►
From YouTube: Cupertino City Council Meeting - March 21, 2023 (Part 1)
Description
Coverage of the March 21, 2023 Cupertino City Council Meeting.
Part 1 of 2.
D
A
A
A
Okay,
I'm
gonna
make
a
little
announcement
because
American
Red
Cross
month
is
this
month,
so
I
like
to
take
a
moment
to
recognize
that
March
is
American
Red
Cross
month
we
have
issued
a
proclamation
declaring
March
as
American
Red
Cross
months
in
the
city
of
Cupertino.
There's
a
long
history
of
the
American
cross,
helping
our
neighbors
in
need,
and
this
is
a
special
time
to
honor
the
kindness
and
dedication
of
the
volunteers
and
donors
who
give
their
time
and
resources
to
help
families
and
people
in
our
communities.
A
A
And
today,
I
have
a
very
sad
news
to
share
with
you,
our
Board
of
trustee
with
the
Fremont
Union
High
School
District
we're
rocking
passed
away
on
Sunday.
He
was
intelligent
and
kind
man.
He
served
our
community
and
taught
at
Lindbergh
High
School
before
he
became
board
member
with
Fremont
Union
High
School
District
I
have
served
with
him
for
many
many
years.
He
was
not
just
a
board
of
trustee,
but
also
a
mentor
and
also
a
friend
I
like
to
give
a
few
seconds
of
respect
to
Roy.
A
Please
take
her,
take
him
and
his
family
in
our
heart,
so
maybe
20
seconds
to
think
about
the
good
things
he's
done
for
our
kids
and
for
our
community.
A
Thank
you,
Roy
will
always
live
in
my
heart
and
he's
his
contribution
to
our
teams
are
always
going
to
be
with
us.
So
thank
you,
Roy.
Okay,
now
we're
moving
to
postponements
and
Order
of
the
day.
Do
we
have
any
postponements
order
of
the
day?
If
not,
we
will
move
to
oral
Communications.
A
C
A
F
Good
evening,
city
council
glad
everyone
was
able
to
get
here
with
our
wild
storms.
I
just
wanted
to
start
out
tonight.
I
think
it's
important
that
we
start
working
on
the
stocklemeyer
house.
It
is
very,
very
easy
to
forget
about
the
history
of
Cupertino
and
our
little
part
of
of
California
and
we've
had
the
stockelmeyer
property
for
quite
a
while.
F
Now
we
have
the
orchard
which
we'll
talk
about
later,
with
the
orange
Orchard
Etc
and
I
used
to
actually
ride
the
bus
down
the
hill
when
I
was
going
to
De
Anza,
the
23
or
24
and
I
would
see
the
fish
ponds.
I
think
that
we're
actually
because
you're
up
high
enough
when
you're
coming
down,
we
called
it
huhu
Hill
and
you
could
see
into
the
property
and
I,
always
wondered
what
the
fish
ponds
were
that
were
there
and
I.
F
We
were
walking
along
and
there's
an
acre
of
land,
and
it
is
this
little
cabin,
that's
sitting
there
and
it
is
where
George
Washington
had
one
of
his
survey
Cottages
or
cabins
from
1745..
He
was
trained
as
a
surveyor
as
a
teenager
and
he
surveyed
a
lot
of
the
land
and
they
had
kept
the
actual
structure
there.
I
mean
1735.
I
was
dumbfounded
that
this
was
something
because
that
was
Wilderness
at
the
time.
Winchester
was
actually
founded,
100
years
later,
it's
where
apple
orchards
in
that
area,
but
California
has
a
lot
of
old
structures
itself.
F
G
Good
evening,
I,
don't
know
where
to
begin
to
express
my
disappointment
at
the
last
council
meeting
about
the
behavior
of
people
that
participated
in
the
council
meeting,
it
was
like
something
out
of
a
medieval
fair
bear.
Baiting
Etc,
you
know
the
whole
point
of
this
sort
of
a
situation
is
to
exchange
ideas.
