Table 5. The direction of
movement from the inclinometer readings was to the southeast, see Figure 5.1 in the February 7, 2020
CAP Addendum. There also appears to be a GPS survey station(s) installed on the Yeager Yard Landslide,
photo 17. I’m assuming that these provide real-time measurements of the movement of the landslide.
Fixed station GPS real-time measurements of the Yeager Yard Landslide surface provide valuable
information on the stability of the slide and the success of the mitigation measures. Real-time tracking
of the rate and direction of movement of the landslide is critical, particularly if the rate of movement of
the landside increases. The Yeager Yard Landslide mass is moving towards Permanente Creek and its
mass is sufficiently large to block the creek. Should this happen during winter months, the runoff from
the upper watershed would likely pond, creating a new debris flow hazard to structures and residences
downstream.
I recommend that the mine operator provide the County with a monthly report of the readings
from these GPS survey stations, which should be tabulated, and movement vectors plotted.
Particular attention should be given to whether the landslide movement is changing, slower or
faster, and whether there is a difference depending on the time of year and the elevation of
groundwater. I also recommend that a protocol be established for immediately notifying the
County should the rate of movement of the Yeager Yard Landslide, or any other waste pile,
indicate that waste rock could slide into and block Permanent Creek.
E
3DFNHW 3J
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:City of Cupertino Written Correspondence
Subject:FW: Thank you
Original Message
From:P Hershey pamelakhershey@aol.com>
Sent:Tuesday,September 15,2020 7:44 PM
To:Kirsten Squarcia KirstenS@cupertino.org>
Subject:Thank you
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 Kristen,
I want to thank the council for all of their hard and dedicated work They deserve an A from myself as a teacher.
Pam Hershey
50 year resident
Sent from my iPhone
CC 09-15-20
2
Report on
Committee
Assignments
Written Comments
1
Cyrah Caburian
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Darcy Paul <DPaul@cupertino.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2020 8:03 PM
To: Kirsten Squarcia <KirstenS@cupertino.org>
Subject: 9/15/2020 Council Meeting ‐ Item 2 ‐ Material at Meeting
Attached, thanks.
‐Darcy
===============
Darcy Paul
Vice Mayor
City of Cupertino
===============
Cupertino City Council Meeting September 15,2020
Item 2 Council Reports Report of Vice Mayor Paul
SVRIA BOD Meeting August 31,2020
Key Point Closed session to interview prospective candidates for Executive Director
Cupertino Mayor’s Commissioners’Meeting September 9,2020
Key Points notes of Vice Mayor Paul;attending in place of Mayor Scharf,who was participating in a County task force
on the issue of homelessness)
Fine Arts Diana)Young Artists’contest;Mural project
Sustainability Gary)Plastics;Climate Action Plan updates
Planning Kitty)Birdsafe design and Darkskies ordinance;hillside exemption for a residence
Teen Anagaa)Hack Cupertino event;Pizza and Politics
Library Amanda)Senior divide;digital divide;Curbside hours are now 37p Wed and Th,15pm other days
Parks Rec Carol)Park amenities and upgrades from the fiscal year will be 200k for all parks,having public outreach;
community gardens;offleash trial period ended and extended
Public Safety Tiffany)Vehicle burglaries went up from June to July;public safety forum will be monthly either four or
five sessions)and online instead of an annual live forum this year,mental health will be the topic in October
Bike Ped Muni)Bollinger road safety study;Stevens Creek bike lane project
TICC Mukesh)Adaptive traffic signaling;climate and noise monitoring;fiberoptic and wireless master plan for the city,
vendor report later this month
Housing Siva)Subcommittee work for the housing survey proceeding;discussion on developmentally disabled housing,
looking for a prospective site
Audit Darcy)Internal audit work by Moss Adams proceeding;financiallyrelated milestones are being met timely
VTA Policy Advisory Committee Meeting September 10,2020
Key Points Item 7 Update on SR237 express lanes.Discussed expresslane tolling from March 19 to end of May,tolls
were not collected),ring of expresslane charges around the Bay looking to be considered in the future;
express lane revenues from SR237 were up almost 2mm in fy2020,from 1.3mm in fy2019,despite the
nearly two and a half months of no collections
Item 8 Next Generation High Capacity Transit Study.Discussed VTA’s current efforts to examine potential
