Written Communications (Updated 7/10/24) — Cupertino City Council, July 9, 2024

CC 07-09-2024
#1
Closed Session
Conference with real
property negotiator
Written Communications
From: Kitty Moore
To: City Clerk; Kirsten Squarcia; Lauren Sapudar
Subject: Written Communications Closed Session
Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 5:49:41 AM
Attachments: Brown Act Real Property Negotiations cal-a-g-op-10-206.pdf Dear City Clerk,
Please include the attachment for written communications for today’s closed session City Council meeting.

Thank you,
Kitty Moore
Councilmember
City Council
[email protected]
(408) 777-1389

_________________________

________________________________________________________________________

TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

State of California

KAMALA D. HARRIS

Attorney General

OPINION : No. 10-206
:
of : December 27, 2011
:

KAMALA D. HARRIS :

Attorney General :
:

MARC J. NOLAN :

Deputy Attorney General :
:

THE HONORABLE TONY RACKAUCKAS, ORANGE COUNTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY, has requested an opinion on the following question:

What items may be discussed under the real -estate-negotiations exception to the open meeting requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act —an exception which states that the legislative body of a local governmental agency may meet in closed session with its real estate negotiator “to grant authority to its negotiator regarding the price and terms of payment” for a proposed purchase, sale, exchange, or lease of identified real property? 1 10-206

CONCLUSION
The real-estate-negotiations exception to the open meeting requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act permits discussion in closed session of: (1) the amount of consideration that the local agency is willing to pay or accept in exchange for the real property rights to be acquired or transferred in the particular transaction; (2) the f orm, manner, and timing of how that consideration will be paid; and (3) items that are essential to arriving at the authorized price and payment terms, such that their public disclosure would be tantamount to revealing the information that the exception permits to be kept confidential.

ANALYSIS
The open meetings law known as the Ralph M. Brown Act (Brown Act or Act) 1 was adopted “to ensure the public’s right to attend the meetings of public agencies,” 2 as well as “to facilitate public participation in all phases of local government decisionmaking and to curb misuse of the democratic process by secret legislation by public bodies.”3 In enacting the Brown Act, the Legislature declared its intent as follows:
[T]he Legislature finds and declares that the public commissions, boards and councils and the other public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people’s business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly.

The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.
4 1 Govt. Code §§ 54950-54963. All further references to sections of the Government Code are by section number only.
2 Freedom Newsp. Inc. v. Orange Co. Employees Ret. Sys., 6 Cal. 4th 821, 825 (1993).
3 Cohan v. City of Thousand Oaks, 30 Cal. App. 4th 547, 555 (1994). 4 § 54950.
2 10-206

As we have recently observed, 5 the Brown Act both implements and furthers the command set forth in the state constitution that “[t]he people have the right of access to information concerning the conduct of the people’s business, and therefore, the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies shall be open to public scrutiny.”6
To effectuate these purposes, the Brown Act “requires that the legislative bodies of local agencies . . . hold their meetings open to the public except as expressly authorized by the Act.”7 While the Brown Act makes exceptions for specified matters8— such as litigation, 9 employee discipline,10 and negotiations for real estate transactions 11— these exceptions must be construed narrowly, in favor of the public’s right of access to public information.12
The courts and this office are occasionally called upon to construe the parameters of a given Brown Act exception. For example, in a recent opinion, we concluded that the Act’s real-estate-negotiations exception does not justify a closed-session discussion of a rehabilitation agency’s proposed loan to a private business. 13 It had been argued that the exception should apply because the proposed loan agreement (1) pertained to the use of 5 See 93 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 51, 53-54 (2010).
6 Cal. Const. art I, § 3(b)(1); see Cal. Const. art. I, § 26 (“The provisions of this Constitution are mandatory and prohibitory, unless by express words they are declared to be otherwise.”).
7 §§ 54953, 54962; Kleitman v. Super Ct., 74 Cal. App. 4th 324, 331 (1999). 8 § 54957; Hamilton v. Town of Los Gatos, 213 Cal. App. 3d 1050, 1055 (1989). 9 § 54956.9.
10 § 54957.
11 § 54956.8.
12 Shapiro v. San Diego City Council, 96 Cal. App. 4th 904, 917 (200 2); San Diego Union v. City Council, 146 Cal. App. 3d 947, 954-955 (1983); see Rudd v. Cal. Cas. Gen.

Ins. Co., 219 Cal. App. 3d 948, 952 (1990) (statutory language “must be construed in the context of the statutory framework as a whole, keeping in mind the policies and purposes of the statute, and where possible the language should be read so as to conform to the spirit of the enactment”); see also Cal. Const. art. I, § 3(b)(2) (legal authority “shall be broadly construed if it furthers the people’s right of access, and narrowly construed if it limits the right of access.”).
13 93 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. at 55-59.
3 10-206

real property that the redevelopment agency was subleasing to the private business, (2) referred to the sublease, and (3) incorporated certain terms of the sublease. After analyzing the real -estate-negotiations exception, we concluded that the proposed loan agreement did not “effectuate the acquisition, disposal, or modification of any property rights under the existing sublease.” 14 Whereas that opinion was tailored to the factual circumstances underlying the question, here we have been asked to provide more general guidance as to what kinds of matters may be discussed under the real-estate-negotiations exception.

The starting point for our analysis is, necessarily, the language of the exception itself, together with related provisions of the Brown Act. 15 The real-estate-negotiations exception provides, in relevant part, as follows:

Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, a legislative body of a local agency may hold a closed session with its negotiator prior to the purchase, sale, exchange, or lease of real property by or for the local agency to grant authority to its negotiator regarding the price and terms of payment for the purchase, sale, exchange, or lease.

However, prior to the closed session, the legislative body of the local agency shall hold an open and public session in which it identifies its negotiators, the real property or real properties which the negotiations may concern, and the person or persons with whom its negotiators may negotiate.
16 The disclosure requirement set forth in the second quoted sentence mirrors a more general Brown Act provision to the same effect.17 Both of these notice provisions reinforce the Act’s general notice requirement that, “[a]t least 72 hours before a regular meeting, the legislative body of the local agency, or its designee, shall post an agenda containing a brief general description of each item of business to be transacted or discussed at the meeting, including items to be discussed in closed session.”18 14 Id.
15 See Shapiro v. San Diego City Council, 96 Cal. App. 4th at 924. 16 § 54956.8.
17 § 54957.7(a) (“Prior to holding any closed session, the legislative body of the local agency shall disclose, in an open meeting, the item or items to be discussed in the closed session . . . .”)
18 § 54954.2(a) (emphasis added).
4 10-206

With regard to the real-estate-negotiations exception, the Act provides that it is sufficiently specific (or within a “safe harbor”) to describe the agenda item as follows:

CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Property: (Specify street address, or if no street address, the parcel number or other unique reference, of the real property under negotiation.) Agency negotiator: (Specify names of negotiators attending the closed session.) (If circumstances necessitate the absence of a specified negotiator, an agent or designee may participate in place of the absent negotiator so long as the name of the agent or designee is announced at an open session held prior to the closed session.)
Negotiating parties: (Specify name of party (not agent).) Under negotiation: (Specify whether instruction to negotiator will concern price, terms of payment, or both.)19
The Act provides that , “in the closed session, the legislative body may consider only those matters covered in its [agenda] statement.”20
An oft-cited commentator has described the purpose of the real-estate-negotiations exception this way:

The need for executive [closed] sessions in this circumstance is obvious. No purchase would ever be made for less than the maximum amount the public body would pay if the public (including the seller) could attend the session at which that maximum was set, and the same is true for minimum sale prices and lease terms and the like.21
But, as we recently remarked, “[o]bvious though the need for it may be, this is still a narrowly-crafted exception.”22 The question for us now is, how narrow? 19 § 54954.5(b).
20 § 54957.7(a).
21 Schwing, Open Meeting Laws § 7.76, 416 -418 (1994); see also Kleitman v.

Super. Ct., 74 Cal. App. 4th at 324.
22 93 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. at 55; see Shapiro v. San Diego City Council, 96 Cal. App. 4th at 924 (real-estate- negotiations exception presents a “narrowly defined exception to the rule of open meetings”).
5 10-206

To aid our analysis, we employ well established rules of statutory interpretation.

Our primary goal is to ascertain the Legislature’s intent.23 In doing so, we look “first to the words of the statute themselves, giving to the language its usual, ordinary import and according significance, if possible, to every word, phrase and sentence.” 24 Here, we are particularly concerned with what i s meant by the phrase “regarding price and terms of payment for the purchase, sale, exchange, or lease,” which describes the authority that a local agency may convey to its negotiator in a closed session.

Consulting the dictionary to give the statutory language its “usual, ordinary import,”25 we believe that the word “price” in this context must be understood as the amount of consideration given or sought in exchange for the real property rights that are at stake.26 Further, we believe that the phrase “terms of payment” is best understood as the form, manner, and timing upon which the agreed-upon price is to be paid—for example, an all-cash transaction (either up -front or in installments), a seller-financed mortgage, an exchange of property or property ri ghts, or the like. 27 It is significant that
the word “terms” is immediately modified by the words “of payment.” In our view, this modification rules out any possibility that the statute is meant to authorize closed -session discussions of any and all terms of the transaction as a whole. 23 See Freedom Newsps. Inc. v. Orange Co. Employees Ret. Sys., 6 Cal. 4th at 826. 24 Dyna-Med Inc. v. Fair Empl. & Hous. Commn., 43 Cal. 3d 1379, 1386-1387 (1987).
25 Dyna-Med, Inc., 43 Cal. 3d at 1387; see also Smith v. Selma Community Hosp., 188 Cal. App. 4th 1, 30 (2010) (“In scrutinizing the words of a statute, courts generally give them their usual, ordinary meaning, which in turn may be obtained by referring to a dictionary.”).
26 “Price” in the economic sense is defined alternately as “the quantity of one thing that is exchanged or demanded in barter or sale for another”; “the amount of money given or set as the amount to be given as a consideration for the sale of a specified thing”; or “the cost at which something is obtained or offered.” Webster’s New International Unabridged Dictionary 1798 (3d ed., Merriam-Webster 2002). 27 As relevant here, “terms” are defined as “conditions,” as in “terms of a sale,” or “credit granted on liberal terms of repayment.” Webster’s New International Unabridged Dictionary 2358. “Payment” is defined simply as “the act of paying or giving compensation,” or “something that is paid.” Id. at 1659. 6 10-206

This view is bolstered by the legislative history of the exception, 28 which reveals that the phrase “terms of payment” came about after a series of amendments incorporating other possible wordings. As introduced, the statute would have allowed a county board of supervisors to conduct a closed session “with other persons for purposes of negotiations for the purchase, sale or lease of property .”29 An early amendment applied the exemption more broadly to “the legislative body of a local agency ,” but simultaneously narrowed the scope of discussion to a “meeting with [the local governing body’s] designated negotiator to give instructions” concerning the “terms or price, or both” of a specified real property transaction.30 Next, the language was amended to limit the scope of discussion to only the “price” of the proposed transaction. 31 A final amendment settled on “price and terms of payment” for the particular purchase, sale, exchange, or lease of real property .32 From this history , we can see that the Legislature considered and rejected the broader phrase (“terms” of the proposed transaction) in favor of the narrower phrase (“terms of payment”). Moreover, the reported appellate decisions in which the phrase “terms of payment” appears reveals a consistent understanding that it is meant to describe how and when the price is to be paid.33 Thus, we see that th e real-estate-negotiations exception includes two topics that a local agency may discuss in closed session: (1) the negotiator’s authority regarding the price, and (2) the negotiator’s authority regarding the terms of payment. Well established rules of statutory construction hold that “the expression of some things in a statute necessarily means the exclusion of other things not expressed,” 34 and that we “may not rewrite a statute by inserting thoughts that have been omitted . . . .”35 Applying those 28 “Both the legislative history of the statute and the wider historical circumstances of its enactment may be considered in ascertaining the legislative intent. [Citation.]” Dyna-Med, Inc., 4 3 Cal. 3d at 1387. The real-estate-negotiations exception was enacted in 1984. 1984 Stat. ch. 1126 §§ 2, 3 (Sen. 2216).
29 Sen. 2216, 1983-84 Reg. Sess. (Feb. 17, 1984).
30 Sen. 2216 (as amend. Apr. 23, 1984).
31 Sen. 2216 (as amend. May 7, 1984).
32 Sen. 2216 (as amend. Aug. 16, 1984); see 1984 Stat. ch. 1126 § 2; Govt. Code § 54956.8.
33 See Segura v. McBride, 5 Cal. App. 4th 1028, 1034 (1992); E & H Wholesale, Inc. v. Glaser Bros., 158 Cal. App. 3d 728, 735 (1984); Kawasho Intl. v. Lakewood Pipe Serv., Inc., 152 Cal. App. 3d 785, 792 (1983).
34 Gikas v. Zolin, 6 Cal. 4th 841, 852 (1993); Dyna-Med, 43 Cal. 3d at 1391 n. 13. 35 Gillett-Harris-Duranceau, etc. v. Kemple, 83 Cal. App. 3d 214, 219 (1978); 7 8 7 10-206

rules to this statute leads us to reject the argument that closed-session discussions may extend to issues that might affect “the economic value of the transaction,”36 or what might be called “the price that the local agency is willing to pay or accept.” It is undoubtedly true that any number of issues might fall into this broad category —for example, the availability of easements on the subject property, or credit worthiness of the buyer or seller, or the financial condition of the local agency itself. But we cannot agree that collateral matters of this sort fall within the meaning of the statutory exception such that they may be discussed out of public hearing. We believe that such an expansive reading of what is meant by “price” would render virtually meaningless the phrase “terms of payment,” because payment terms themselves commonly affect the price that a party may be willing to pay or accept.37 We are not free to construe a statute in a manner that would render any words or phrases redundant.38
Moreover, the California Court of Appeal has rejected an argument that the real- estate-negotiations exception implies a “rule of reason” that would allow closed-session consideration of items “reasonably related to the purpose of giving direction to a legislative body’s negotiator.”39 In Shapiro v. San Diego City Council, a city council was considering a development project that included the construction of a new baseball stadium for the San Diego Padres. The city council argued that the complexity of the proposed transaction justified closed-session discussion of various matters “reasonably related” to the ballpark deal. 40 Among these matters were: briefing on land acquisition Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 192, 194 (1995); 66 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 217, 222 (1983); see Code Civ. Proc. § 1858.
36 Ltr. from League of Cal. Cities to Dep. Atty. Gen. Marc J. Nolan (Aug. 6, 2010) 3-4.
37 For example, a party’s agreement to make a full lump-sum payment at the outset would typically bring about a lower total payment price than would a series of installment payments made over time. See, e.g., E & H Wholesale, Inc. v. Glaser Bros., 158 Cal.

App. 3d at 735 (“cash discount” is “discount granted in consideration of immediate payment or payment within a prescribed time” [citation]). 38 Metcalf v. Co. of San Joaquin, 42 Cal. 4th 1121, 1135 (2008); Cooley v. Super.

Ct., 29 Cal. 4th 228, 249 (2002); see Commn. on Peace Officer Stands. & Training v.

Super. Ct., 42 Cal. 4th 278, 294 (2007) (quoting Moore v. Cal. State Bd. of Accountancy, 2 Cal. 4th 999, 1011- 1012 (1992)) (restrictive meaning must be adopted “‘if acceptance of a more expansive meaning would make other items in the list unnecessary or redundant . . . .’”).
39 Shapiro v. San Diego City Council, 96 Cal. App. 4th at 922. 40 Id. at 923.
8 10-206

matters; design work of architects and engineers; infrastructure and parking developments; capping interim expenses; environmental impact report considerations; issues of alternative sites, traffic, stadium naming rights, expert consultants, and staff; and such policy considerations as the impact of the ballpark project on the homeless. 41 The Shapiro court acknowledged the “perceived value of confidentiality” in negotiations and did not “denigrate [this] important consideration.” 42 Nevertheless, it concluded that the council’s closed-session discussions exceeded the scope of the “safe harbor notice provisions” on the council’s agenda (which stated that closed-session discussion s would be conducted as to price and terms of payment), and that the topics ranged “far afield of a specific buying and selling decision.”43
We note that the city council in Shapiro failed to identify a specific parcel of property in its agenda when it referenced the closed-session item of business, 44 and we are aware that an argument may be made that the Shapiro case is distinguishable on that basis. But we believe that Shapiro’s reasoning is robust enough to support the point we make here, which is that the real-estate-negotiations exception (like the safe harbor notice provision) simply cannot be read so broadly as to incorporate any and every topic that might have a bearing on a public real estate transaction.