It
is
not
to
pillory
people,
it
is
not
to
abuse
them
and
we
had
people
from
out
of
town
coming
in
here
talking
very
passionately
about
issues
that
they
didn't
understand.
G
We
had
a
section
of
people
that
were
hooting
and
hollering
and
chuckling
when
they
were
discussing
Mr
Wong,
and
it
was
just
unbelievable.
It
was
just
a
completely
disgusting
spectacle
and
it
was
unnecessary
if
you
wanted
to
relieve
him
of
his
duties.
All
you
had
to
do
was
vote
on
it.
You
didn't
have
to
pillory
him.
I've
had
many
people
talk
to
me
in
my
exercise.
Class
and
they've
wanted
to
know
when
they're
going
to
people
are
going
to
start
to
recall
the
council
because
they
thought
it
was
so
offensive.
G
You've
turned
this
man
into
a
martyr
and
in
the
past,
when
people
have
come
to
power,
they
have
just
held
their
noses
and
waited
until
the
per
the
commissioner
had
termed
out.
They
didn't
do
this.
It
was
unnecessary,
I
think
you've,
behaved,
abominably
and
I
think
you
need
to
be
put
in
time
out
bad
counsel.
Shame
on
you.
H
Hi
thanks
so
Kirsten,
so
I,
don't
ditch
you
again.
Can
you
put
that
slide
on
so
Kirsten's,
going
to
put
a
slide
up
that
I
asked
several
meetings
ago
to
share
and
I'll
I'll
tell
you
why,
when
it's
there,
okay,
you
can
see
it
all.
I
can
see.
Is
myself
okay,
there
we
go
so
I
would
just
like
this
to
be
for
the
record
and
people
to
understand
that
this
is
this
particular
image
without
the
edits
is
from
well
I.
Believe
the
city
has.
H
Supplied
it
to
a
who
is
it
fairs,
and
you
know
who
I'm
talking
about
the
consultant
people
looking
at
into
Main
Street,
and
there
are
issues
with
the
map
that
they're
using
and
they're
basing
their
report
on.
They
have
their
report
in
draft
form
and
it's
using
this
map.
It's
not
correct,
and
you
can
ask
me
about
it
later,
because
I
don't
want
to
spend
any
more
time
on
that
I.
Just
keep
sending
this
to
Kirsten
and
now
I've
got
it
in
there.
Thank
you
so
other
other
things,
new,
the
new
Creek
Trail
great.
H
H
Interestingly
enough,
over
the
weekend,
I
had
a
discussion
well
just
having
a
dinner
party
with
a
bunch
of
friends
and
I
use
the
term
undue
influence
in
a
totally
unrelated
situation,
and
people
said,
what's
that,
what
are
you
talking
about?
I
said
actually
I
need
to
ask
that.
H
So
what
I'd
like
to
know
is
if
we
could
somehow
get
a
very
firm,
sensible
multi,
you
know
definition
I
want
to
say,
but
more
than
that,
a
definition
for
the
term
undue
influence
as
it's
used
in
the
new
procedural
manual
and
also
how
it's
used
elsewhere
in
the
city
or
Beyond.
It
would
be
really
helpful
to
have
that
so
I'm
requesting
that,
and
hopefully
one
or
more
of
the
council
members
will
ask
for
that
and
staff
can
produce
it
for
us.
C
I
Good
evening
city
council
I
would
like
to
talk
to
you
today
about
the
capital
Improvement
projects
that
are
ongoing
in
the
city
and
the
experience
of
a
resident
that
is
dealing
with
the
city,
roads
and
the
traffic
conditions.
As
you
may
have
heard
from
me
on
a
written
comments
to
you.
Mclillon
road
is
a
complete
mess.
We
have
traffic
that
is
going
in
the
opposite
lane.