future highcapacity transit options;seem to have an openness to considering more innovative and longer
term solutions but need to keep the interestfactor known
Transit Service Plan part of Staff updates);Couple of upcoming publicinput dates of notes,September 23
at 6pm and September 29 at 11am.See https://www.vta.org/projects/2021transitserviceplan
Automated electric bus pilot part of Staff updates)Occurring in the County;possibly at the PA VA
hospital
CC 09-15-20
7
Short Term Rental
Ordinance
Written Comments
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Jenny Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, September 15, 2020 6:37 PM
To:City Clerk
Subject:Number 7- short term rentals
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 Ccouncil:
I am wondering what the status of the city hiring the outside vendor who will monitor The short term rentals is at this
point?Has the city found a vendor who will monitor The short term rentals if there are any issues of compliance or they
need to contact The owners and they are not available?Will this vendor be shown on the city website And will the
phone number be made available?Will they contact the owner of they need To get a hold of them?Is the city getting
cost recovery for this?I think it is good To have this monitoring service engaged by the city.It will prevent Orinda
incidents From happening.
Thank you,Jennifer griffin
CC 09-15-20
8
Short-Term Rental
Registration, FY
2020-21
Written Comments
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Jenny Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, September 15, 2020 6:54 PM
To:City Clerk
Subject:Number 8- tax for short term rentals?
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 council:
Can the city receive the full amount of hotel occupancy tax for short term rentals?
Is this charged daily or per month?Hotels rent by the day and so do short term Rentals?Is the occupancy tax collected
guys same way?Does the city get TOT from ADUs?This might be an avenue for TOT from ADUs for the city.Are ADUs
considered Short term rentals by the city of can the city get revenue from ADUs?
Thank you,
Jennifer griffin
CC 09-15-20
11
2020 Blackberry
Farm Entrance
Road Feasibility
Study Report
Written Comments
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Rhoda Fry <fryhouse@earthlink.net>
Sent:Tuesday, September 15, 2020 6:47 PM
To:City Clerk; City Council
Subject:Agenda Item 11: Blackberry Farm Entrance - City Council September 15, 2020
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.
Agenda Item 11:Blackberry Farm Entrance I'm concerned about the loss of trees.
These trees protect nearby homes from errant golf balls.
These trees also provide stability for the slope on the path side and the driveway.
Thanks,Rhoda Fry
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Seema Lindskog <seema3366@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, September 15, 2020 7:08 PM
To:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager's Office; City Council
Subject:Please support modified Alternative B for Blackberry Farm Bike Lanes
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 Manager and City Council Members,
The city staff presented the various options for the Blackberry Farm Bike Lanes to the Bike Ped Commission in Feb 2020.
The Bike Ped Commission supported Alternative B BUT with both uphill and downhill bike lanes next to each other and
next to the pedestrian walkway,away from cars.
The current option B that city staff is presenting tonight to city council for approval has ONLY the uphill bike lane next to
the pedestrian walkway,with downhill bikers are expected to share the road with cars.It is NOT what the Bike Ped
Commission requested and it is not the safest option for bicycle riders in our community,especially children and less
expert bikers.
Please approve a modified Alternative B with both the uphill and downhill bicycle lanes next to each other and next
to the pedestrian walkway,away from the car lanes.It is the safest option for all bicycle riders.
Thank you for your hard work on behalf of the city.
Best regards,
Seema Lindskog
You must be the change you want to see in the world."Mahatma Gandhi
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Jennifer Shearin <shearin.jen@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, September 15, 2020 7:14 PM
To:City Clerk; City Council
Subject:City Council agenda item 11 (9/15/20)
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 Councilmembers and esteemed Mayor Scharf,
I am writing tonight to encourage you to approve the proposal to add safe bicycle access to the entrance to Blackberry
Farm,with the caveat that it be a two way bike lane—not one way,as the City Staff is proposing tonight.