We do not mean to say that a closed session must be absolutely limited to the specification of a particular dollar amount (or other specified consideration) that the local agency is willing to pay or accept in a given real estate transaction. While exceptions to the Brown Act must be given a narrow construction,
45 they must still be interpreted in a
manner that gives effect to the underlying purposes of the law.46 Among the purposes at play in this situation is the need to conserve scarce public resources through eff ective negotiation of real estate transactions. In our view, therefore, a closed-session discussion regarding price or terms of payment must allow a public agency to consider the range of 41 Id. at 923-924.
42 Id. at 924.
43 Id.
44 Id. at 908 (agenda merely specified “real property interests in the East Village area of downtown San Diego, and at Qualcomm Stadium in the City of San Diego” or, on other occasions, “real estate interests in the Centre City East area of downtown San Diego”).
45 Shapiro, 96 Cal. App. 4th at 917.
46 See Duval v. Bd. of Trustees, 93 Cal. App. 4th 902, 909-911 (2001) (eschewing overly narrow reading of “evaluation of performance” as used in Brown Act’s personnel exception).
9 10-206

possibilities for payment that the agency might be willing to accept, including how low or how high to start the negotiations with the other party, the sequencing and strategy of offers or counteroffers, as well as various payment alternatives. Information designed to assist the agency in determining the value of the property in question , such as the sales or rental figures for comparable properties, should also be permitted, because that information is often essential to the process of arriving at a negotiating price.47 Ultimately, of course, each case must be decided on its own facts. But, for the reasons stated, we cannot accept the view that the real-estate-negotiations exception permits the closed-session discussion of any and all aspects of a proposed transaction that might have some effect on price and payment terms. The purpose of the exception is to protect a local agency’s bargaining position, not to keep confidential its deliberations as to the wisdom of a proposed transaction.

For the reasons stated, we conclude that the real-estate-negotiations exception to the open meeting requirements of the Brown Act permits the closed-session discussion of: (1) the amount of consideration that the local agency is willing to pay or accept in exchange for the real property rights to be acquired or transferred in the particular transaction; (2) the form, manner, and timing of how that consideration will be paid; and (3) items that are essential to arriving at the authorized price and payment terms, such that their public disclosure would be tantamount to revealing the information that the exception permits to be kept confidential.
*****
47 In this connection, we note that section 6254(h) exempts from public disclosure under the Public Records Act (§§6250-6276.48) the “con tents of real estate appraisals . . . made for or by the state or local agency relative to the acquisition of property” until after the property has been acquired.
10 10-206

From: Rhoda Fry
To: City Clerk; City Council; City Attorney"s Office
Subject: RE: Closed Session, City Council July 9 2024 Purchasing a Building Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 1:41:22 PM
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.

And I would like to add on that this building does not adhere to newer indoor air quality standards – which keep people healthy and reduces the spread of COVID and other diseases.

From: Rhoda Fry <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 1:39 PM
To: 'City Clerk' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; 'City Attorney's Office' <[email protected]> Subject: Closed Session, City Council July 9 2024 Purchasing a Building

Dear City Council,
I have a number of concerns regarding the purchase of a new building.

1. Typically, it only makes sense to purchase a building when the plan to hold it is at least 10 years. In this case, the idea is to use it for 2 years. It makes no sense to buy a building.

2. Because the intended use is only for 2 years, it looks like a real-estate investment. What is the City investment policy for real estate? And, if it is a good investment, it would have been purchased by now. There are plenty of newer buildings in the City and there will be plenty of even newer ones. I don’t see this as being a good investment and I don’t think that the City should get into real-estate investing anyway.

3. We also need to be looking at either leasing or buying a building for the sheriff substation because the current location is expected to go away. This has been on the City’s radar for quite some time (I recall seeing it on some sort of work plan around the time of public safety forum at Quinlan before the most recent one as I had spoken with Mr. Morely about it). We should not be doing anything with another building that might risk resources that need to be applied to public safety.

4. Because this building is an older building, by definition, it is not built to the most modern seismic standards and energy-efficiency standards and more.

5. If this building were such a great deal, it would have been purchased by someone else by now.

It is your fiduciary duty to protect our City’s coffers, please do not move forward on purchasing this building.

Warm Regards,
Rhoda Fry
Virus-free.www.avg.com
From: Santosh Rao
To: City Council; Pamela Wu; Christopher Jensen; City Clerk Subject: Please do not buy or proceed with the office building negotiation or transaction.

Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 2:14:02 PM
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.

Respected Mayor Mohan, Manager Wu, Members of the Cupertino City Council, City Attorney Jensen,
CC: City Clerk
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed acquisition of the 1979 Class C office building located at 19400 Stevens Creek Boulevard. As the council deliberates this significant investment, it is crucial to consider several compelling reasons why this purchase is not only economically unwise but also strategically unsound.

First and foremost, the current office market conditions in the Bay Area are deeply troubling. Silicon Valley ended 2023 with a record high office availability rate of 27.5%, while San Francisco faced an even graver situation with a 36.7% vacancy rate. These statistics underscore a broader regional trend of declining demand for office space, fueled by remote work, downsizing, and economic uncertainties. Investing in additional office space under such conditions would likely exacerbate the financial strain on the city.

Moreover, the rising capitalization (CAP) rates in the office market further reflect the declining asset values and increased risk associated with office investments. With CAP rates on the rise, the potential return on investment diminishes, making it an unfavorable time to allocate significant city resources to an asset class experiencing heightened volatility and decreased demand.

The specific building in question, which has been vacant for four years, presents additional risks. The prolonged vacancy indicates potential issues with the property's desirability or structural conditions. This history of non- occupancy suggests that the building may not be easily marketable or attractive to potential tenants, especially in an already saturated market.

Furthermore, the ongoing economic recalibration in the tech sector, which is a major driver of office space demand in our region, suggests that recovery and renewed demand for office space will not occur in the near term. According to recent analyses, despite some interest from sectors such as artificial intelligence, overall leasing activity remains low, with significant space left unoccupied.

Adding to these concerns are the challenges associated with debt financing for a Class C 1979 office building that has sat vacant for four years.

Lenders are likely to view this property as a high-risk investment due to its age, prolonged vacancy, and potential lack of modern amenities and compliance with current building codes, including seismic retrofitting.

Securing favorable financing terms would be difficult, if not impossible, and the city could face high interest rates and stringent lending conditions.

Furthermore, the risk of future capital calls by the debt provider or bank is a significant concern. Should the building fail to attract tenants or require unexpected major repairs, the city could be compelled to inject additional capital to meet financing obligations, thereby straining public finances and diverting resources from other essential projects.

The eventual disposal of this property poses yet another challenge. Selling a 1979 Class C office building that has not been seismically retrofitted and has a history of prolonged vacancy would be a daunting task. Potential buyers would be wary of the significant investment required to bring the building up to current standards and the uncertain return on such an investment, particularly in a market already saturated with vacant office space.

High insurance costs and the potential lack of adequate insurance coverage for such an aged and vacant building further compound these financial challenges. Insurers may impose prohibitive premiums or decline coverage altogether due to the building's age, vacancy status, and potential structural deficiencies. This lack of insurance or high insurance costs would expose the city to substantial financial risks in the event of damage or liability issues.

Additionally, the removal of this property from the commercial tax rolls would result in a significant loss of property tax revenue for the city.

Transferring ownership to a municipal entity eliminates a valuable source of ongoing tax income, further straining the city's budget and reducing funds available for essential public services and community projects.

Investing in this property at this juncture would not only be fiscally irresponsible but also detracts from other critical areas that require funding, such as affordable housing, infrastructure improvements, and social services. These sectors have a more immediate and tangible impact on the well-being of our community and the quality of life for Cupertino residents.

I urge the city council to reconsider this purchase and instead focus on priorities that align with the current and future needs of our community. By doing so, we can ensure that Cupertino remains fiscally resilient and well- positioned to navigate the evolving economic landscape.

Thank you for considering my perspective. I trust that the council will make a decision that reflects the best interests of Cupertino residents.

Thanks,
Santosh Rao
From: Griffin
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk; City Attorney"s Office
Subject: 2024-07-09 City Council Meeting CLOSED SESSION building purchase Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 2:22:43 PM
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.

PLEASE INCLUDE THIS AS PART OF WRITTEN COMMUNICATION FOR THE ABOVE MEETING AGENDA.

Dear City Council and Manager Wu,
This purchase does not make financial sense!

-The building is not anymore seismically safer than the current City Hall but you are planning to buy it and pay to upgrade it then pay again to upgrade City Hall?!? -NO public discussion of the condition of the building. -NO public discussion of what exact requirements are needed for a relocation! -NO publicly discussed plan!
-NO discussion in public of why this is being done.

Safety is not addressed!

-Where will the EOC be located?
-Where will the Sheriff be located?
Funding
A recent memo from City Manager Wu to all employees dated June 18, 2024 states that she will look at the “disposition of “ city properties to pay for this! -This was not even discussed in public. It was a public record request! -Which properties are being considered and why? Discuss in public!! These issues cannot be discussed in a CLOSED SESSION. They MUST be in an open meeting.

This is irresponsible.

Please do not continue without a public discussion of the plan and the steps and the funding source!
Peggy
From: Lisa Warren
To: City Council; City Clerk
Cc: City Attorney"s Office
Subject: City Council Meeting CLOSED SESSION commercial real estate purchase July 9,2024 Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 3:03:32 PM
Attachments: Exception to Brown Act for closed session Real Estate transaction discussion .DOC.docx summary of key points from Supl Rpt re PULLED consent #12 CC mtg June 18, 2024.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.

I REQUEST THAT THIS EMAIL COMMUNICATION AND ATTACHMENTS BE INCLUDED THIS AS WRITTEN COMMUNICATION FOR THE JULY 9, 2024 CLOSED SESSION MEETING OF CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL.

Please note the two attachments to this email, in addition to the Turnkey definitions below. They are meant to be informational and available to the public in relation to today's closed session agenda.

As you already know, I have great concerns related to the misrepresentation that Cupertino City Manager used in the Supplemental 'slide deck' that was in no way part of the June 18, 2024 agenda - consent item 12.

The supplemental came into play when members of the public and city councilmember 'pulled' the consent item for discussion.

What Is a Turnkey Property?
A turnkey property is a fully renovated home or apartment building, or other commercial building that an investor can purchase and immediately rent out. A turnkey home is often a property purchased from a company that specializes in the restoration of older properties. Those same firms may also offer property management services to buyers, minimizing the amount of time and effort they have to put into the rental. --- Lisa Warren
Definition of Turnkey property
…
what is a turnkey property
A turnkey property is one that you can buy and immediately occupy. That's because it is fully renovated and repaired.

The Real-Estate-Negotiations Exception To The Brown Act Permits Closed-Session Discussion Of The Amount Of Consideration The Public Agency Is Willing To Pay, The Form, Manner, And Timing Of Payment, And Items Essential To Arriving At Authorized Price And Payment Terms

By Heather DeBlanc
Liebert Cassidy Whitmore
Apr 12, 2012
The Attorney General has issued an opinion as to what items may be discussed under the real-estate-negotiations exception to the open meeting requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act. The Brown Act permits a governing body to meet in closed session with its real estate negotiator "to grant authority to its negotiator regarding the price and terms of
payment" for a proposed purchase, sale, exchange, or lease of identified real property.

The real-estate-negotiations exception does not permit closed-session discussion of any and all aspects of a proposed transaction that could effect price or payment terms.

The wisdom of the proposed transaction cannot be discussed in closed session. The Attorney General opined that the real-estate-negotiations exception to the open meeting requirements of the Brown Act permits closed-session discussion of the following:

1. the amount of consideration the local agency is willing to pay or accept in exchange for the real property rights to be acquired or transferred in the particular transaction;

2. the form, manner, and timing of how that consideration will be paid; and

3. items essential to arriving at the authorized price and payment terms, such that their public disclosure would be tantamount to revealing the information that the exception permits to be kept confidential.

The agenda item must specify the property, identification of agency negotiator, names of negotiating parties, and whether the negotiation concerns, price, terms of payment, or both. The Attorney General noted that the word "terms" is modified by "of payment" which rules out the possibility that all terms of the transaction as a whole may be discussed under the exception.

The AG concluded that "a closed-session discussion regarding price or terms of payment must allow a public agency to consider the range of possibilities for payment that the agency might be willing to accept, including how low or how high to start the negotiations with the other party, the sequencing and strategy of offers or counteroffers, as well as various payment alternatives. Information designed to assist the agency in determining the value of the property in question, such as the sales or rental figures for comparable properties, should also be permitted, because that information is often essential to the process of arriving at a negotiating price." Attorney General Opinion No. 10-206 (Dec. 27, 2011) [2011 WL 6917511].

This article was written by Heather DeBlanc, an attorney with the full service education law firm of Liebert Cassidy Whitmore. Ms. DeBlanc is an Associate in the Los Angeles office and can be reached at (310) 981-2000 or at [email protected]. For more information regarding the information above or our firm please visit our website at www.lcwlegal.com, or contact one of our offices below.

Liebert Cassidy Whitmore publishes the Business and Facilities Update as a service to our clients and other friends for informational purposes only. It is not intended to be used as a substitute for specific legal advice or opinions and the transmission of this information is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship between sender and receiver. You should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.

Read on lcwlegal.com

################################################################################## Comments from another source:

The starting point for our analysis is, necessarily, the language of the exception itself, together with related provisions of the Brown Act.15

The real-estate-negotiations exception provides, in relevant part, as follows:

16 The disclosure requirement set forth in the second quoted sentence mirrors a more general Brown Act provision to the same effect.

17 Both of these notice provisions reinforce the Act’s general notice requirement that, “[a]t least 72 hours before a regular meeting, the legislative body of the local agency, or its designee, shall post an agenda containing a brief general description of each item of business to be transacted or discussed at the meeting, including items to be discussed in closed session.”

18 14 Id. 15 See Shapiro v. San Diego City Council, 96 Cal. App. 4th at 924. 16 § 54956.8. 17 § 54957.7(a) (“Prior to holding any closed session, the legislative body of the local agency shall disclose, in an open meeting, the item or items to be discussed in the closed session . . . .”) 18 § 54954.2(a) (emphasis added). 4 10-206 With regard to the real-estate-negotiations exception, the Act provides that it is sufficiently specific (or within a “safe harbor”) to describe the agenda item as follows:

CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Property: (Specify street address, or if no street address, the parcel number or other unique reference, of the real property under negotiation.) Agency negotiator:
(Specify names of negotiators attending the closed session.) (If circumstances necessitate the absence of a specified negotiator, an agent or designee may participate in place of the absent negotiator so long as the name of the agent or designee is announced at an open session held prior to the closed session.) Negotiating parties: (Specify name of party (not agent).) Under negotiation: (Specify whether instruction to negotiator will concern price, terms of payment, or both.)

19 The Act provides that, “in the closed session, the legislative body may consider only those matters covered in its [agenda] statement.”