I
That,
in
turn,
has
led
to
a
large
amount
of
traffic
that
is
allowed
to
flow
when
the
light
turns
green,
causing
cars
to
back
up
into
the
opposing
Lane
as
they
go
westbound
on
McLaren
during
school
Peak
powers,
I
want
to
talk
about
the
current
projects
that
are
in
the
pipeline
of
the
eight
projects
that
are
in
the
pipeline.
For
bike
fed
and
Roads,
four
or
five
of
them
are
related
to
creating
more
disasters
like
mclillon
Road,
namely
we
are
going
to
create
smaller
roads.
We
are
going
to
constrict
traffic
on
the
roads.
I
We're
gonna
put
in
these
concrete
cylinder
blocks
with
separated
bike
Lanes
in
other
stretches
such
as
mclillon
extensions
such
as
Stevens,
Creek,
Boulevard
extensions
and
we're
gonna
add
buffer
zones
on
the
Anza
Boulevard.
We
cannot
have
our
cake
and
eat
it
too.
We
are
trying
to
increase
density
for
the
housing
element,
we're
building
high
density,
mixed
use,
project
all
through
Stevens,
Creek
and
potentially
the
answer
as
well
and
at
the
same
time,
you're
trying
to
construct
traffic
with
these
projects.
I
I
request
the
city
council
to
please
bring
some
common
sense
to
these
projects
and
defer
funding
for
all
projects
that
constrict
the
flow
of
traffic
and
create
safety
hazards
for
the
public.
I
further
request
you
to
please
have
simple
fixes,
which
is
eliminate
the
no
right
turn
on
red
If.
You
eliminate
the
no
return
on
red
and
introduce
crossing
guards
which
we
already
have.
We
do
not
need
more
crossing
guards.
Mclellan
and
Bob
already
has
a
crossing
guard.
We
did
not
need
the
scramble.
We
did
not
need
the
no
right
turn
on
red.
I
C
H
J
Hear
me:
yes,
could
you
please
display
my
slides?
J
Thank
you
good
evening
mayor
way.
Vice
mayor,
Mohan,
council
members
and
staff,
I
would
like
to
make
the
council
and
the
public
aware
and
some
of
the
staff
that
the
city
lost
over
12.5
million
dollars
last
month
and
they'll
lose
another
323
000
this
month.
This
is
a
result
of
the
California
Department
of
tax
and
fee
Administration.
We
get
local
taxes
sales
tax
once
a
month.
J
It
deposits
money
into
the
city's
accounts,
general
fund
and
I've,
been
concerned
about
the
loss
of
Revenue
when
the
city
is
looking
at
enormous
expense
for
a
city
hall
and
I
wanted
you
to
know
this
next
slide.
Please.
J
J
This
is
the
statement
from
March
10th.
This
is
March
21st
12
days
ago,
and
we
still
don't
know
publicly
that
this
actually
happened.
I
have
several
questions
regarding
this.
Why
did
this
happen?
Why
wasn't
the
council
and
the
public
informed
of
this
massive
multi-million
dollar
loss
in
Revenue
over
a
month
ago?
Why
wasn't
the
audit
committee
informed
when
they
met
in
February
at
least
weeks
after
it
was
known?
How
much
more
will
the
city
lose
and
does
the
city
have
to
give
Apple
an
Insight,
their
35
sales
tax
Kickback
in
spite
of
this
loss?
J
J
This
is
last
night
again
about
the
same
time
and
the
light
is
still
on
I
reported
it
again.
This
time,
though,
I
I
added
the
term
does
not
follow
conditions
of
approval
and
I
think
it
got
routed
to
planning
how
long
does
it
take
to
get
them
to
turn
their
light
off.
J
I
have
a
request.
Thank.
