CC 11-02-2020 Oral Communications_Late Written CommunicationsCC 11-02-20
Study Session #1
Cupertino LOS to
VMT Presentation
Written Comments
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, November 2, 2020 5:56 PM
To:City Council
Subject:Fw: Issues with LOS and VMT
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
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.
Letter to the Planning. Commission from Sept. 22 LOS vs VMT Study session.
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
To: PlanningCommission@Cupertino.org <PlanningCommission@Cupertino.org>
Cc: grenna5000@yahoo.com <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2020, 08:15:20 PM PDT
Subject: Issues with LOS and VMT
Dear Planning Commission:
LOS has been used successfully in the past to plan projects in
Cupertino and Santa Clara and other cities. The LOS was included in
the 700 page DRAFT EIR in one project in Santa Clara.
I am very worried that the intent to remove LOS as a tool is another
attempt to suppress local control in cities by entities who are promoting the
Big Housing Bills.
I am very concerned when tools residents and cities have been using
successfully for years are suddenly taken away. This smacks
of the issues with elimination of local control by the writers of the
Big Housing Bills.
I am wondering why SB 743 was written in the first place and why is it
being implemented now when the Big Housing Bills are being rolled out
by Sacramento.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Griffin
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, November 2, 2020 5:58 PM
To:City Council
Subject:Fw: LOS vs VMT for Item 3- Study Session
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
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.
Letter to the Planning Commission from Sept. 22 Planning Commission
Study session on LOS vs VMT.
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
To: PlanningCommission@Cupertino.org <planningcommission@cupertino.org>
Cc: grenna5000@yahoo.com <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2020, 04:55:24 PM PDT
Subject: LOS vs VMT for Item 3- Study Session
Dear Planning Commission:
I think it is important to retain the LOS when traffic is being studied. The public
understands this designation of LOS and is used to seeing it used for the last
25 years on projects in Cupertino as well as in the County as well as for projects
in the city of San Jose, Sunnyvale, Los Altos, Santa Clara, Saratoga and
Los Gatos. I have seen LOS used in projects in others states I have read about.
LOS is easy to understand. Intersections are graded as A, B, C D or F. The Level of
Service degrades to unacceptable levels such as D or F as the ramifications of
the project being studied increases and affects the neighboring roads and streets.
It is easy to understand. Your intersection or roadway was at B level and with the
project being studied your intersection or roadway will go to a D or F. It is very
easy to understand. With or without mitigating circumstances, that is probably
the traffic level you will wind up with -- D or F-- with many of the high density housing
projects that are being pushed forward by the Big Housing Bills.
Did Governor Brown change LOS to VMT because he knew that there were going to
be the plethora of Big Housing Bills introduced in the years following
him signing the bill to convert LOS to VMT? I wonder about that. The Big Housing
Bills first started showing up in 2017, just three years after this bill that
switches LOS to VMT. What was the rationale there? Does the removal of
LOS and replacement with VMT do anything to promote the Big Housing Bills?
Does VMT make it easier to build high density, multi-story highrises? LOS might
have shown more true traffic impacts than VMT does if some of these high rise
projects are built. Also, why try to confuse the public with new terminology as these
Big Housing Bills are just now being introduced?
It is like changing the language we do CEQA in from Spanish to French. We all speak
Spanish and we understand how stuff works with the traffic studies, but now we
are being forced to have our LOS Language changed to a new language VMT (like
now we have to do this in French and few speak French) and then we also get saddled
with the plethora of new Big Housing Bills.
2
At least the public understands LOS. Don't change the language on us now to
something like VMT which no one understands yet and then they also throw in the
Big Housing Bills and their impossibility of understanding or interpreting, especially the
ones that got signed into law by the previous governor and maybe this one.
The public are having to try to figure out/understand/comprehend/question/
define the Big Housing Bills (some which make no sense and seem to just try to
build fourplexes on every square inch of land in a city, even in the roads
and on the sidewalks). Don't take LOS away from us now. That is at least one
tool we have to try to fathom these apocalyptic Big Housing Bills.