The [agenda] statement
Type: Consent Calendar Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 6/5/2024 In control: City Council
On agenda: 6/18/2024 Final action:

Title: Subject: Consider acquisition of property located at 19400 Stevens Creek Blvd, and appointment of real property negotiator for acquisition of property

CC 06-18-2024
#12
Consider acquisition of property located at 19400 Stevens Creek Blvd

Bullet points from slide #4 of ‘Supplemental Report’ to Consent Item #12 on June 18 City Council meeting Agenda

Key Elements and Opportunities
• Turnkey oﬃce space located at 19400 Stevens Creek Boulevard • 1.2-acre lot, 20,700 square feet of oﬃce
• Accessible location for the community
• Could serve as an interim City Hall while potential partnership and funding options are explored for current site
CC 07-09-2024

Annual Comprehensive
Financial Report
(ACFR)

Written Communications
From: Rhoda Fry
To: City Clerk; City Council; City Attorney"s Office; Cupertino City Manager"s Office Subject: Agenda Item 2 7/9/2024 - ACFR - the Sales Tax Revenue for 2019/2020 is not accurate Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 6:41:52 PM
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,
Agenda Item 2 7/9/2024 - ACFR - the Sales Tax Revenue for 2019/2020 is not accurate when compared with income reported by the CDTFA and rebates paid to Insight and Apple.

Nor is it accurate as compared with the initial paperwork to refinance the bond.

It is somewhat misleading to mention the 2 hotels that have yet to break ground. It should be mentioned that the plans are yet to be completed.

Thank You for fixing page viii with the Citizens of Cupertino at the top of the org chart.

In my opinions, the city’s financial situation should have been reported regarding our debt.

Additionally, the ACFR should have been reported by 3/30/2024 – most other cities get theirs posted in December.

The ACFR was posted today in advance of approval by City Council and that is not right – it needs to be approved by council first.

On page 177, to my knowledge we do not have an Alo hotel, but we do have an Aloft hotel.

Nor do we have a Hya House but we do have a Hyatt House.

Regards,
Rhoda Fry

Virus-free.www.avg.com
CC 07-09-2024

Vision Zero Action Plan

Written Communications
From: Deepa Mahendraker
To: City Council; City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; David Stillman Subject: Re: REJECT Vision Zero Action Plan
Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 2:26:04 PM
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 David, Manager Wu, Mayor Sheila, and Council Members, I am writing to express my deep disappointment with the Vision Zero Action Plan. The plan reads as though it could have been written a decade ago, failing to address several critical and contemporary traffic safety issues:

Distracted Driving: Astonishingly, there is no mention of the significant dangers posed by cell phone use while driving.

E-Bikes and E-Scooters: The plan completely ignores the risks posed by e-bikes and e-scooters, including their unsafe speeds and erratic behavior, which endanger other road users.

Buffered Bike Lanes: The feasibility of implementing buffered bike lanes to safely accommodate e-bikes, e-scooters, and regular bikes is not considered.

Cybersecurity: The plan overlooks the rising threat of cybersecurity breaches and ransomware attacks on traffic systems, a glaring omission in today’s digital age.

Traffic Design Changes: There is a lack of rigorous data studies on the impact of traffic design changes such as banning right turns on red and redesigning curbs to prevent free right turns.

Intersection Changes: No data is provided on the effectiveness of intersection changes at Wolfe and Stevens Creek, particularly regarding impeding free right turns by vehicles.

Driving Under the Influence: The plan fails to address the emerging threats posed by driving under the influence of various drugs.

High-Density Housing and Parking: The issues related to new medium and high-density zoning, reduced parking restrictions, and state laws impacting parking near crosswalks are inadequately covered.

Traffic Enforcement: There is insufficient data on traffic enforcement activities by sheriffs, including trends and budget allocations, to assess their effectiveness.

Lessons Learned from Accidents: The plan lacks comprehensive data on actions taken from lessons learned from major accidents and fatalities, and their effectiveness.

This plan is fundamentally flawed, relying on outdated data and ignoring the critical issues that have emerged in recent years, particularly since COVID-19. The failure to address modern risk factors such as distracted driving, drug-induced DUI, e-scooter and e-bike hazards, and cybersecurity threats is unacceptable.

I urge you to reject this draft and demand a thorough rewrite that reflects the true dangers of 2024 and beyond. The safety and well-being of our community depend on a plan that addresses contemporary traffic safety challenges with the seriousness they deserve.

Sincerely,
Deepa Mahendraker
Resident of Cupertino
From: Santosh Rao
To: David Stillman; Pamela Wu; City Council; Sheila Mohan; Kitty Moore; Liang Chao; Hung Wei; J.R. Fruen Subject: 07/09/24 council meeting. Agenda item 3. Unaddressed Challenges for Motorists in Cupertino"s Vision Zero Action Plan.

Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 11:18:17 AM
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.

Subject: Unaddressed Challenges for Motorists in Cupertino's Vision Zero Action Plan.

Dear David, Manager Wu, Mayor Sheila and council members, I am writing to express my deep disappointment with the vision zero action plan. The plan reads like it could have been written in 2010. Why do I say that?

1. There is zero mention of distracted driving due to cell phones.

2. There is zero mention of the risks caused due to unsafe speeds and weaving in and out of traffic by e-bikes and e-scooters to other bikes as well as auto traffic.

3. There is zero mention of the feasibility of buffered bike lanes in the era of e-bikes and e- scooters having to share space with regular bikes.

4. There is no coverage of how cyber security and ransomware attacks have risen as a threat in traffic systems.

5. There is no data studies on the benefits and drawbacks of traffic design changes such as no right turn on red, preventing free right turns with curb re-designs.

6. There is no data on the success or lack thereof of the intersection changes at Wolfe and Steven’s Creek specifically in impeding free right turns by vehicles with the design changes.

7. There is no data or research on the emerging threats from driving under the influence of drugs of various kinds.

8. There is light to no coverage of the issues due to housing element, specifically new medium and high density zoning, reduced parking restrictions, new state laws impacting parking within 20 feet of striped or un-striped crosswalks etc.

9. There is little data or metrics on traffic enforcement by sheriffs for the budget allocated to law enforcement and no historical data to reflect whether traffic enforcement has increased, declined, stayed flat, reasons for the trend.

10. There is lack of data on resulting traffic department actions taken from lessons learnt from major accidents, fatalities and the effectiveness of those actions.

I urge you to please send the report back and ask that this be written to reflect the true dangers in 2024 and looking ahead.

The use of 10 year data actually skews towards an outdated set of issues. We need the report to provide weightage to issues seen more recently since Covid especially with the emergence of modern risk factors such as distractions of cell phones, drugs induced DUI, e-scooter and e-bike risks, cyber security risks.

I include below a more comprehensive set of feedback.

1. Scooters and E-Bikes:

Inadequate Integration: The draft lacks detailed coverage on how the plan will manage the integration of scooters and e-bikes into the transportation system, which has led to increased conflicts between these e-bike, e-scooter users and pedestrians, cyclists and automobile drivers.

Safety Measures: There are no safety measures outlined for e-scooter and e-bike users. This is an area of high risk to the community and could result in higher accident rates involving these less protected road users.

2. Cell Phone Use:

Distracted Driving: The plan does not address policies to deal with cell phone use among drivers, a significant cause of distracted driving- related accidents.

Enforcement and Education: There is a lack of initiatives for enforcement and public education campaigns specifically targeting the dangers of cell phone use while driving.

3. Enforcement of Traffic Laws:

Speeding: While speed management is mentioned, there is insufficient emphasis on strict enforcement of speed limits, particularly in high- risk areas. The issue I see is not a need for uniform reduction in speed limits but enforcement of current speed limits. We hardly see speed, red light, stop sign enforcement any more. All we seem to see are deputies writing tickets to school parents. Has traffic enforcement declined for speed violations, stop sign violations, red light violations and if so why.

Red Light Violations: The plan does not propose enough measures to prevent and penalize red light violations, which are a major and rising cause of severe accidents.

4. Infrastructure Gaps:

Road Design: The plan does not fully address the learnings, data and actual realized benefits from changes in road design to accommodate road users safely, such as no turn on red, curb re-designs, etc.

Intersection Improvements: Although intersections are recognized as high-risk areas, the specific redesign or improvement plans for these intersections are not detailed nor are lessons learnt and data on benefits or lack thereof from prior changes.

5. Data Utilization:

Lack of Real-time Data: There is no mention of utilizing real-time data to monitor and respond to traffic conditions and incidents, which could enhance road safety. How about data on utilization of bike lanes by cyclical period and time of day. How about dynamic signs for no turn on red only limited to peak school hours of 8 - 9am and 2 - 4pm.

Predictive Analytics: The draft does not include plans to use predictive analytics or AI to anticipate and prevent potential accidents.

6. Community Involvement:

Public Feedback: There is a lack of mechanisms to continuously gather feedback from auto users to improve the safety measures over time. Please stop relying on feedback solely from orgs that bias solely towards bikes such as Walk-Bike orgs. Please provide methods for auto users to give input. Please consider forming a transportation commission and disbanding the bike ped commission. Equity of all road users is a key gap since our traffic department heavily biases to walk-bike org feedback.

7. Emergency Response:

Accident Response: The plan does not outline improved procedures or infrastructure Tom for quick and efficient response to accidents, to mitigate the severity of injuries and fatalities.

8. Parking Policies:

Parking Regulations: There is no discussion on revising parking policies to reduce conflicts between parked vehicles and moving traffic, especially in high-density areas from new zoning changes caused due to housing element, reduction of parking requirements, addition of duplex in corner lots etc.

9. Inadequate Addressing of Parking Needs:

The plan does not address the increased demand for parking in high- density housing areas. This can lead to illegal parking and increased congestion on streets, affecting road safety.

10. Lack of Comprehensive Parking Management Strategies:

There is no strategy for managing the limited parking spaces available in high-density areas. Effective parking management is crucial to prevent traffic disruptions and ensure smooth vehicular flow.

11. Impact on Emergency Services:

The plan does not consider how reduced parking availability in high- density areas might impede access for emergency services, potentially delaying response times and compromising safety.

12. Insufficient Focus on Mixed-Use Developments:

Mixed-use developments, which combine residential, commercial, and recreational spaces, are not adequately covered. These areas require specific parking and traffic management solutions to handle the diverse and high volume of users.

Thanks,
Santosh Rao
From: Jennifer Griffin
To: City Council; City Clerk
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: No Right Turn on Red at Stevens Creek Blvd and De Anza Blvd. (#3 on 7/9/24 CC Agenda) Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 10:19:00 AM
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:

In discussion of Item Number 3 on Net Zero on the Cupertino City Council Agenda on the 7/9/24 City Council Meeting it is not a good idea to make turn changes at Stevens Creek Blvd. and De Anza Blvd (Sunnyvale-Saratoga Rd).

Some of these proposed changes might be only allowing a right turn on a green light (no right turn on A red light). This would back up traffic greatly on both directions of roadways at this intersection.

There is too much car traffic at this intersection to introduce something like this.

This might also involve squaring off the intersection also. This is also not a good plan because Cars would be making right turns with little or no room to turn. This would not provide an Efficient use of time in the intersection.

Drivers might start driving up on sidewalks if they didn't have enough turning radius.

I don't think making all cars wait to turn right only on a green light would help much For anyone. People might cut through adjacent neighborhoods if the intersection was Bogged down with no right turns until a green light.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Jennifer Griffin
From: J Shearin
To: City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk Subject: Vote yes to adopt the Vision Zero Action Plan | Agenda item #3 | City Council meeting July 9, 2024 Date: Saturday, July 6, 2024 9:31:52 PM
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 Honorable Mayor Mohan, City Councilmembers, and City Manager Wu, On Tuesday, I urge you to adopt the Vision Zero Action Plan as recommended by the city staff. I ask this as a resident of Cupertino who was a stakeholder in the Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) process and has given feedback about the proposed Vision Zero plan on many occasions prior to this vote.

The plan has been extensively reviewed by the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (BPC), and changes made to encourage reductions in fatalities and severe injuries for all road users, including motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians. It will allow our city the flexibility to make improvements that best suit our city while having a solid toolbox to do so. I commend the Transportation Staff for their hard work to bring the Vision Zero Action Plan together and incorporate so much BPC and resident feedback.

We all want to feel safe when out driving, walking or riding on our roads. This plan can get us there and I ask that you approve it when it comes up for the vote. Thank you for your work on behalf of Cupertino’s residents.

Sincerely,
Jennifer Shearin
-----------------------------------
This message is from my personal email account. I am only writing as myself, not as a representative or spokesperson for any other organization.

From: Henry W
To: City Council; City Clerk
Subject: Support for the Vision Zero Plan and Lawson Bike Path Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 2:37:32 PM
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 Mayor Mohan, Vice Mayor Fruen, and Councilmembers Wei, Moore, and Chao:

I am writing today as a resident of Cupertino and a 4-year student of Cupertino High School.

Tonight, I am asking you to vote in favor of measures around Cupertino that will support the heightened safety of pedestrian and bicycle traffic - as well as students biking to and from schools. As such, I ask you to vote in favor tonight for the Vision Zero Plan and approval for the Lawson Bikeway. These two items are critical to improving bike-ped traffic throughout the city as well as protect students as they are making the commute to and from schools.

The Vision Zero Plan is a clear roadmap in order to reduce collisions, injuries, and fatalities on city roads. This initiative is indispensable for safeguarding the well-being of all residents, especially those who may be more vulnerable. The approach in formulating this plan, which was collaborative, inclusive, and unanimously approved by the Bike-Ped Commission, demonstrates how it is sufficient in addressing diverse needs and concerns regarding road safety throughout Cupertino. Vulnerable populations, such as children, elderly, and those with disabilities, stand to gain significantly from the Vision Zero Plan measures. With the said reasoning, I urge the City Council to unanimously support the Vision Zero plan.

Now, the Lawson Bikeway is a clear demonstration of the benefits of Vision Zero. As a student of Cupertino High School, previous advocate for safer bikeways around Cupertino High School, and a biker, I wholeheartedly support the addition of a bikeway to the streets surrounding Lawson Middle School. This bikeway option provides proper separation between vehicles, pedestrians, and bikers, and stands to be a solid solution for the dangers of Lazaneo and Vista during before- and after- school times. Biking students and vehicles mix with the current layout, and it is excessively unsafe for the student bikers. Bikers who opt to bike on the sidewalks face equal dangers, if not more, posing a threat to both themselves and pedestrians on the narrow sidewalk. For this reasoning, I urge City Council to unanimously support the Lawson Bikeway plan.

Sincerely,
Henry Widjaja
From: Gauri Chawla
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: For Public Comment (7/9): Item #3 Vision Zero Action Plan Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 2:18:45 PM
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.

To the Cupertino City Council:

I am writing to urge you to support the adoption of the Vision Zero Action Plan.

This is a document that will be continually updated, and is intended to provide guidance to traffic safety (including motorists, cyclists, transit users, and pedestrians). It does not provide any actionable plans, and thus should not be treated as the only action Council can take in regards to traffic safety. Instead, it should be viewed as a way to keep Cupertino updated on protecting certain areas of traffic (for example: cyclists riding to school/work) as our traffic environment is always changing.

This detailed plan has undergone several revisions based on public input, as well as recommendations from the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission. These actions have strengthened the Vision Zero Plan, and the adoption of this plan will bring Cupertino into the present in regards to traffic safety.

As someone who has had to rely on public transportation, and understands that much of the city drives due to the structure of our roads and pathways, the Vision Zero Action Plan - because it is a document that is continually reviewed and updated - will be able to adapt to any changes in environment Cupertino may face. Thus, its adoption is beneficial to our city; having a guiding document that is subject to revision allows a clear methodology for developing further outlines for traffic safety, and transforming our city to become more walkable, transit-friendly, and bike-friendly.

Thank you for your consideration,
Gauri Chawla
From: Carols Gmail
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject: Support both Vision Zero Plan AND Bike lanes at Lawson Middle School Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 12:20:27 PM
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 Mayor Mohan, Vice Mayor Fruen and Council-members, I am writing today in support of both the Vision Zero Action Plan and the Class IV bike lanes at Lawson Middle School.

Both of these items will help our residents safely navigate our streets. Pedestrians and bicyclists are at far greater risk of life threatening injuries or death than those traveling inside of vehicles. It is prudent to focus on the safety of those most at risk. We need to reduce car traffic in and around our schools. To do so, we need safe bike lanes that give parents confidence to allow their students to ride their bikes.