C
K
Okay
hi
there,
my
name
is
Peter
Morris
and
I'm
here
at
the
First
on
behalf
of
Ms
Jane
Wong
who's
with
me,
Ms
Wang
is
a
resident
of
the
Cupertino
over
at
this
near
Cupertino
High,
and
there
there's
been
an
incident
these
past
few
years
pertaining
to
that
started
with
a
playhouse
structure
or
said
that
was
in
her
backyard
and
for
which
the
the
insistence
upon
the
city
of
tearing
it
down
became
somewhat
acrimonious
and
to
a
point
where
it
was
well
where,
where
property
rights
were
trampled
down,
but
by
a
crew
coming
without
notice,
to
be
able
to
take
it
down
a
year
and
a
half
ago,
there
has
been
some
discussion
and
there
may
be
some
sort
of
closure
that
we
hope
was
going
to
be
reached.
K
That
has
to
do
with
all
of
the
city's
demands
for
legal
costs,
as
well
as
the
tear
down
costs.
But
we
do
want
them
to
please
keep
in
mind
that
she
has
been
out
of
pocket
significantly
for
the
original
cost
of
the
construction,
the
materials
that
is,
and,
in
addition,
that
there
he's
had
also
her
own
legal
costs
that
it
that
she's
had
to
be
able
to
bear
in
terms
of
being
able
to
try
to
to
to
go
to
to
consist
I
guess.
K
Regular
Court
battles
with
the
the
city
would
be
at
the
third
party
legal
firm
that
they
retained
who's
done
nothing,
but
we
do
everything
possible
to
stall,
enforce
multiple
actions
that
have
now
reached
the
point
where
there,
where
some
agreement
is
going
to
have
to
be
reached
in
order
to
be
able
to
bring
this
to
an
end.
We
just
want
to
say
for
at
least
for
the
future
that
we
hope
the
city
can
at
least
consider
what's
right.
K
What
and
we
want
to
the
no
other
property
owners
have
to
be
able
to
do
it
and
what
what
no
so
I
do
want
to
just
to
to
voice
my
opinion
on
her
behalf,
because
I
know
it's
been
sort
of
a
very
long
hard
situation
with
her
and
to
please
keep
in
mind
that
there
are
other
people
who
probably
have
had
the
same
issue
with
us
so
I.
K
So
on
that
note,
I
would
ask
you
to
maybe
have
some
sort
of
a
much
more
open
sort
of
dialogue
in
terms
of
being
able
to
be
a
more
conciliatory
and
then
not
have
to
drag
this
thing
out
for
like
three
years,
which
is
causing
nothing
but
acrimony
between
all
of
the
different
parties
involved.
So
I
do
want
to
thank
you
for
your
time
and
do
hope
that
that
something
good
can
come
all
of
us,
maybe
not
for
her,
but
maybe
for
other
residents
of
Cupertino.
Thank
you.
C
L
L
We
had
some
some
news
because
we
have
some
internet
issue
in
the
city
hall
in
the
past,
the
outside
Law
Firm,
the
a
creamy
skill
so
and
so
the
whatever
the
amount
to
do
it
was
the
granted
through
the
the
city,
and
we
want
also
work
with
the
look
at
this
thing.
L
Somehow
I've
been
to
the
circle
and
the
thing
is
we
asked
because
we
also
had
a
amount,
a
legal
I
know
three
different
legal
Consultants
and
other
cities
and
the
things
we
want
with
some
cost
work,
because
we
had
this
Europe
three
two
times
have
died
and
has
taken
away
belongings.
Well
because
we
don't
want
all
these
things
happen
and
all
everything
and
all
the
stepping
to
the
residents
and
homeowners
in
the
city
and
this
this
find
the
peace
and
patterns
keep
going.
L
So
we
thinking
at
least
need
a
compensating
and
the
material
cost
or
the
build
up
with
the
Hi-Fi
figure
and
and
also
on
some
legal
fees.
Oh
and
to
that,
and-
and
so
we
can
back
and
if
the
kids
already
have
to
present
how
this
maybe
help
some
some
distance
if
we
need
a
temporary
State
and
a
homeless
whatever
so
so
the
well.
Those
kind
of
patterns
will
not
continue
to
have
pretty
always
respect
any
homeowner
and
in
the
city.