The proposal that City Staff is presenting is not what the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission supported in February 2020 at
their commission meeting. During that meeting, The Bike Ped Commission said they supported Option B
but with both uphill and downhill bike lanes next to each other and next to pedestrian walkway, away from
cars. The Staff proposal tonight would leave cyclists in one direction still trying to share the lane.
Cupertino has the land; let’s do this right. Make the bike lane go in both directions, away from cars, to make it
safe to exit and enter Blackberry Farm. This would be great for residents of all ages.
Thank you for your consideration of my input, and for your hard work on behalf of Cupertino.
Best Wishes,
Jennifer Shearin
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Joseph Fruen <jrfruen@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, September 15, 2020 11:10 PM
To:Kirsten Squarcia; Rod Sinks; Darcy Paul; Liang Chao; Jon Robert Willey; Steven Scharf
Subject:For Public Comment Re: Item 11
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.
Mayor Scharf and Councilmembers:
Under the current recommendation Alternative B),I'm concerned that by not separating cyclists riding downhill as well
as uphill,we will create a situation where less experienced bike riders would have to mix with cars.Such a situation
could make cyclists feel less safe and disincline them toward using bicycles to access Blackberry Farm.
I therefore encourage you to approve a modified Alternative B that cleaves to the Bicycle Pedestrian
Commission's original recommendation,which included bike lanes running both uphill and downhill and next to the
pedestrian walkway.I think this recommendation represents the safest version of the alternative.Ensuring that cyclists
feel safe here will encourage increased use of bicycles to access Blackberry Farm.
Many thanks,
J.R.Fruen
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Kirsten Squarcia
Sent:Tuesday, September 15, 2020 8:50 PM
Cc:City Clerk
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 11 San Fernando entrance to Blackberry Farms
Attachments:Students near Carmen Bridge (002).jpg
Dear Mayor,Vice Mayor,and Councilmembers Bcc’d on this email),
I am forwarding an email at the request of Larry Dean regarding agenda Item No.11 San Fernando entrance to
Blackberry Farm.
Regards,Kirsten
Kirsten Squarcia
City Clerk
City Manager's Office/City Clerk's Office
KirstenS@Cupertino.org
408) 777-3225
From:Larry Dean ldean95014@comcast.net>
Sent:Tuesday,September 15,2020 8:42 PM
To:City Clerk CityClerk@cupertino.org>
Subject:Agenda Item 11 San Fernando entrance to Blackberry Farms
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 Manager and City Council Members,
The re engineering of the entrance to Blackberry Farms is a key segment/connector for the Monta Vista Bike Boulevard
that extends from MVHS to Orange/San Fernando,through Blackberry Farms Park to Scenic Circle.It will connect over
1,300 middle and high school students from all of the neighborhoods West of Stevens the)Creek to the schools
complex.This area includes Deep Cliff,the Scenic,Inspiration Heights and Stevens Creek School neighborhoods with the
main route that does not have extremely high cyclist/vehicle conflict think McClellan Road and Stevens Creek Boulevard
at rush hour).Please see the attached neighborhood layout.
Additionally,with the completion of the McClellan Road separated bike lane project,it will make Blackberry Farms more
easily and safer accessed for all ages of cyclists in the community.
The city staff presented the various options for the Blackberry Farm Bike Lanes to the Bike Ped Commission in Feb 2020.
The Bike Ped Commission supported Alternative B BUT with both uphill and downhill bike lanes next to each other and
next to the pedestrian walkway,away from cars.
The current option B that city staff is presenting tonight to city council for approval has ONLY the uphill bike lane next to
the pedestrian walkway,with downhill bikers are expected to share the road with cars.It is NOT what the Bike Ped
2
Commission requested and it is not the safest option for bicycle riders in our community,especially children and less
expert bikers.
Please approve a modified Alternative B with both the uphill and downhill bicycle lanes next to each other and next
to the pedestrian walkway,away from the car lanes.It is the safest option for all bicycle riders.
Thank you for your hard work on behalf of the city.
Larry Dean
Walk Bike Cupertino
40 year resident of the Scenic and Stevens Creek School neighborhoods