The roads belong to all of us. We must share their use responsibly. Please support both of these items on your agenda tonight.

Sincerely,
Carol Stanek
Speaking for myself
From: Jennifer Griffin
To: City Council; City Clerk
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Vision Zero Task Force Composition (Item 3 City Council Meeting 7/9/24) Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 10:03:57 AM
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:

Item Number 3 of the City Council Meeting on 7/9/24 considers adopting the Vision Zero Plan for Cupertino. One of these parts is to establish a Vision Zero Task Force.

I want to make sure that the Task Force is composed of groups that represent everyone in The community, and also to reflect that the Task Force has to work with people from other cities That surround Cupertino.

1. I get the very strong impression that Missing Middle, which the city has adopted very aggressively In their Housing Element, does not like cars very much or the people who need to drive them.

Missing Middle constantly does things to try to make one of the most common modes of transportation in The city (80% or more) more difficult by reducing parking requirements in new construction thus Forcing new residents to park in the streets and clogging up street parking for other residents.

Missing Middle also promotes over-building on lots of any size by forcing high-density Construction that overwhelms the adjacent areas.

The Task Force needs to represent people from the Community who have concerns about the implementation of Missing Middle into Cupertino and how it will actually affect Our city in everyday life and actual traffic realities from its implementation.

2. The state has implemented new housing laws on a regular basis since 2018 and these laws Have changed how our Housing Element has had to be focused. I don't think Vision Zero has Been able to be updated to keep up with these new housing laws, many of which are very Hostile to car traffic and people who drive cars.

We need to make sure the Vision Zero Task Force is composed of everyday people who are skeptical about The Housing Laws and can ask pertinent questions about how these laws impact the quality of life in the city, their impact on transportation demands in the city as well as how the Housing Laws will affect Vision Zero in practice and in reality for all forms of safe transportation.

3. Cupertino is surrounded by other cities. The city should not implement Vision Zero ideas Without talking to other cities first. The members of the Vision Zero Task Force should include Residents and community members of the city who are concerned about interaction with other cities to understand common roadway issues shared between cities. This also is to make sure nothing In Vision Zero is implemented that seriously disrupts street traffic traveling into and out of Adjacent cities such as evidenced by the concerns about Bollinger Road lane reduction, Future improvements to Homestead Road, and Wolfe Road and 280 infrastructure.

The Vision Zero Task Force needs to contain city residents who will look out for the Interests of car traffic as it travels from city to city to make sure that all forms of transportation Are safe for all.

Please make sure the Vision Zero Task Force is also composed of Cupertino residents who live In the neighborhoods affected and drive cars for their daily activities in Cupertino and in adjacent Cities. These car activities involve shopping, eldercare or childcare, medicine pickup and recreation opportunities that are only reachable by car due to physical limitation, the need to transport elderly or ill family Members or young children or by personal choice of the car driver. It is important to make sure these People who choose to drive a car or must drive a car have a seat at the Vision Zero table of Task Force members, too.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Jennifer Griffin
From: Hervé Marcy
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Vision Zero Plan - Please approve
Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 9:39:15 AM
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 Mohan, Esteemed council members,
I write to you from France today, where I am spending time with my family, and while I am the Chair of the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission, I am writing in my name only.

I am asking you to vote in favor of the adoption of the Vision Zero Plan for the City of Cupertino.

This plan is a clear roadmap for the City of Cupertino to tackle in the most effective way the issue of road fatalities and serious injuries.

It is the result of a robust community engagement: as a matter of fact, the bicycle pedestrian Commission gave its input and feedback to the City staff to help deliver the best possible plan for the residents of our City. City staff was very open in the process and included our suggestions for improvement. This plan was unanimously approved by the Commission.

This plan will help the most vulnerable residents of the City of Cupertino, such as seniors, children and people with disabilities and will help make our city more inclusive to all road users and modes of transportation. If followed by actual implementation, I am convinced this plan will save lives and I am proud to have my name on it. I think you should too and hope you will approve it at the upcoming city council.

Sincerely,
Herve Marcy
From: [email protected]
To: City Council; City Clerk
Cc: Jim Davis
Subject: Please adopt the Draft Vision Zero Plan
Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 9:20:10 AM
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 Members,
I am writing to you in support of the Vision Zero Plan. It is hard to imagine someone being against an effort to eliminate traffic-related injuries and fatalities for everyone that uses our roads. The write up put together by city staff seems detailed and thorough. There has also been significant community outreach, with all residents being afforded the opportunity to provide comments and feedback.

I use our roads for driving and cycling, and cross them when I am out walking. I speak from experience that over the years these activities have become more and more dangerous for all concerned. The plan is a guiding vision. A vision where Cupertino eliminates traffic-related injuries and fatalities. That's a vision deserving of your support.

Thank you for your consideration.

Jim Davis
Long time Cupertino resident
From: Helene Davis
To: City Council; City Clerk
Subject: Vision Zero Plan
Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 9:15:27 AM
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.

Hello city council,
Kudos to the City of Cupertino staff for putting together such a thorough Vision Zero plan for our community. This important road map (excuse my pun) for this international approach to reducing/eliminating traffic deaths and injuries will be an incredible benefit to our community.

The usual approach to road design is not enough. Systemic changes are needed to make progress towards the goal of zero fatalities and injuries. And who doesn’t want that to be a goal for our community?
Vision Zero is fundamentally a different way of looking at the “business as usual” approach to road design. It recognizes that sometimes people make mistakes and is designed to prevent accidents before they occur. It will encompass all road users (motorists, cyclists, transit users and pedestrians) in Cupertino.

It is also a multidisciplinary approach that brings together multiple stake holders to look at all aspects of road design - speed, behaviors, design, technology and policies - it is a toolbox, a toolbox we can use to prioritize safety and equity for all road users.

I encourage you to adopt this vision. Thank you for your consideration.

Helene Davis
Long-time community member
From: Aaryan Doshi
To: City Council; City Clerk
Subject: [SUPPORT] Vision Zero Plan
Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 9:10:06 AM
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 Mayor Mohan and City Council Members,
My name is Aaryan Doshi. I am a current high schooler at Monta Vista and a frequent biker around Lawson.

I'm writing in the hopes that the protected bike pathway is added to Lawson Middle School.

When debating the decision of parking spaces vs. biker safety, we need to ask ourselves what is more important:

A few minutes of convenience or a human life?
No amount of convenience can ever match up to human life.

No amount of money can ever match up to human life.

No amount of anything can ever match up to human life.

As a frequent cyclist myself, we do not need any more reminders of what is at stake.

And this is by no means an exaggeration: we have the ability to pave a safer Cupertino at our fingertips.

Now, it is about what we will do. Please vote "Yes" on the upcoming Vision Zero Plan.

Thank you so much for your time and consideration.

With Gratitude,
Aaryan
From: Rattehalli Sudesh
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: SUPPORT VISION ZERO PLAN
Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 8:05:53 AM
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.

Respected Cupertino city Mayor, city council members and city officials, I am writing this urging you to strongly support the ‘Vision Zero’ plan. It makes complete sense to adopt this. Who would not want to keep our pedestrians and cyclists safe! Many neighbouring cities have already adopted this. As a regular cyclist on the roads, I have seen and experienced the joys and near misses on the road. But I have also experienced the benefits of improved pedestrian and biking infrastructure within Cupertino.

So, please adopt the Vision Zero plan and let’s make Cupertino a safe and awesome area to walk and bike.

Sincerely,
Rattehalli Sudesh MD
7827 Creekline Drive
Cupertino CA 95014
From: louise saadati
To: City Council; City Clerk
Subject: Vision Zero Cupertino City Council
Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 2:09:40 AM
Attachments: Vision Zero Cupertino City Council.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.

Sent from my iPhone
Thegoal of theVisionZeroPlanistoprovideaguidingvisionfor eliminatingtraffic-relatedseriousinjuriesanddeathsfor all roadusersinCupertino. It isathorough, detailedandcompleteplan TheUpcomingActiveTransportationPlanwill identifyspecificinfrastructureandpolicyimplementations.

ThankyoutotheCupertinostaff for puttingtogether averydetailedandthoroughdocument intheVisionZeroPlan. TheTransportationstaff hasbeenespeciallycommendableinputtingtogether thisVisionZeroPlan.

TheBPCandCitystaff workedinacomprehensiveandcollaborativemanner toincorporatesignificant resident input inthisplan. Thefinal draft hasbeenextensivelyreviewedandfeedbackhasbeenincorporated.

Theimplementationwill followActiveTransportationPlan.

I'maskingthat theActiveTransportationPlanfollowtherecommendationsfromtheVisionZeroPlan. After that, I wouldstronglyencouragetheCupertinoCityCouncil toapprovetheActiveTransportationPlantoenableimplementationof theplan.

Protectingthelivesof everyonewhousestheroadsinCupertinoshouldbeaprimarygoal ofour city. WeneedtheCityCouncil toapprovethisprocesstoenableitsimplementation Thankyoutothecitystaff, CityCouncil, andtheBikePedCommissionfor all theexcellent workdonetotakeustothispoint.

Sincerely,LouiseSaadati
From: Seema Lindskog
To: City Council; City Clerk
Subject: Walk Bike Cupertino supports the Vision Zero Plan and the Lawson On-street Bike Path Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 12:27:18 AM
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.

Respected Mayor Mohan, Vice-Mayor Fruen, and councilmembers, I am writing today as the Chair of Walk Bike Cupertino.

Walk Bike Cupertino supports the draft Vision Zero Plan. We request that the City Council vote to adopt the plan on Tuesday July 9th. It is a data-driven, thoughtful and comprehensive plan. We fully support it and urge the council to adopt it as written.

I want to commend the staff for their excellent work. While some of our neighboring cities have adopted Vision Zero plans that are just a few paragraphs in length, our city's staff created a high quality and complete plan that will serve us well for the next 16 years. It includes a data-driven analysis of high injury corridors and intersections, a comprehensive toolbox of available infrastructure and policy options, a detailed action plan, and specific performance metrics to track our success. The community was given multiple opportunities to participate in the process and provide input and the input received was incorporated into the final draft.

Walk Bike Cupertino also supports the staff recommendation for an on-street two-way Class IV bike lane at Lawson Middle School (Alternative 3). We have been backers of this project since it was identified six years ago and we are thrilled to see it finally come to council for a vote. It is a long overdue and much needed safety improvement for Lawson students.

The on-street bike path has received support from many key constituents - the city's Bike Ped Commission, the CUSD district board and staff, the Lawson Principal, the Lawson PTA President, Lawson parents, Lawson students, and community organizations such as Walk Bike Cupertino.

The staff has done an excellent job identifying an innovative and effective solution, while also taking into account cost and infrastructure constraints. They diligently considered every option proposed by neighbors such as moving the bike corral to the south end of campus or allowing students on to the exercise track. The final design for the bike path was formulated after careful and extensive analysis and discussion. It is a well thought-through proposed design and we urge the council to follow the staff recommendation and adopt it as written.

On a personal note, as a former Lawson Safe Routes to School parent, I have seen first-hand the scary gauntlet that we put the cycling children at Lawson through on their daily commute.

No child should have to risk injury or death just to get to school. I'm glad and relieved that we are finally doing something to make the Lawson commute safer for all students whether they walk, bike, or are driven.

Thank you for everything you do for this city.

Seema
___________________________________________________________________ "You must be the change you want to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi This message is from my personal email account. I am only writing as myself, not as a representative or spokesperson for any other organization.

From: Tim Oey
To: City Council
Subject: Cupertino"s Vision Zero Plan is a win for everyone! Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 11:16:56 PM
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.

Honorable Cupertino Council Members,
The Cupertino Vision Zero Plan is well researched, vetted, and designed. Vote yes to approve it.

I work, shop, and teach in Cupertino. I drive, bike, and walk in Cupertino. The new Vision Zero Plan will reduce deaths and serious injuries for ALL users. It just makes sense.

Sufficient outreach, public forums, and discussion has happened. Cupertino city staff did an excellent job in creating it. Now is the time to approve it.

Thanks!
Tim Oey
Zero Waste Engineer, ZeroW.org
League of American Bicyclists Cycling Instructor #6033
Cell: (408) 781-1094
[email protected]

From: Joel Wolf
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Agenda Item 3--Vision Zero Plan
Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 8:55:07 PM
Dear Mayor Mohan, Vice-Mayor Fruen and Council Members,

I am writing in regard to the upcoming July 9 Council meeting, Agenda Item #3, Adopt Resolution No. 24-070, adopting the Cupertino Vision Zero Action Plan. I strongly support the adoption of the July 2024 Draft Cupertino Vision Zero Action Plan. The adoption of this plan is an important step towards reducing and eventually eliminating traffic-related deaths and serious injuries in Cupertino. With adoption of this plan, Cupertino will join 50+ other cities in the United States that since 2014 have adopted plans to eliminate traffic related deaths including pedestrian and cyclist. Between 2012 and 2021, Cupertino has experienced 9 traffic deaths, including 4 pedestrian and 4 cyclist, and 74 serious life changing injuries, including 20 pedestrians and 23 cyclists.

As stated in the TJKM draft plan “Vision Zero is a heartfelt belief that no one should be killed or seriously injured while traveling along, across, or around our streets and roadways.”

This plan represents substantial general public input and feedback during two community meetings (October 4, 2023 and January 23, 2024) and two Bike Pedestrian Committee meetings (March 2024 and June 2024 meetings). Following presentation of the first draft plan by TJKM at the March 2024 BPC meeting, the City Staff requested written comments from the BPC and public on the plan. Written responses to the comments were provided by Staff prior to the June 2024 BPC meeting. Public and BPC input was incorporated into the final draft plan. The City Staff should be commended for their overall responsiveness and hard work on this plan.

The 100+ page plan is comprehensive and dynamic, allowing for annual evaluations and continuous improvement through formation of a Vision Zero Task force. The Task Force will present to the Council on a regular basis, reporting on the progress of achieving zero fatalities and serious injuries in Cupertino. This plan was approved by the BPC with a 4-0 vote during the June 2024 meeting.

Please approve Agenda Item 3.

Thank you for your consideration.

Joel Wolf
Vice-Chair
Bike-Ped Commission

Joel Wolf
Bicycle and Pedestrian Commissioner
[email protected]

From: Jian He
To: City Council; City Clerk
Subject: Vote Yes to make Vision Zero happen
Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 8:36:23 PM
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 Honorable Mayor Mohan and City Council Members:

This is Jian He, a Cupertino Resident. You probably just read my email to support the Lawson Bikeway a few minutes ago. This email is to support the Vision Zero Action Plan, a comprehensive and long-term plan to improve the road safety for the entire Cupertino community, including walking, biking, driving and all transportation means.

It's so impressive to read all the updates on the city's website with detailed timeline and community outreach efforts. https://www.cupertino.org/our-city/departments/public- works/transportation-mobility/vision-zero-action-plan
Thanks so much to the city staff, county staff, and all community members who helped develop the plan with localized data based on real traffic situations.

Another informative article published in March by Walk Bike Cupertino is also very helpful to understand why we need it and how we can make it happen. Now I can see the plan has been greatly improved since then. https://walkbikecupertino.org/2024/03/vision-zero-is-coming-to- cupertino-but-plan-needs-more-work-first/
Best wishes to you all to have a productive meeting and make a great milestone for this impactful project tomorrow. May the presentations and discussions will help all who care about our city to support this thoughtful action plan.
--
Blessings,
Jian
"...all things work together for good..." --- Romans 8:28 From: louise saadati
To: City Clerk; City Council
Subject: Vision Zero Cupertino City Council
Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 4:40:01 PM
Attachments: Vision Zero Cupertino City Council.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.

ThankyoutotheCupertinostaff for puttingtogether averydetailedandthoroughdocument intheVisionZeroPlan. TheTransportationstaff hasbeenespeciallycommendableinputtingtogether thisVisionZeroPlan.