I do believe that in one of the Study Sessions last year on LOS and VMT that cities
were allowed to also retain LOS in their reports if they wished. This was on the Study
Session on this 2013 bill Governor Brown signed, SB 743. I do believe that
cities can actuallt pay for studies to evaluate LOS and place them on the reports on
projects along with VMT. I think that is a great idea! I speak LOS. Please keep it
on the project reports that Cupertino has in the future. I am a firm believer that
one should not change all the parameters at one point, especially when the public's
understanding is at stake. Keep LOS and then we can compare it side by side
with what VMT is saying. The public understands teh LOS and gets to see what VMT
can or can't do for them. This is a big WIn - Win for everyone involved.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Griffin
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, November 2, 2020 6:00 PM
To:City Council
Subject:Fw: Comments for Item 3- Study Session on LOS and VMT
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
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.
Letter to the Planning Commission from Sept. 22 on the LOS vs VMT Study
Session.
I believe now that that the elimination of the Redevelopment Agencies was
done to set up for the Big Housing Bills.
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
To: planningcommission@cupertino.org <planningcommission@cupertino.org>
Cc: grenna5000@yahoo.com <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2020, 07:06:56 PM PDT
Subject: Comments for Item 3- Study Session on LOS and VMT
Dear Planning Commission:
I think that we should keep LOS in the studies of any upcoming projects.
LOS has been used for many years in the studies of new projects that may
iimpact adjacent areas around the project and traffic load on streets and
intersections. LOS is understood by much of the public. It has been used
in studying the ramifications of large projects on our city and other cities.
I would prefer that LOS be retained in the analysis and study of upcoming
projects. VMT is not understood well by the public. It is an unknown entity.
I remember in the city Study Sessions on SB 743 last year that it was
determined that a city could have LOS analysis in plans of a project as well
as the new VMT. I think that Cupertino should keep LOS in their project
analysis on new projects as well as having the new VMT. LOS is extremely
valuable in determining traffic load and how intersections are affected by
new, especially high density, projects. Much of the public already
understands how LOS works. There is no reason to take away a tool that
the public already knows and can understand.
Please retain LOS in any studies of projects being proposed for Cupertino.
It gives the residents one more trusted tool to understand the implications
and ramifications of new, especially high density, projects on streets, traffic
load and potential intersection congestion.
I believe LOS to be an excellent tool to judge potential traffic load on streets
and it should be retained in project reports.
Thank you.
2
Sincerely,
Jennifer Griffin
CC 11-02-20
Oral
Communications
Written Comments
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:City of Cupertino Written Correspondence
Subject:FW: Public comment in Cupertino Council meeting this evening
From: Tim McRae <tmcrae@svlg.org>
Sent: Monday, November 2, 2020 6:52 PM
To: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.org>
Subject: Public comment in Cupertino Council meeting this evening
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 Clerk -
Please enter the following in public comment in tonight's City Council meeting.
Silicon Valley Leadership Group invites you to join us for our 16th Annual Applied Materials "Silicon Valley Turkey
Trot," to participate in our Sand Hill Property Company Mayor's Cup Challenge.
This year, the Turkey Trot, produced by the Silicon Valley Leadership Group Foundation, will be Virtual for the safety of
our community and vulnerable populations. But with so much tremendous need in our Valley, community support for our
five local beneficiaries is needed more than ever - Second Harvest of Silicon Valley, Second Harvest Food Bank of Santa
Cruz County, the Health Trust, Healthier Kids Foundation and Housing Trust Silicon Valley.
Over the past 15 years, we have donated $9.6 million to our community, and this year we hope to surpass $10 million!
Your involvement can get us there.
As you know from past years, our Mayor's Cup rewards Mayors, Councilmembers and City Managers who register for
our race. We encourage you to compete in the mid-sized city Mayor's Cup competition - beat Mountain View!
This year, points will also be awarded for Turkey Trot related outreach posts in newsletters, e-newsletters and social
media to your constituents. Points are also available if you would like to champion these efforts on behalf of your council.
I will leave behind our points scoring sheet for further reference.
Thanks again for your past support for our Silicon Valley Turkey Trot. Please join us on Thanksgiving to show support
for your community, and to earn that extra slice of pie!’
Best regards,
Tim
‐‐
Tim McRae
Vice President, Energy
408.501.7871 | svlg.org
Connect with us: Twitter | LinkedIn | Facebook
Silicon Valley: Better Together