So
we,
but
once
the
council
to
consider
that.
M
Hi
good
evening,
Council
and
staff
today
I'm
my
comment:
I
have
a
couple
of
comments.
One
of
them
is
I'm
very
saddened
about.
The
last
meeting
like
Brooke
mentioned.
I
was
saddened
that
our
young
youth
has
no
respect
for
the
elders,
a
respected
individual.
The
community
was
pretty
much
I
yeah.
It
was
like
a
a
circus
in
there
and
I.
Just
was
at
all
that
I
know.
M
Mayor
Paul
would
have
put
order
into
that
situation
and
I
just
wanted
to
bring
that
to
your
attention
so
that
in
the
future
there
could
be
some
order.
I
actually
looked
for
the
sheriff.
It
was
like
in
the
past
that
would
not
have
been
tolerated.
There's
been
a
clapping
in
the
past,
I've
been
around
for
a
while
that
you
know
when
all
the
back
and
forth
and
people
were
discussing
passionately,
but
never
like
it
was
last
time.
M
It
was
very
embarrassing
that
video
going
out
from
our
city
was
embarrassing
and
I
just
wanted
to
plead
with
you
to
not
let
that
ever
happen
again
and
please
put
those
people
mayor,
Paul,
stopped
and
said:
please:
well
everyone
stop
the
whatever
it
is.
They're
clapping,
or
whatever
he
put
order
into
it,
so
please
do
that
in
the
future.
M
Also
I
it
just
during
the
meetings
it
appears
to
be
hostile,
it
does
not
seem
to
be
a
safe
environment.
I
get
some
hostility
from
from
a
group
of
people
towards
other
people,
and
it
just
doesn't
feel
like
everyone's
working
together.
I
wanted
to
just
plead
with
you,
mayor
hungway.
You
went
on
the
campaign
that
you
were
gonna
work
with
people
and
get
everyone
to
work
together
amicably
and
it
just
seems
a
little
hostile,
not
safe.
It
feels
like
a
almost
like
a
Witch
Hunt
towards
certain.
M
A
You,
madam
City
Kirk
I,
want
to
thank
everyone
who
made
comments
your
time
and
passion,
and
your
communication
is
very
important
to
the
council.
So
thank
you
for
speaking
up
now,
I'm
going
to
move
to
a
close
to
oral
communication.
N
N
O
Sudama
council
member
Moore's,
first
request
on
the
Peggy
Griffin's
request
we're
already
working
on
it.
The
request
King
to
director
El,
Faro
and
myself
late
today,
so
we'll
provide
a
response
back
to
miss
Griffin
and
also
provide
that
same
response
back
to
council.
We're
looking
at
hopefully
to
have
that
information
completed
by
early
next
week.
A
O
The
questions
I
am
actually
not
clear
what
the
question
is.
I
would
like
an
opportunity
to
talk
to
director
Alfaro
before
I
commit
to
that,
but
we'll
have
a
follow-up
to
Ms
Griffin's
question:
okay,.
O
D
The
agenda
request
for
a
procedure
so
that
we
don't
like
take
action
based
on
on
proven
claims
and.
C
Yeah
so
reserve
request
for
a
process
for
admonition
and
censorship
and
how
it
would
be
handled
in
the
future
to
be
agendas
for
discussion.
D
Okay,
yeah
and
I'd
like
to
also
I
think
we
have
gotten
many
complaints
about
existing
science
and
its
interior
light
from
Public
Storage.
That's
not
complying
with
the
approval
of
the
project,
so
if
the
city
could
it
is
on
the
agenda,
so
no
the.
P
O
N
So
I
want
to
clarify
something:
I
was
not
informed
about
this
12
and
a
half
million
dollars
from
the
city,
so
I
I,
all
I've
heard-
is
that
we're
waiting
for
the
CD
TFA
audit
to
happen.
So
this
was
this
is
news
yeah.
E
I
think
you
should
wait
to
get
complete
information
before
you
jump
to
conclusions.