TheBPCandCitystaff workedinacomprehensiveandcollaborativemanner toincorporatesignificant resident input inthisplan. Thefinal draft hasbeenextensivelyreviewedandfeedbackhasbeenincorporated.

Theimplementationwill followActiveTransportationPlan.

Sincerely,LouiseSaadati
CC 07-09-2024

Lawson Middle School
Bikeway Project

Written Communications
From: Saileel Vijaykar
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Vote Yes to build the Lawson Bikeway
Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 2:46:26 PM
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 Honorable Mayor Mohan and City Council Members:

I am a Cupertino resident who cares about the safety of our children. I urge you to vote yes to install the protected bikeway around Lawson Middle School. These lanes will make it safer for students to walk and bike to school and make it less stressful for parents driving to drop off or pick up their students.

Many parents fear for the safety of their students and so they drive their kids to school. Adding these protected bike lanes will help parents feel more comfortable allowing their children to get to school actively by walking and biking.

Studies have shown that children who walk or bike to school do better academically and have better social skills. It will also make it safer for parents driving their kids to school so they don’t have to worry about a collision with a student cycling to school.

This protected bikeway is not going to take any money out of our tight budget. It is already fully funded by Apple grant money, and will cost the city nothing to build. With our current budget crisis, it is wonderful that we can make these positive infrastructure improvements without affecting our budget.

The city has done a considerable amount of work developing this proposed project over the past six years and has conducted three community outreach meetings with parents and local residents. At each of these meetings, 60-90% of attendees voted in favor of this project design over other options.

Some residents are concerned about losing parking along the school side of the street. However, the city’s parking analysis shows that there will still be more than enough parking for residents and teachers after the lanes are installed, plus there are options for additional parking when there is a heavy demand such as for school events.

Parking is important, but the safety of our students should take priority.

Thank you for considering my input on this issue.

Thanks,
Saileel
From: meena V
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Vote Yes to build the Lawson Bikeway
Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 2:44:42 PM
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 Honorable Mayor Mohan and City Council Members:

Parking is important, but the safety of our students should take priority.

Thank you for considering my input on this issue.

Meena
From: b jung
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Build the Lawson Bikeway for safety and riding encouragement Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 10:13:30 AM
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 Mayor Mohan, Vice Mayor Fruen, and City Councilmembers:

I ask that you approve the plan recommended by city staff to install protected bike lanes at Lawson Middle School.

Actually, I beg you to approve it as my grandkids already bike to Lawson and it’s downright scary the stories they tell me of the near misses between bikes and cars! Drivers in the morning rush are so distracted, our bikers need every protection!
It’s clear from the increased numbers of students who are using the bike lanes on McClellan that protected bike lanes encourage younger and less experienced cyclists to bike. Adding them wherever we can is beneficial to our city to make it a safer place for everyone and encourage cycling instead of driving.

This plan is even better than typical protected lane plans in that it will cost our city nothing. The low cost of $120,000 is covered completely by a grant from Apple. Increasing safety for our residents and not having to pay for it is a win-win.

During the community outreach meetings, up to 90% of people voted the protected bike lanes as their top choice to fix the safety issues at this school. The Bike Ped Commission agreed, and also supported it with a 4-0 vote. There are likely a few neighbors that may complain about the reduced parking, but the city parking analysis shows that there is more than enough parking available for both neighbors and teachers even with this change. When comparing the safety improvement for the community to more parking, it’s clear that we should tip the balance toward making our children safe.

Voting yes for these bike lanes is a great way to show that you care about the safety of our residents, and especially about our children.

Thank you for considering my input today.

Respectfully,
Bonnie Jung
510.552.2728
Sent from my iPhone
From: Joel Wolf
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Lawson Bikeway--Agenda Item 4
Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 10:02:31 AM
Dear Mayor Mohan, Vice-Mayor Fruen and Council Members,

I am writing in regard to the upcoming July 9 Council meeting, Agenda Item #4, Implementation of an on‑street two-way Class IV bikeway on Vista Drive and Forest Avenue (Alternative 3) along the Lawson Middle School frontage. It is clear to me that bicycle safety improvements are required at Lawson School. I personally visited the Lawson School site around 8:15AM on a school day in May 2023, just prior to the Hexagon Consultants presentation to the Cupertino Bicycle Pedestrian Commission on May 17, 2023. During a 20-minute period, I observed what could only be described as a dangerous mix of vehicle traffic (parents dropping off their children) and student cyclists, with a number of near misses that fortunately did not result in any accidents on that morning. I strongly believe we need to place the highest priority on the safety of our children. There are many benefits to encouraging students to cycle to school including reduction of auto traffic congestion, reduction of greenhouse gases and notable health benefits (mental and physical). Lawson student biking grew from 3% in 2016 to 17% in 2022. This trend should be encouraged through infrastructure improvements.

I support the Alternative 3 bicycle infrastructure project presented by Hexagon Consultants, and recommended for approval by City Staff. Alternative 3, with an estimated cost of $115,000, is by far the most cost effective of the two safety solutions presented by Hexagon Consultants to the BPC. It is also fully funded through the generous Apple donations, requiring no General Fund money. The BPC voted to recommend this option (4-0, with Commissioner Ganga abstaining). This solution is also preferred by the community. While this solution requires the removal of 50 on-street parking spaces along the west side of Vista Drive, there are approximately 500 on-street parking spaces within a five-minute walk from the school. Also, CUSD is open to allowing use of their parking lot during after-school or weekend events. I note that the draft Vision Zero plan prioritizes multimodal safety over on-street parking.

By contrast, Alternative 2 consists of a multi-use trail that would cost an estimated $1,150,000 due to substantial infrastructure modifications required (including movement of street curb and utilities and substantial tree removal). Given the budgetary problems facing Cupertino it is likely this solution would not be built in the near future as it would require substantial money from the General Fund.

Please approve Agenda Item 4, Alternative 3.

Thank you for your consideration.

Joel Wolf
Vice-Chair
Bike-Ped Commission

Joel Wolf
Bicycle and Pedestrian Commissioner
[email protected]

From: Lucinda Wong
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Vote yes to build the Lawson Bikeway
Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 8:26:00 AM
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.

Good Morning Respected Mayor Mohan and Council Members, My name is Lucinda Trice and I am a life long resident of Cupertino, parent, and teacher in CUSD.

My son will start 6th grade this fall at Lawson. We live by the library and my son will be biking to Lawson as I cannot drop him off because I have to be on my campus to teach before his classes start. Based on where we live, his options are to bike down Blaney to Merritt to Vista or to take Torre/Vista to Forest to Vista to get to the bike cages at Lawson. I am apprehensive about this despite the fact that my son is a competent cyclist. I have taught for over 25 years and am well aware of the driving behaviors around schools. As you may recall, it took several significant accidents (and deaths) before the protected bike lane was added to the route to Monta Vista. We have the chance to have a protected bike path by Lawson paid entirely by a grant, with no cost to the city. I realize some residents feel they would be impacted by the loss of parking spaces in front of Lawson, but the loss of a few parking spaces is worth knowing our children will be safer biking and walking to school. With a safe biking option, hopefully more families would be open to biking and walking, which would in turn lessen traffic around the school. That is a win for the the neighbors. I urge you to vote in favor of this proposal at the coming council meeting.

Respectfully,
Lucinda Trice
Please excuse any typos.

From: Gayathri Lokesh
To: City Council
Subject: SUBJECT: Support for the Lawson Bikeway Project Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 7:21:22 AM
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 Respected Mayor Mohan and City Council Members:

I am a parent of a Vritansh V Lawson student. I ask that you vote yes to add the protected bike lanes at Lawson Middle School. This will benefit all students at Lawson whether they walk, bike, or are driven to school.Students who walk will no longer have to share the sidewalk with students cycling to class, reducing conflicts between cyclists and walkers.

Students who bike will use a dedicated and protected bike lane to get to campus safely.

Parents who drive their students to school will not have to worry about potential collisions with students cycling to campus, reducing conflicts between cyclists and cars.

Many parents drive their kids to school instead of allowing them to bike because they are concerned for their safety. Adding these lanes at Lawson may encourage more parents to allow their kids to walk and bike to school, which helps kids do better academically. Studies have shown that children who walk or bike to school do better academically and have better social skills.

Having fewer cars traveling to Lawson is beneficial for all residents. It can help reduce greenhouse emissions, something that affects us all. A recent study shows that if a student bikes to school for a semester, it saves the equivalent CO2 of 47 trees. It can also help ease traffic jams at pickup and dropoff, which is an issue for everyone because of car emissions and just plain frustration. It’s important to note that this project doesn’t cost the city any money, as the cost is covered by an Apple grant. It’s a positive change for Cupertino that won’t affect our budget.

Some nearby neighbors are concerned about reduced parking. The city staff have done parking studies which show that there is more than enough parking for residents and the teachers at Lawson after the lanes go in. There’s even a plan for what to do during special events when parking demand is higher. Adding these lanes will be a huge positive for our community, especially our children. Ensuring our students have a safe route to school that encourages is a priority that we all should put before parking needs. I urge you to say yes.

Thank you for considering my letter today.

Respectfully,
Gayathri
From: Bao Ngo
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Support for the Lawson Bikeway Project
Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 5:18:27 AM
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 Respected Mayor Mohan and City Council Members:

I am a parent of a an incoming Lawson student. My wife has taught at CUSD for over 20 years at the elementary schools. I ask that you vote yes to add the protected bike lanes at Lawson Middle School. This will benefit all students at Lawson whether they walk, bike, or are driven to school.

The Lawson Bikeway Project is important to decrease the already highly congested traffic in residential streets during school start and dismissal times. A healthy and environmentally sound solution is this Bikeway Project. There is a great need for this infrastructure which would increase safety for bicyclist, but also pedestrians.

Please approve this project and make Cupertino a bike-friendly and environmentally friendly city.

Sincerely,
Bao Ngo
Cupertino resident and Lawson Middle School parent
From: Nathan Dunn
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: A parent asks that you build the Lawson Bikeway Date: Sunday, July 7, 2024 11:37:54 PM
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 Respected Mayor Mohan and City Council Members,
I am the parent of current and future Lawson students. I ask that you vote to add the protected bike lanes at Lawson Middle School.

This will benefit all students at Lawson, whether they walk, bike, or are driven to school. --Students who walk will no longer have to share the sidewalk with students cycling to class, reducing conflicts between cyclists and walkers.
--Students who bike will use a dedicated and protected bike lane to get to campus safely --Parents who drive their students to school will not have to worry about potential collisions with students cycling to campus, reducing conflicts between cyclists and cars.

Many parents drive their kids to school instead of allowing them to bike because they are concerned for their safety.

Adding these lanes at Lawson may encourage more parents to allow their kids to walk and bike to school, which helps kids do better academically. Studies have shown that children who walk or bike to school do better academically and have better social skills.

It’s important to note that this project doesn’t cost the city any money, as the cost is covered by an Apple grant. It’s a positive change for Cupertino that won’t affect our budget.

Adding these lanes will be a huge positive for our community, especially our children. I urge you to say yes. Thank you for considering my letter today.

Please do not wait until a tragic accident occurs to take action (think of the bike lanes on McClellan Road towards Monta Vista High School)
Thank you,
Nathan Dunn
Sent from my iPhone
From: Michelle Dunn
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: A parent asks that you build the Lawson Bikeway Date: Sunday, July 7, 2024 11:34:43 PM
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 Respected Mayor Mohan and City Council Members,
I am the parent of a current/future Lawson student. I ask that you vote to add the protected bike lanes at Lawson Middle School.

Many parents drive their kids to school instead of allowing them to bike because they are concerned for their safety.

It’s important to note that this project doesn’t cost the city any money, as the cost is covered by an Apple grant. It’s a positive change for Cupertino that won’t affect our budget.

Adding these lanes will be a huge positive for our community, especially our children. I urge you to say yes. Thank you for considering my letter today.

Cheers,
Michelle Dunn
Sent from my iPhone
Cheers,
Michelle
Sent from my iPhone
From: Omkar Mate
To: City Council
Subject: Support for the Lawson Bikeway Project
Date: Sunday, July 7, 2024 11:11:45 PM
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 Respected Mayor Mohan and City Council Members:

I am a parent of an incoming Lawson student. I ask that you vote yes to add the protected bike lanes at Lawson Middle School. This will benefit all students at Lawson whether they walk, bike, or are driven to school.Students who walk will no longer have to share the sidewalk with students cycling to class, reducing conflicts between cyclists and walkers. Students who bike will use a dedicated and protected bike lane to get to campus safely.

Parents who drive their students to school will not have to worry about potential collisions with students cycling to campus, reducing conflicts between cyclists and cars.

Respectfully,
Omkar Mate
From: Justin Imai
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Vote yes to build the Lawson Bikeway
Date: Sunday, July 7, 2024 7:54:49 PM
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.

Please vote in favor of adding separated bike infrastructure in front of Lawson Middle. The area around a school, and our entire neighborhoods, should be a place for kids to have no worries, but instead they’re faced with having to weave in and out of tall, parked cars, or be in the road with drivers who are hopefully paying attention. We need to make cycling a more viable form of transportation for everyone, and that starts with the children of the area. Along with parents of school children, other adults are apprehensive of cycling as a form of transportation because of the mentioned dangers, which necessitates the need for a car, which then leads to the over allotting of space for the parking of personal vehicles. So, not only is there an incredible amount of space being used for parking in our residential areas, which sits empty for the vast majority of the day, if nearly all the people coming to Lawson for whatever occasion feel completely comfortable cycling there, then the need for car parking is almost entirely gone. It may sound like a catastrophic change for those in favor of keeping our streets the same dangerous places for anyone outside of a car, but we need to make our neighborhoods truly safer places, and that starts with getting rid of the necessity of cars within them.

Sent from Mail
for Windows

From: Steffan Thomas
To: City Council; City Clerk
Subject: Vote yes to build the Lawson Bikeway
Date: Sunday, July 7, 2024 7:13:31 PM
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.

As a Cupertino voter, and parent of a future Lawson student, I support building the protected bikeway near Lawson school. As an accountant, I very much am in favor of using the grant from Apple.

Bikes should not share lanes with either cars or pedestrians. The safer option is also the cheaper option.

Thank you,
Steffan Thomas
From: Sharlene Liu
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Vote yes to build the Lawson protected bike lanes Date: Sunday, July 7, 2024 4:33:08 PM
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 Mayor Mohan, Vice-Mayor Fruen, and City Council Members, I would like to ask you to approve the Lawson protected bike lanes. Protecting the many students who bike to Lawson MS is a high priority. By establishing a habit of going to school car-free, students will more likely continue this good habit into adulthood, for the benefit of their own health, clean air, and safe transportation. Here are some specific reasons why supporting Lawson protected bike lanes makes a lot of sense:

The safety of the children in our community should be a top priority. There are significant safety issues for students biking to Lawson today that were identified six years ago and are still ongoing today. We need to act before a serious accident occurs.

This on-street bikeway is free to the city due to a grant from Apple and low cost ($115K) in general. It will not affect our constrained city budget in any way.

Significant public outreach has occurred. The consultant led several public meetings in person and on Zoom to discuss alternatives, plus they were discussed at a public Bicycle Pedestrian Commission meeting.

The majority of community members are in favor of the on-street bikeway. In meetings, 60-90% of participants preferred the on-street bikeway. The BPC overwhelmingly supported the on-street bikeway with a 4-0 vote.

This is the best option to fix the safety issues. It is the most cost-effective by far. It preserves the mature trees on campus and the school landscaping, and it does not require extensive construction work.

Neighbors who have opposed the lanes do not like the loss of parking. The official parking study shows there is more than adequate parking for both teachers and the local residents after this change. No parking will be removed in front of homes.

Our approved city plans including the General Plan and Climate Action Plan all have goals to increase and encourage more alternative transportation. Making it safer to walk and bike makes it more attractive to residents and will encourage more active transportation.

This is a small change, but sends a signal to residents that you care about the safety of our children, that the approved city plans are a ‘roadmap’ you are using, and that you wish for a greener future.

I ask that you approve the bikeway today. Thank you.

Sharlene Liu
Community Member
From: Jd Marfatia
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Build the Lawson Bikeway for safety and riding encouragement Date: Sunday, July 7, 2024 2:10:45 PM
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 Mayor Mohan, Vice Mayor Fruen, and City Councilmembers:

I ask that you approve the plan recommended by city staff to install protected bike lanes at Lawson Middle School.

It’s clear from the increased numbers of students who are using the bike lanes on McClellan that protected bike lanes encourage younger and less experienced cyclists to bike. Adding them wherever we can is beneficial to our city to make it a safer place for everyone and encourage cycling instead of driving.

This plan is even better than typical protected lane plans in that it will cost our city nothing.

The low cost of $120,000 is covered completely by a grant from Apple. Increasing safety for our residents and not having to pay for it is a win-win.

Voting yes for these bike lanes is a great way to show that you care about the safety of our residents, and especially about our children.

Thank you for considering my input today.
/Jaydeep
From: Y Thorstenson
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Build the Lawson Bikeway for safety and riding encouragement Date: Sunday, July 7, 2024 2:02:50 PM
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 Mayor Mohan, Vice Mayor Fruen, and City Councilmembers:

I ask that you approve the plan recommended by city staff to install protected bike lanes at Lawson Middle School.

This plan is even better than typical protected lane plans in that it will cost our city nothing.

The low cost of $120,000 is covered completely by a grant from Apple. Increasing safety for our residents and not having to pay for it is a win-win.

During the community outreach meetings, up to 90% of people voted the protected bike lanes as their top choice to fix the safety issues at this school. The Bike Ped Commission agreed, and also supported it with a 4-0 vote. There are likely a few neighbors that may complain about the reduced parking, but the city parking analysis shows that there is more than enough parking available for both neighbors and teachers even with this change. At this point no reasonable person can argue that parking should be prioritized over children’s safety.

Voting yes for these bike lanes is a great way to show that you care about the safety of our residents, and especially about our children.

Thank you for considering my input today.

Yvonne Thorstenson
From: Debbie Timmers
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Vote Yes to build the Lawson Bikeway
Date: Sunday, July 7, 2024 1:08:09 PM
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 Honorable Mayor Mohan and City Council Members:

I am a Cupertino resident and a grandma of Cupertino students. In addition I care about the safety of all of our precious children in Cupertino. I urge you to vote yes to install the protected bikeway around Lawson Middle School. These lanes will make it safer for students to walk and bike to school and make it less stressful for parents driving to drop off or pick up their students.

This protected bikeway is funded by a grant from Apple and won't take any money out of our tight budget. It will cost the city nothing to build.

I understand that some residents may concerned about losing parking along the school side of the street. However, the city’s parking analysis shows that there will still be more than enough parking for residents and teachers after the lanes are installed, plus there are options for additional parking when there is a heavy demand such as for school events. Parking is important, but the safety of our students should take priority! Thank you for your work and for considering my input on this issue.

Debra Timmers
From: Marilyn Sherry
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Vote yes to build the Lawson Bikeway
Date: Sunday, July 7, 2024 12:46:19 PM
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.

As a citizen of Cupertino who lives in the Lawson school district, I am writing to support the creation of the Lawson Bikeway, on-street protected bike lanes on Vista to protect the children who bike and walk to Lawson Middle School. I am opposed to the alternative of a mixed bike/pedestrian path.

In my experience with both options, not only are protected street lanes safer for bikers, but they are very much safer for pedestrians than a shared bike/pedestrian multi-use sidewalk. I, myself, have been the victim and witness of bicycle/pedestrian accidents on such shared paths.

I also understand that the Lawson Bikeway option will be completely covered by a grant from Apple, saving the city of Cupertino as much as $1 million dollars it does not have at this time. Any minor inconvenience in regards to parking is well worth the increase in pedestrian safety and ability for the city to apply funds in a more productive manner.

Regards,
Marilyn Sherry
From: Gauri Chawla
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: For Public Comment (7/9): Item #4 Building the Lawson Bikeway For Our Students Date: Sunday, July 7, 2024 12:03:20 PM
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 Mayor Mohan, Vice-Mayor Fruen, and City Council Members, I went to Lawson Middle School, and am now a rising college student. I ask you today to say yes to building the Lawson protected bikeway. Students shouldn’t have to face the danger of being hurt on their school commute and we should be able to walk and bike safely to school.

Every day, students bike on Vista and Forest with cars or bike on the sidewalk with walking students, leading to many near-misses and minor collisions. It has been six years since this project began. It’s time for the next generation of students to not have to face these dangers.

These new on-street bike lanes will not cost our city anything. They are already funded through an Apple grant. The other option is 10 times more expensive, we don’t have the money in our budget to build it, will require removing some great shade trees, and still won’t solve the problem fully.

Students deserve to be safe on their way to school. This should be a top priority over extra parking. It should be easy to weigh these two things. I hope that you agree, and vote to build this bikeway.

Thank you for your consideration,
Gauri Chawla
From: sonali kale
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Request to approve and build the Lawson Bikeway Date: Sunday, July 7, 2024 10:49:55 AM
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 Respected Mayor and City Council Members,
I am parent of two former Lawson students. I urge you vote to add the protected bike lanes at Lawson Middle School.

It’s important to note that this project doesn’t cost the city any money, as the cost is covered by an Apple grant. It’s a positive change for Cupertino that won’t affect our budget.

Adding these lanes will be a huge positive for our community, especially our children. I urge you to say yes. Thank you for considering my letter today.

Sonali Kale
From: J Shearin
To: City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk Subject: Approve the Lawson Bikeway project | City Council agenda item #4 | July 9, 2024 Date: Saturday, July 6, 2024 2:24:48 PM
Attachments: PastedGraphic-1.png
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 Honorable Mayor Mohan, City Councilmembers, and City Manager Wu, I write to you today to urge you to vote yes for the Lawson Bikeway as recommended by the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission, and by the majority of residents per the polls in the community outreach meetings. I ask this as a resident of Cupertino (and I am writing today only as a resident) that cares about the welfare of all of the children in our community.

Why the Lawson protected bike lanes should be approved
We all know that biking or walking to school leads to more sustainable communities. Studies show that it improves concentration for students leading to better school outcomes. It’s also true that the top reason that parents do not allow their children to bike or walk to school is safety. This bikeway—with protected lanes at the highest traffic conflict point for commuting students—addresses many safety concerns of parents which can then result in more students walking or biking to school. When the same design of bikeway was installed at Greene Middle School in Palo Alto, the school saw the number of students biking to school more than double.

Lawson would likely also see an increase.

Safety is reason that this bikeway is needed: students currently biking on Vista and Forest must mix with cars and make unsafe left turns across traffic to enter the school bike corral.

Students have already been hit, leading some of them to bike on the sidewalk instead, conflicting with walking students.

Many residents have written to you already with letters about how this bikeway is the best solution to these safety issues. They’ve talked about how it will be completely paid for by an Apple Walk Audit grant, how there has been significant public outreach by the city staff and the paid consultants, and how there is still adequate parking for residents and for Lawson teachers even after the spaces on the school side of Vista and Forest are removed. They’ve talked about how the bikeway will allow pedestrians and cyclists to each have their own path so there are no conflicts between them. This bikeway can also help residents other than just Lawson students: traffic is measurably higher on all streets while school is in session. Every student that walks or bikes to school is one fewer car on the road, decreasing our traffic load.

These are just some of the many reasons it is the right solution for the Lawson safety issues.

Other rejected ideas
It’s clear that the two-way separated bikeway is the best option and should be approved, but I’d like to also discuss in this email two other ideas that were considered but ultimately rejected, and one idea that is still being considered in the many-year process to get to this vote.

One idea that has been considered is to replace the current Vista Avenue bike corral with a new one located at the southern edge of the campus, south of the running track (see Fig. 1 below). Theoretically, students could then avoid car conflicts by getting onto campus as quickly as possible. Unfortunately, any new southern entrance requires students to either still use Forest and Vista (making a left turn across lanes), or mix with trucks and busses in the south CUSD parking lot. This means safety is not improved. The bike corral would be far from the main buildings of campus, encouraging thefts as it is not visible from them. CUSD staff is not in favor of this option, as school personnel are not available to lock/unlock the corral at this location which is far from the regular building workspaces, students are not allowed to use the south CUSD parking lot as a traffic path, and having students cross the field area can cause conflicts with zero-period classes. For all these reasons, this idea was considered not an option.

Another idea is to allow students to bike onto campus at a new southern entrance and bike on the school track to reach the bike corral on Vista (see Fig 2 below.). This also doesn’t improve safety as students must still cross traffic on Vista or use the south CUSD parking lot. Unlike moving the corral, bike thefts are not likely to increase, and locking/unlocking the corral is not an issue. However, it presents a new issue in that students will now be biking on the school track which is only designed for foot traffic and will not hold up to the higher wear of bike wheels. Allowing student to ride on the track can also disrupt zero-period PE classes. CUSD is not in favor of this idea, and i is not recommended for these reasons.

Other feasible option: multi-use sidewalk
The consultants also determined that another plan was possible—a multi-use sidewalk where students walking and biking would share a 10’ wide sidewalk. This would allow bikes to ride off street and not require any parking to be eliminated. Unfortunately, it would cost 10 times as much as the bikeway, at $1.3 million, the majority of which would need to come from the city’s General Fund. It also requires the loss of many mature trees and school landscaping, and requires movement of CUSD utilities and landscape piping. It also does not solve the issue of conflicts between walking and biking students that are seen right now on the sidewalks next to Lawson. Because of the city’s budget crisis, it’s likely a multi-use path would never be affordable to build. The negatives of this option far outweigh the positives.

The bikeway is the best choice
After this many-year process, with extensive public outreach and a $50K consultant to investigate alternatives, it can be safely said that this issue has been exhaustively studied and discussed. The cost/benefit for a protected bikeway is excellent. Separated bike lanes have been shown to significantly lower accident rates where they have been installed. Residents in community meetings have greatly preferred the bikeway option (60–90% chose the bikeway as their preferred option across many different outreach meetings). Apple has said that the grant can be used for this project, and there is no better project in the works. Now is the time to approve it.

I ask that you approve the project this Tuesday at the Council meeting for the benefit of our community and especially its children. Thank you for considering my input, and for your work on behalf of Cupertino.

Best Wishes,
Jennifer Shearin
-----------------------------------
This message is from my personal email account. I am only writing as myself, not as a representative or spokesperson for any other organization.

From: Jennifer Griffin
To: City Clerk
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Item Number 4 Cupertino City Council Meeting (7/9/24) - Bollinger Road Date: Friday, July 5, 2024 9:48:51 AM
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.

FYI. Please include the following comments as public input for Item Number 4 in the City Council Agenda for the 7/9/24 City Council Meeting on Vision Zero and Bollinger Road. Thank you.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Item Number 4 Cupertino City Council Meeting (7/9/24) - Bollinger Road From: Jennifer Griffin <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, July 5, 2024, 9:45 AM
To: [email protected],[email protected]
CC: [email protected]
Dear City Council:

Please make sure that Item Number 4 in the Cupertino City Council Agenda for Vision Zero does not involve changing Bollinger Road from Sunnyvale-Saratoga Road to Lawrence Expressway from two lanes down to one lane in each direction. There is too much traffic on The road for one lane traffic and it would lead to very heavy backups.

There would also not be enough room for emergency vehicles to get through.

The discussion of what happens in Bollinger Road is a joint process between all parties Involved which includes the people of Cupertino, San Jose (West San Jose especially) And Bike and Ped groups from the areas etc. Cupertino should not dominate the discussion Etc., Especially if there are grants .

We are very much against the idea of reducing Bollinger Road to one lane in each direction Because of traffic load and emergency vehicle access. My mother-in-law and family members who
Live on the West San Jose side of Bollinger Road by Hyde are very much against the reduction
Of lanes also because of traffic load on Bollinger and the inability of emergency vehicles to Get down the road if there was only one lane in each direction. My mother-in-law and family Members have lived by Bollinger since the 1970s and are very familiar with the traffic conditions on
The roadway.

Please leave Bollinger with the two lanes in each direction. It is the best solution.

Thank you very much.

Sincerely,
Jennifer Griffin
From: Helene Davis
To: City Council; City Clerk
Subject: Writing in Support of the Lawson On-street Protected Bike Lanes at Lawson Middle School Date: Thursday, July 4, 2024 3:54:08 PM
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,
I am writing to voice my support for the new on-street protected bike lanes at Lawson Middle School. I am a concerned community member who whole heartedly believes that infrastructure encouraging walking and cycling contributes to a healthier, more sustainable, and vibrant community. The proposed Lawson bike-way is only one piece of the puzzle that will contribute to our city's Vision Zero goals.

The best option is for pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles to be separated. This is safer for everyone. This is also what CUSD staff prefers.

There has been ample community outreach on this project and the separation is also what the community prefers.

There has been some concern about loss of parking (this always seems to be a knee jerk reaction anytime bike lanes are discussed) but a city staff parking study determined that there will still be plenty of parking for residents, parents, and other visitors to the school.

The cost is reasonable - an Apple grant is earmarked for this project and will cover the entire amount.

Thank you for your consideration of my email.

Regards,
Helene Davis
Long time Cupertino resident
Advocate for walking and biking in our community
From: Philip Nguyen
To: City Council
Cc: Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk
Subject: Lawson Bikeway Support
Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 3:53:30 PM
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 Honorable Mayor Sheila Mohan, Vice-Mayor JR Fruen, Councilmembers and staff,
My name is Philip, an alumni of Monta Vista High School and longtime community member, and the purpose of this message is to express my deep support for safe bike routes and infrastructure. Being a fresh graduate from MV, I was still closeby when I heard the news of a student getting killed in an automobile accident while biking to school. The community expressed their heartbreak by quickly mobilizing and demanding for cement dividers creating a separated and safer path for bikers.

The community historically supports safe biking infrastructure as many people utilize this separated bike lane on McClellan to get to school but also for leisure. We need this type of safe bike infrastructure everywhere in the city and especially near schools.

Safe bike routes to school not only reduces car usage and traffic to school, but also reduces air pollution and emissions. Parents will see the biking infrastructure and know that their child has a reliable and safe method of active transport to get to class. This will only create a healthier, stronger community.

City parking studies also show that even with the reduction in adjacent parking, the supply of parking spots will still be adequate for neighbors and teachers.

Please do the right thing and support the Lawson Bikeway.

Many thanks,
Philip
From: Henry W
To: City Council; City Clerk
Subject: Support for the Vision Zero Plan and Lawson Bike Path Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 2:37:32 PM
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 Mayor Mohan, Vice Mayor Fruen, and Councilmembers Wei, Moore, and Chao:

I am writing today as a resident of Cupertino and a 4-year student of Cupertino High School.

Sincerely,
Henry Widjaja
From: Juliet Shearin
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Support for Lawson Bikeway - Agenda Item 4
Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 1:54:36 PM
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 Mayor Mohan, Vice-Mayor Fruen, and City Council Members, I am Juliet Shearin, a former Lawson Middle School student and a current biker for both my commute to work and for recreation. I ask you to SUPPORT the Lawson protected bikeway.

It is unconscionable that the safety issues I faced as a middle school student are still plaguing our students today.

When I was a student, I would carpool to school despite living within biking distance because of the safety issues. As a student, I would have certainly used this bikeway, and felt much safer doing so. Car traffic is so heavy during school commuting hours that biking in the street poses serious dangers. Biking on the sidewalk is a terrible solution that causes many near-misses with pedestrians.

I want students to feel safe, comfortable and
empowered to get themselves to school during the crucial transition from elementary school to high school.

There is no financial reason to continue to put our students in danger from getting to school. The bikeway is 100% funded from Apple grants, which is especially crucial with the city's budget crisis. Continuing to pretend the other option is feasible, even though it costs ten times as much, is unreasonable. The Lawson bikeway will make our students as safe as I wish I could have been.