I'm,
not
sure
that
I
I
think
that
people
are
operating
with
incomplete
information.
N
We'll
we'll
provide
the
update,
yeah,
oh
okay
and
lastly,
through
the
mayor,
I
was
I,
don't
know
if
we
need
to
wait
until
the
end
of
this
meeting,
but
with
regards
to
our
sign
ordinance
in
general,
when
would
be
an
appropriate
time
to
make
a
motion
to
revisit
that
ordinance.
I
have
some
questions
about,
what's
allowable
in
my
own
neighborhood
that
I've
seen.
O
So
to
have
a
study
session
or
any
sort
of
work
to
be
done
on
a
sign.
Ordinance
right
now
would
have
been
considered
a
work
program
item
which
is
not
part
of
the
work
program.
That
Council
has
provided
direction
to
staff
for
next
year,
but
we
can
certainly
entertain
a
potential
conversation
to
either
add
or
modify
the
current
work
program
and
having
a
more
refined
scope
on
the
science.
Ordinance
and
staff
can
work
with
adequate
allocation
of
Staff
time
and
resource
to
work
on
the
program.
A
Thank
you,
okay,
so,
on
that
completes
the
oral
communication
portion
of
it.
We're
moving
to
consent
agenda
item
number
one
to
six.
If
I
understand
correctly
number
three
number
five
and
number
six
have
been
pulled.
Do
we
have
more
items
that
will
be
that
council
member
would
like
to
pull?
A
Q
A
R
A
A
R
A
We
have
a
motion
and
second,
if
no
discussions,
let's
vote
by
like.
A
A
So,
council,
members,
if
you
have
questions
it's
time
to
ask
now,
you
have
five
minutes
to
ask
questions
who
who
pulled
it?
Do
we
know
who
pulled
this
content
I.
D
Pulled
it:
okay,
go
ahead,
I,
send
my
questions
to
staff,
but
sorry,
I,
really
I
haven't
had
time
to
re,
read
the
answer,
but
the
main
concern
is
usually
the
for
public
project.
We
take
the
lowest
bid
and
for
this
item
it
seems
to
be
not
lowest
bid.
It's
based
on
qualification,
but
the
qualification
scoring
on
criteria
was
not
listed.
I.
D
Remember,
usually,
when
is
qualification
based
the
council
has
to
have
resolution
on
specific
type
of
project
we
may
have
qualification
based
and
also
the
qualification
has
to
be
public
information,
and
that
information
is
not
available.
I
think
this
is
to
ensure
fairness
for
all
the
respondents
so
that
they
are
being
considered
fairly
by
a
public
agency.
So
I
remember,
we
approved
something
for
the
library
Expansion
Project
only
specifically,
but
this
is
a
different
project
when
we
can
consider
qualification
rather
than
just
lowest
bid.
O
I'll
defer
that
question
to
to
director
mostly.
S
Good
evening
Council
Chad
Mosley
interim
director
of
Public
Works,
we
did
respond
to
that
question
in
one
of
the
supplemental
questionnaires,
but
I
do
have
Jimmy
Tan
our
assistant,
Public
Works,
director
on
the
zoom
call
to
answer
this
question
he's
been
handling
many
of
those
questions
so
I
will.
T
Leaving
audible
mayor
members
of
the
city
council
I'll
be
happy
to
answer
the
questions.
Yeah,
the
you
know,
the
the
RFP
that
was
sent
out
was
advertised
included,
the
you
know
the
qualifications
that
were
looked
at
in
addition
to
the
cost
overall
cost.
So
you
know
we
had
a
pricing
table
attached
to
the
RFP
that
requested
unit
prices
for
various
different
items
that
were
part
of
the
scope
of
work.
T
So
with
that,
you
know
at
the
the
term
the
the
time
when
the
poses
are
due
the
city
staff
actually
reviewed
all
of
the
other
prices
and
compared
them
with
various
different
contractors
that
submitted
and
out
of
the
the
six
contractors
West
Coast
operas
was
the
the
submitted,
the
actual
lowest
unit
price
for
the
for
the
project.