I hope that you will consider not just short-term complaints about construction or parking, but support the long-term health of our city and students by voting YES on the Lawson bikeway. Thank you for considering my experiences and opinion.

Sincerely,
Juliet Shearin
From: Stacy Yao
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk; [email protected]
Subject: Lawson Bikeway Support Letter
Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 1:30:08 PM
Attachments: Lawson Bikeway Support Letter.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.

Dear Mayor Mohan and Councilmembers,
Please find attached our CUSD letter of support for the Lawson Bikeway agenda item for tonight.

Stacy Yao
Superintendent
Cupertino Union School District
408.252.3000

June
2024
Dear
Mayor
Mohan
and
Councilmembers,
I
am
writing
this
letter
in
support
of
a
yes
vote
for
the
proposed
Lawson
Middle
School
on-street
Bikeway
at
the
upcoming
City
Council
meeting
on
Tuesday,
July

9. This
new
bikeway
will
significantly
improve
the
safety
and
accessibility
to
Lawson
Middle
School
for
students
biking
and
walking
to
school.

This
solution
is
the
outcome
of
multi-year
collaborative
work
by
our
CUSD
staff,
City
Staff,
Lawson
school
staff,
and
the
parent
community,
and
solves
many
issues
at
all
points
of
entry
to
the
school.

This
bikeway
option
provides
the
necessary
separation
for
cyclists
from
both
motor
vehicles
and
pedestrians.

CUSD
understands
there
will
be
a
loss
of
street
parking
and
is
able
to
mitigate
the
loss
through
available
parking
lot
spaces.

Currently,
kids
walking
and
biking
to
school
face
many
hazards
and
unsafe
situations.

Each
day,
heavy
car
traffic
on
Vista
and
Lazaneo
cause
biking
students
to
mix
with
cars
and
make
unsafe
left
turns
across
traffic.

With
the
high
volumes,
frustrated
parents
also
make
unwise
decisions--such
as
to
drive
recklessly
or
not
stop
fully
at
stop
signs--which
furthers
the
danger
to
the
students.

Many
biking
students
have
resorted
to
biking
on
the
sidewalk,
which
is
difficult
for
both
pedestrians
and
cyclists;
the
sidewalk
is
too
narrow
and
there
is
too
much
of
both
pedestrian
and
cycling
traffic
to
allow
safe
sharing.

Thank
you
for
your
consideration
on
this
issue.

The
safety
of
our
children
is
of
utmost
importance
to
our
community.

Sincerely,
StaYa
Stacy
Yao
Superintendent

EQUALOPPORTUNITYEMPLOYER

TitleDatePage2
Cupertino
Union
School
District
From: Carols Gmail
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject: Support both Vision Zero Plan AND Bike lanes at Lawson Middle School Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 12:20:27 PM
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 Mayor Mohan, Vice Mayor Fruen and Council-members, I am writing today in support of both the Vision Zero Action Plan and the Class IV bike lanes at Lawson Middle School.

The roads belong to all of us. We must share their use responsibly. Please support both of these items on your agenda tonight.

Sincerely,
Carol Stanek
Speaking for myself
From: Sylvia Leong
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Support for the Lawson protected on-street bike lane Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 11:03:24 AM
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 Cupertino City Councilmembers,
I am writing in regards to the Lawson bikeway agenda item for the July 9, 2024 council meeting. As you consider the two options, I would like to advocate for the option that creates the safest biking environment for students who are biking to and from school.

As a trustee for the Cupertino Union School District, student safety is of utmost importance, both on-campus and off-campus. Having a protected on-street bike lane that wraps around Lawson Middle School ensures that students biking to and from school won't have to navigate around traffic, parked cars, or other obstacles that could endanger them.

Personally, this topic of bike safety for students is near to my heart. Two years ago, my good friend’s daughter was hit by a car while biking to school. She ended up with a concussion that kept her at home for almost two weeks and headaches that still come even today. Despite this, we consider her lucky that it wasn't worse. A few years before that, another friend's son wasn't so lucky, when he was biking to school and struck and killed by a truck on McClellan Rd. It was devastating to see a family we had known for years, whom we had gone to birthday parties with, and seen our sons grow up together, lose their son in an instant. Our entire school and community mourned together.

What was so powerful though, was seeing the city respond, essentially saying "Never Again," by putting in the McClellan Road Separated Bike Path - a decision that has no doubt saved the lives of so many others since that day. I felt really proud when I heard that Cupertino had been recognized as a city that promotes road safety, when the McClellan Bike Path was honored by Public Works.

A Lawson protected on-street bike lane would be another change that would create a big impact for the children of Cupertino and be consistent with Cupertino's values on bike safety.

For the safety of our students, I urge you to support the protected on-street bike lane so that our students have a dedicated bike path at all times of day.

Thank you for the work you are doing serving the city and our communities. I truly appreciate your leadership.

Best,
Sylvia Leong
Cupertino Union School District, Trustee
(representing myself, title for identification purposes only) From: Purva Marfatia
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Our students need the Lawson Bikeway!
Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 10:54:17 AM
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 Mayor Mohan, Vice-Mayor Fruen, and City Council Members, I'm a Cupertino resident, and I strongly support building the Lawson Bikeway, as a Lawson alum who appreciates the enormous safety benefit and low cost of the project. Many students walk and bike to school, and without the much-needed separation (both biker/pedestrian AND biker/vehicle) that the bikeway provides, the school commute can be crowded and lead to student injuries.

My middle-school transit experience, as someone who biked on Forest and Vista every weekday, was characterized by trying to dodge pedestrians and avoid parked/moving cars -- there have been many near-misses and minor collisions over the years, and the bikeway provides a logical solution to clear up the otherwise clogged-up Vista Dr.

In addition to the simple way they solve an important issue, these new on-street bike lanes will NOT cost our city. They are already funded through an Apple grant, and city staff have confirmed that this is the highest-priority project the grant can cover. The alternative is 10 times more expensive, we don’t have the money in our budget to build it, and we'll have to remove some great shady trees while still not fully solving the problem.

Students deserve to be safe on their way to school. This should be a top priority over extra parking-- it should be easy to weigh these two things, and the costs speak for themselves. I hope that you agree, and vote to build this bikeway.

Thank you for reading this letter, and considering my viewpoint.

From: Connie-Comcast Swim5am
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: July 9 CC Agenda Item 4, Vote Yes on the Lawson Bikeway Project Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 9:38:23 AM
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 Honorable Mayor Mohan, City Councilmembers, and City Manager Wu:
(This is a copy of the email I sent to Council on June 25, 2024). I see now that is on the Agenda for July 9.

Vote Yes on the Lawson Bikeway Project
My family and I have frequently used bikes to get to school or work by riding bikes or walking. I have supported Safe Routes to School for many years.

I’m a Cupertino resident concerned about making the city a greener community. I urge you today to support the protected bike lanes at Lawson Middle School.

Our city's Climate Action Plan, General Plan, Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans all have goals to make alternative transportation to cars more attractive and increase the number of residents using it. These proposed bike lanes at Lawson further the goals found in all those plans by making alternative transportation safer and more appealing for our students and their parents. Conversely, the argument against these lanes which prioritizes keeping all parking— especially in excess of what is required per the city’s parking analysis —is not a goal in any city plan.

This small change will be another step toward making Cupertino a greener community. Every time someone bikes or walks to school, there is one fewer car being driven. That means fewer harmful emissions and greenhouse gasses, less traffic, and an improved quality of life for all residents.

It’s important to note that these lanes won’t cost anything to the city. They are completely paid for by an Apple grant. The city staff have been working with parents, CUSD staff and Safe Routes to School for six years on this issue. It’s time to take their recommendation and those of many community members and build these bike lanes.

Habits are often made at young ages, and biking or walking instead of being driven everywhere is one of them. Let’s make a positive change for the younger members of our community and install these lanes today. Thank you.

Connie Cunningham
Resident 37 years, Housing Commissioner, self only, Audubon member From: Kzj1
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: A parent asks that you build the Lawson Bikeway Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 9:11:35 AM
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 Respected Mayor Mohan and City Council Members, appreciate your consideration of the Lawson Bikeway.

I’ve driven here several times for Cupertino Hoops practice in the evenings and adding this lawson Bikeway will add the students safety tremendously and will help extend the overall bike pathway route. This solution has minimal fiscal impact to the city of cupertino (eg Apple grant) and has limited residential impact (when I’ve driven by at night. Very few cars were parked on the proposed school side of vista. I encourage you and the city city council to approve this Lawson Bikeway.

I am the parent of a current/future Lawson student. I ask that you vote to add the protected bike lanes at Lawson Middle School.

Many parents drive their kids to school instead of allowing them to bike because they are concerned for their safety.

It’s important to note that this project doesn’t cost the city any money, as the cost is covered by an Apple grant. It’s a positive change for Cupertino that won’t affect our budget.

Adding these lanes will be a huge positive for our community, especially our children. I urge you to say yes. Thank you for considering my letter today.

Thanks,
Kevin Jung
510-506-1959
(Resident in the Garden Gate elementary boundary area)
From: Phyllis Vogel
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Vote yes to build the Lawson protected bike lanes Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 8:07:21 AM
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 Mayor Mohan, Vice-Mayor Fruen, and City Council Members, I am a Governing Board Member in the Cupertino Union School District (currently President), and I am writing on behalf of myself. I am asking that you approve the Lawson protected bike lanes. As a long time resident of our school district, and a long time employee and board member in CUSD, I believe that the safety of our children should be a top priority.

Please send a signal to residents that you care about the safety of our children, that the approved city plans are a ‘roadmap’ you are using, and that you wish for a greener future.

I ask that you approve the bikeway. Thank you.

Best,
Phyllis
Phylis Vogel
408-314-0785
[email protected]
Typos courtesy of my iPad
From: Pamela
To: City Council
Subject: Lawson Bikeway
Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 1:02:55 AM
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 CityCouncil,
I'm a parent with a child currently attending Lawson Middle School. I do encourage my child to walk/bike to school but surprisingly he chooses to walk. I do believe that if there's a safer bike route for my child, he will choose to bike instead. Also many times when I drop my child off to school, I do encounter kids needing to cut across the street in the middle of the block which makes me question the safety for our biking kids. Please support the current proposal for a safer Lawson Bikeway.

Thank you,
Pamela
From: Seema Lindskog
To: City Council; City Clerk
Subject: Walk Bike Cupertino supports the Vision Zero Plan and the Lawson On-street Bike Path Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 12:27:18 AM
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.

Respected Mayor Mohan, Vice-Mayor Fruen, and councilmembers, I am writing today as the Chair of Walk Bike Cupertino.

On a personal note, as a former Lawson Safe Routes to School parent, I have seen first-hand the scary gauntlet that we put the cycling children at Lawson through on their daily commute.

Thank you for everything you do for this city.

From: Sabrina Yanagihara
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Build the Lawson Bikeway for our students
Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 11:14:50 PM
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 Mayor Mohan, Vice-Mayor Fruen, and City Council Members, I am a student here in Cupertino who asks you today to say yes to building the Lawson protected bikeway. Students shouldn’t have to face the danger of being hurt on their school commute and we should be able to walk and bike safely to school.

Thank you for reading this letter, and considering what I have to say.

From: Arnav Gokhale
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Vote yes to build the Lawson Bikeway
Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 10:29:42 PM
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.

Hi,
My name is Arnav, and I attended Lawson Middle School for the last three years. I graduated in June and will attend Cupertino High School in the fall.

I would like to request that you support the construction of the on-street protected bike lane on Vista Drive.

I used to bike to school when I attended LMS. Biking on Vista Drive is tricky since we have to either bike on the sidewalk with all the students walking or try to bike along with the cars on the road.

An independent bike lane would be super helpful. We would not need to cross Vista Drive, and it would help us get to the bike rack safely.

Please approve the on-street protected bike lane option - it can be built now and can be built fast.

Please do everything to make biking safer for Lawson students.

Thank you for reading my email. I hope you vote yes to building the bike lane for Lawson students.

Thanks,
Arnav Gokhale
From: Aakash G.

To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Vote yes to build the Lawson Bikeway
Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 10:06:49 PM
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.

Hello City Council Members,
My name is Aakash Gokhale. I attended Lawson Middle School from 2019-2021. I am currently a rising senior at Cupertino High School.

I have been biking to school in Cupertino for the last several years. As you all know, biking to school is a great way to get to school—it allows me to get to/from school independently.

I request that our city make biking safe for everyone. Please approve to build the Lawson- protected bikeway.

The on-street bike lane option is a simple and cost-efficient solution. The Apple grant will cover the cost. It will avoid the removal of any trees. It will provide a separate pathway for everyone: pedestrians, bikers, and cars.

Please vote yes to build this bikeway and make biking safer for Lawson students now.

Thank you for considering my feedback.

Regards,
Aakash Gokhale
From: Jian He
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Vote Yes to build the Lawson Bikeway
Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 8:00:55 PM
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 Honorable Mayor Mohan and City Council Members:

This is Jian He, a Cupertino resident who cares about the safety of our children and the peace of mind of all people on the road, walking, biking or driving. I live in the Monta Vista neighborhood. You may have heard of a recent tragedy that happened in our neighborhood where an 11 yr old girl was killed by a car while walking from the park to her home. How sorrowful for the family! How terrible for this driver to regret for the rest of his life! Many parents fear for the safety of their students and so they drive their kids to school. Adding these protected bike lanes will help parents feel more comfortable allowing their children to get to school actively by walking and biking. Studies have shown that children who walk or bike to school do better academically and have better social skills. It will also make it safer for parents driving their kids to school so they don’t have to worry about a collision with a student cycling to school.

Thank you so much for building the protected bikeway around Monta Vista High and Lincoln Elementary. When my sons were attending schools there, they biked to school almost everyday. It made a big difference with the protected lanes! I heard you are going to make a decision tomorrow about the protected bikeway for Lawson Middle School. What a great opportunity to improve the walk and bike safety for the Lawson neighborhood! Please vote YES!
This protected bikeway is not going to take any money out of our tight budget. It is already fully funded by Apple grant money, and will cost the city nothing to build. With our current budget crisis, it is wonderful that we can make these positive infrastructure improvements without affecting our budget. The city has done a considerable amount of work developing this proposed project over the past six years and has conducted three community outreach meetings with parents and local residents. At each of these meetings, 60-90% of attendees voted in favor of this project design over other options.

Some residents are concerned about losing parking along the school side of the street.

However, the city’s parking analysis shows that there will still be more than enough parking for residents and teachers after the lanes are installed, plus there are options for additional parking when there is a heavy demand such as for school events. Parking is important, but the safety of our students should take priority.

Thank you for your kindness and support to improve the safety on the road! --
Blessings,
Jian
"...all things work together for good..." --- Romans 8:28 From: Sophia Chan
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Please support the Lawson Bikeway
Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 5:59:11 PM
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 Respected Mayor Mohan and City Council Members,
I am a parent alumni of Lawson Middle School and am still actively volunteering there supporting the Lawson Sports Boosters. I ask that you vote to add the protected bike lanes at Lawson Middle School.

I was one of the parents that participated in the SR2S program where we look to improve ways for students to get to school without their parent’s cars since 2018. I am both surprised and saddened that it has taken until now, in 2024, for us to finally bring this idea to vote and make it a reality for the community.

I’m sure you are well aware of the benefits a dedicated bike lane can provide for the community.

However, the 'what ifs’ questions the people have objecting to the bike lanes cannot never be compared to the safety of bikers, especially the safety of children.

What we decide today, can actually safe a life.

Please understand having parking spaces close to where I have to go would be great but would give it up in a heartbeat if it meant increased safety for bikers.

The question we should be asking is:

What if, knowing this area is currently unsafe as we have near misses of students interacting with cars, we take no action?
What if a student is injured knowing we could have mitigated that with a dedicated bike lane? What if a life is lost only then do we realized we shouldn’t have waited? As a parent, I hope we never have to look back and answer these "What ifs." Let’s take action by providing a safe place for our community to bike on.

I urge you to please vote yes. Please be on record that safety, especially for children, will always be your number one priority.

Thank you for your consideration.

Best regards,
Sophia Chan
From: Peggy Griffin
To: David Stillman; City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: 2024-07-09 City Council Meeting Agenda ITEM4 Lawson BikewayQQ Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 4:55:03 PM
Attachments: 2023-03-16 Mtg2 Presentation-Lawson Bikeway.pdf P15of 52 - 2023-03-16 Mtg2 Presentation-Lawson Bikeway.pdf P40of52 - BOLLARDS 2023-03-16 Mtg2 Presentation-Lawson Bikeway-2.pdf P15of 52 - PARKING ANALYSIS-2023-03-16 Mtg2 Presentation-Lawson Bikeway.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.

PLEASE INCLUDE THIS EMAIL AND ALL ATTACHMENTS IN WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE ABOVE MEETING AGENDA ITEM.

Dear Director Stillman and City Council,

Now that you changed the use of state funds for road maintenance to allow it to be spent on the Stevens Creek bikeway, it frees up “other money” to be spent on this project at the cost of the maintenance of our roads! Our roads are visibly deteriorating, especially the heavily used roads.

I have attached the following files:
3-16-2023 Meeting2 Presentation to the public
3-16-2023 Parking Analysis from that presentation
NOTE – They DID NOT COUNT CARS ON THE WEEKEND! They assumed zero except those that are regularly parked over night.
3-16-2023 Bollards picture from the presentation

I have several questions regarding this project:

Type of “vertical separation”…
Q1: What exact type of “vertical separation” will be used? Please provide a picture.

In the meetings with the public they were vertical bollards, NOT CONCRETE! I have attached a picture of what was presented.

Public access to CUSD Parking Lots…
No where in the Staff Report or attachments does it indicate that the public is permitted to park in the CUSD Maintenance Lot at the south end of the Lawson field or in any of the Lawson parking lots.

Q2: Where is there an agreement with CUSD to allow this after 4pm and on weekends and holidays?
Community Meeting #2
Lawson Middle School
Bikeway Feasibility Study
March 16, 2023

Project Information
• Project Website
cupertino.org/lawsonbikewaystudy
• Project Manager
Cherie Walkowiak
Email: [email protected]
Ph. No.: (408) 777-7609

How to Participate Today
By Phone:
 Raise hand: dial 9
 To unmute: dial 6
On Zoom:
 Type question or comment in the Q&A
 Raise hand to ask a question or comment

Poll #1
Who is attending today’s meeting?
a) Student (past, current, future)
b) Parent (past, current, future)
c) Live along Vista Dr (opposite school)
d) Live elsewhere in the neighborhood
e) City/CUSD/School Staff
f) Other members of the public
Agenda
• Project Overview
• Study Process/Timeline
• What we’ve Heard
• Field Observations, Data Collection, Analysis
• Alternatives
• Next Steps
Project Overview
• 2016-2017: Citywide School Walk Audit identified
need to improve bicycle safety at Lawson
• Lawson student biking grown from 3% in 2016 to
17% in 2022
• 2018-2022: Conditions and options explored by
City / School / District / PTA / Parents
• 2022: City contracted with Hexagon to take a
fresh look at conditions and options by
conducting this feasibility study
Study Process/Timeline2022
2023
Collect & Analyze
Data
Community
Meeting 1
Nov. 10, 2022
Stakeholder
Input
Feb 9, 2023
Alternatives
Development
We are
here!
Community
Meeting 2
Mar 16, 2023
Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr to Jun
Community
meeting #3,
BPC, City
Council
TBD
Present Data &
Alternatives
Preferred
Alternative
What we’ve heard – Community
Meeting #1
• Considerations for potential improvements:
– Need to consider bikes + pedestrians + parking + drop off/pick up operations
– Safety concerns occur in a narrow time window
• Data collection considerations:
– A lot of bike activity on Lazaneo/Forest
– Vehicular traffic operations on Blaney
– Wednesday data collection (trash day)
• Other issues:
– There are illegal vehicular movements
– Coordinate with CUSD, Apple
What we’ve heard – Stakeholder
Meeting
• Concerns with bikes/peds cutting through the CUSD
parking lot.
• Generally supportive of the study’s direction and the alternatives.

Field Observations
• Conducted for two days
(Tuesday + Wednesday) in
November 2022 during
drop-off and pick-up times
• Observed conflict points
for i) bike/pedestrian, ii)
bike/vehicle, iii)
vehicle/pedestrian
• Understood bicycle travel
patterns, parent drop-off
locations/behaviors

Observed Conflict Areas
Peds and bikes sharing
the sidewalk
1 1
Bikes observed on sidewalk
Observed Conflict Areas
Peds and bikes sharing
the sidewalk
1 1
2 2 Bicycles making wide
turns, weaving across
vehicles to cross
22 Bikes observed on sidewalk
Path of bike travel on street
Data Collection
• Bike/Ped/Vehicular
turning movement counts
at nearby intersections
and School driveways
• Hourly parking counts on
a typical school weekday
and a Saturday
Intersections counts Parking Counts
Data Collection Findings
• Vehicles
• Low volumes (<200 vehs/hr each direction) on
adjacent streets
• Pedestrian
– High ped volumes (>100) south and north of the bike
cage
• Bikes
– High bike volumes (>30) south of Vista bike cage
– Low bike volumes (<10) north of Vista bike cage
Time of Day On-Street Parking Analysis-
Vista Drive
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 7:00
AM
8:00
AM
9:00
AM
10:00
AM
2:00
PM
3:00
PM
4:00
PM
5:00
PM
8:00
PM
9:00
PM
10:00
PM
11:00
PM
12:00
AM
Maximum Parking Occupancy Observed
Weekday Weekend
School pick-up time
Alternatives Analysis
• Developed three improvement alternatives
based on:
– Field observation
– Data collection
– Community input
Alternative 1
Bike Route and Sharrow Signage and
Pavement Markings
• Design Features
– Bike Route signage
– Sharrow signage
– School zone warning signage
– Speed table on Vista Dr. in
front of bike cage
– Median on Forest Ave at
Vista Dr.

Source: Aerial Imagery
Source: Aerial Imagery
Install
raised
median
Install shared
roadway bicycle
markings
Install bike route
signage
Install speed table to
slow vehicle speeds

Install bike route
signage
Alternative 1
Bike Route and Sharrow Signage and
Pavement Markings
• Pros
– Low cost
– Increased awareness for
drivers
– Reduce vehicle speeds
• Cons
– Bike/Ped/Vehicle conflicts
not addressed

Alternative 2
Two-way Mixed-Use Trail To Replace Existing
Sidewalk
• Design Features
– 14’, two-way, continuous,
mixed-use trail
– Bike crossing
enhancements at
intersections
– Wayfinding/Signage
Bike crossing
enhancements
Two-way
Mixed-Use trail
Source: Aerial Imagery
Bike crossing
enhancements
Remove existing sidewalk and landscaping and build 14’
multiuse path (10’ path + 2’ shoulders on each side)
Bike crossing
enhancements
Currently
With Alt 2
With Alt 2
Currently
Move light pole
Trail can be placed between curb
and fence. ~6’ landscaping can be
retained
Narrow travel lanes to
fit a 12’ multiuse path
Remove some
existing trees
35’
Rebuild
Driveways
Bike crossing
enhancements
Alternative 2
Two-way Mixed-Use Trail To Replace Existing
Sidewalk
• Pros
– Get bikes off Vista Dr. and
Forest Ave eliminating
bike/veh conflicts
– Wide multi-use trail
accommodates bikes and
peds
– Retain parking

Alternative 2
Two-way Mixed-Use Trail To Replace Existing
Sidewalk
• Cons
– Higher Cost
– Removal of trees
– Relocate utilities (incl.
parking lot light)
– Rebuild driveways
– Move curb to narrow lanes

Alternative 2A
Two-way Mixed-Use Trail To Replace Existing
Sidewalk with RRFB at Vista/Forest
• Design Features
– Same as Alternative 2,
except mixed-use trail
starts at Forest Ave/Vista
Dr.
– RRFB at Forest Ave/Vista
Dr.

Install RRFB
Source: Federal Highway Administration
Alternative 2A
Two-way Mixed-Use Trail To Replace Existing
Sidewalk with RRFB at Vista/Forest
• Pros (compared to Alt 2)
– Ease of construction
– Straightforward bicycle
facility
– Less intrusion on CUSD
property

Alternative 2A
Two-way Mixed-Use Trail To Replace Existing
Sidewalk with RRFB at Vista/Forest
• Cons (compared to Alt 2)
– Alt 2 provides better
protection for WBL
turning bikes
– Alt 2 gets bikes off the
street sooner

Alternative 3
On-street Two-Way Class IV Bike Facility
• Design Features
– 8’+ 3’buffer, two-way,
Class IV bike facility
– Bike crossing
enhancements at
intersections
– Wayfinding/Signage
Bike crossing
enhancements
Class IV Bike
Facility
Source: NACTO
Bike crossing
enhancements
8’ two-way class IV bike path with 3’ buffer and vertical separation
Bike crossing
enhancements
Remove parking on one-side
Remove parking on one-side
29’
8’ two-way class IV
bike path with 3’
buffer and vertical
separation
Remove parking
on west side
Remove parking
on west side
Bike crossing
enhancements
Alternative 3
On-street Two-Way Class IV Bike Facility
• Pros
– Low cost
– Eliminates bike/veh and
bike/ped conflicts
– Does not require removal of
trees/relocating utilities
• Cons
– Removal of Parking on one
side of Vista Dr. & Forest Ave.

Alternatives Recap
Alt 1: Bike Route and Sharrow Signage and Pavement Markings Alt 2: Two-way Mixed-Use Trail To Replace Existing Sidewalk Alt 2A: Two-way Mixed-Use Trail To Replace Existing Sidewalk with RRFB at Vista/Forest
Alt 3: On-street Two-Way Class IV Bike Facility
Characteristics Alt 1 Alt 2 & 2A Alt 3
Addresses bike/ped/veh conflicts + ++++ +++++
Relocate utilities --
Remove trees --
Removal of some on-street parking spaces ---
Cost to implement (order of magnitude) $ $$$$ $$
‘+’ = pro; ‘-’ = con
Study Process/Timeline2022
2023
Collect & Analyze
Data
Community
Meeting 1
Nov. 10, 2022
Stakeholder
Input
Feb 9, 2023
Alternatives
Development
We are
here!
Community
Meeting 2
Mar 16, 2023
Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr to Jun
Community
meeting #3,
BPAC, City
Council
TBD
Present Data &
Alternatives
Preferred
Alternative
How to Participate Today
On Zoom:
 Type question or comment in the Q&A
 Raise hand to ask a question or comment
By Phone:
 Raise hand: dial 9
 To unmute: dial 6
Poll #2
Which alternative is your 1st preference?
A: Bike Route and Sharrow Signage and Pavement Markings (Alt 1) B: Two-way Mixed-Use Trail To Replace Existing Sidewalk (Alt 2) C: Two-way Mixed-Use Trail To Replace Existing Sidewalk with RRFB at Vista/Forest (Alt 2A)
D: On-street Two-Way Class IV Bike Facility (Alt 3)
E: No Change
Poll #3
Which alternative is your 2nd preference?
A: Bike Route and Sharrow Signage and Pavement Markings (Alt 1) B: Two-way Mixed-Use Trail To Replace Existing Sidewalk (Alt 2) C: Two-way Mixed-Use Trail To Replace Existing Sidewalk with RRFB at Vista/Forest (Alt 2A)
D: On-street Two-Way Class IV Bike Facility (Alt 3)
E: No Change
Poll #4
Preferred format for Community Meeting #3.

A) Zoom (same as today)
B) In-person
C) Hybrid
Poll #5
Preferred time for Community Meeting #3.

A) 6:30 pm (same as today)
B) Start earlier (6:00 pm)
C) Start later (7:00 pm)
Time of Day On-Street Parking Analysis-
Vista Drive
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 7:00
AM
8:00
AM
9:00
AM
10:00
AM
2:00
PM
3:00
PM
4:00
PM
5:00
PM
8:00
PM
9:00
PM
10:00
PM
11:00
PM
12:00
AM
Maximum Parking Occupancy Observed
Weekday Weekend
School pick-up time
It seems the least they can do since they are going to NO EFFORT to do anything to help the situation.

Getting sports equipment onto Lawson field for soccer, etc.

Coaches, particularly soccer coaches have heavy equipment they haul around for practices and games. They park right by the open gate to unload their equipment. There was talk of opening up the gate at the south end of the Lawson field for access from the CUSD south parking lot on Forest Ave.

Q3: What provisions have been made to accommodate these sports teams other than parking far away and hauling their equipment?

Safety of pedestrians
Pedestrians seem to be at the bottom of the list when it comes to safety improvements. When walking the sidewalk along Lawson Middle School, there are constantly overgrown city tree branches and CUSD landscape bushes blocking the walkway for pedestrians. If you look at the street-side of the trees where the bikeway will go, it has the same problems. Often branches hang low enough to brush the tops of cars parked along the curb.

Q4: What plan is in place to REGULARLY (not every 7-8 years), trim the trees and landscape bushes along the perimeter of Lawson for the safety of PEDESTRIANS and cyclists?

Sincerely,
Peggy Griffin

Source: NACTO
From: The Invincible Dummy
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Lawson Bike Path
Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 4:36:04 PM
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.

Respected Mayor Mohan, Vice Mayor Fruen, and Council Members, I used to be a student at Lawson, and I biked to school every day. Each day, I would have to weave in between cars, getting closer than reasonably safe, and I almost had several accidents.

This bike lane would ensure that no one would get hurt simply traveling to school, and more people feeling safer to bike would mean fewer cars on the road, which in turn makes it safer to bike. For everyone, this lane has benefits, and I believe it's in the city's best interest to install it.

Thank you for your time,
Samil Lindskog
From: Nicole Phan
To: City Council
Cc: Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk
Subject: Please Support the Lawson Bikeway!
Date: Monday, July 8, 2024 4:06:11 PM
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 Honorable Mayor Sheila Mohan, Vice-Mayor JR Fruen, Councilmembers and staff, My name is Nicole, an alumnus of Monta Vista High School and a lifelong resident of Cupertino.

Today, I am writing to express my strong support for Lawson Bikeway and all safe bike routes and infrastructure. I was a senior at MVHS when the shocking news broke out of a younger Monta Vista student dying due a vehicle accident while biking to school. It was a terrifying story and truly a tragedy – one's worst nightmare coming true. Everyone was shaken up and our school held a vigil. The community channeled their heartbreak into quickly mobilizing and demanding for cement dividers to create a separated and safer path for bikers.

The community historically supports safe biking infrastructure as so many people utilize this separated bike lane on McClellan Road to get to school and for leisure. We need more of this type of safe bike infrastructure everywhere in the city, especially near our schools. Safe bike routes to school not only reduce car usage but will also save lives. Parents will see the biking infrastructure and know that their child has a reliable and safe method of active transport to get to class. This will only create a healthier, stronger community.

City parking studies also show that even with the reduction in adjacent parking, the supply of parking spots will still be adequate for neighbors and teachers.

Please do the right thing and support the Lawson Bikeway.

Thank you for your time,
Nicole
CC 07-09-2024

Lawson Middle School
Bikeway Project

Written Communications
From: Jay
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Vote yes to build the Lawson Bikeway
Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 4:18:03 PM
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 Cupertino City Council members,
As an avid bike rider and also the wrestling coach at Lawson Middle School, I strongly advocate for a safe bike lane for students biking to and from school. During the days that I coached at LMS, I would arrive before the end of the school day and witness the confusion in front of the school. As I walked through the bike parking lot, I witnessed scores of students trying to navigate their way out of the school grounds onto the sidewalks and streets. It is hectic and has always concerned me. I believe we should encourage our middle school students to choose bicycle riding as a viable source of transportation; however, we must make it safe. I am asking for your support on this very important issue.

Best,
Jay Lawson
Sent from my iPhone

Cupertino City CouncilJuly 9, 2024

Cupertino City Council
July 9, 2024