So
we
are
selecting
West
Coast
operator,
which
is
the
lowest
unit
price
contractor.
T
In
addition
to
that,
we
did
review
the
the
proposals,
and
then
we
ensured
that
the
The
Firm
actually
has
the
qualifications,
as
well
as
the
proposals
or
verified
to
be
responsive
or
actually
be
responsible
and
qualified,
as
well
as
that
the
company
can
perform
discover
work.
That's
identified
in
the
Erp.
D
But
as
I
remember,
I
read
the
staff
report,
it
didn't
say
it's
based
on
the
lowest
unit
price
and
the
unit
price
were
not
listed
in
the
staff
report.
For
the
other
contract,
which
is
agenda,
item
five
I
think
the
all
the
plates
were
listed
and
then
we
understand
that
we
choose
the
lowest
bit.
This
step.
Reports
specifically
said
it's
qualification
and
the
unit
cost
are
both
considered.
So
you
are
saying
we
did
choose
the
lowest
unit.
Price
and
qualification
were
considered
or
not
considered.
T
Well,
we
always
have
to
consider
qualifications
for
any
contractors
that
we
select.
You
know
for
any
of
our
projects
that
we
have.
You
know
that
we
occur
for
our
cities
right.
So
with
that
you
know,
in
addition
to
the
qualifications,
we
still
have
to
look
at
the
overall
cost
to
make
sure
that
the
contractors
you
know
provides
the
efficient
costs
to
do
the
work
that
we're
asking
to
do
so
with
that
you
know
it's
it's
both.
You
know
as
part
of
the
overall
evaluations,
both
cost
and
qualifications
were
considered.
Q
S
Interrupt
please,
and
for
the
other
contract,
that's
for
actual
defined
work
that
will
be
happening
for
this
one.
It's
an
on-call
service.
We
don't
know
what
work
will
be
necessary
until
that
work
comes
up
so,
like
we
just
had
these
recent
storms
with
the
trees,
we
may
have
needed
to
call
out
a
contractor
to
help
with
some
of
that.
We
don't
know
what
that
work
is
until
the
situation
arises.
D
N
Mark
okay,
thank
you.
So,
looking
at
at
this
particular
agenda
item,
we
I'm
not
seeing
an
appropriation
request
like
we
have
on
for
the
Orchards
and
I
was
wondering
why?
What
what's
the
difference
there
with
regards
to
that,
and
also
look
at
looking
at
the
purchasing
policy?
N
Is
it
that
you
are
over
a
hundred
and
seventy
five
thousand
dollars
that
this
was
brought
to
council
and
I
want
to
clarify
with
that
175
000
in
the
purchasing
policy?
Is
that
for
the
entire
contract,
regardless
of
the
time
period?
So
if
it
was
five
years,
two
hundred
thousand
dollars
would
that
trigger
a
contract
needing
to
come
to
council,
or
is
it
just
for
a
single
year
amount,
so
I'm
wondering
what
where
what
the
trigger
is
and
what's
the
difference
between
these
two
contracts?
Thank
you.
T
First,
if
I
made
answer
that
question
on
regards
to
the
contract,
you
know
it
is
not
a
single
year
contract,
it's
a
multi-year
contract.
So
with
that
the
city
is
bringing
the
item
for
Council
approval,
and
it
will
you
know
it's
currently
right
now
it
is
a
city
staff
is
requesting
an
on-call
agreement
of
200
000
per
year,
which
actually
triggers
Consular
approval
for
that
and
since
it's
a
multi-year
contract.
T
In
addition,
the
other
questions
that
you
had
of
councilmember
and
it's
not
in
the
budget,
because
it's
not
we're
not
requesting
additional
probations.
You
know
for
this
item.
It's
because
the
the
amount,
the
budget
the
base
budget
already
includes
the
probations
already
for
the
to
treat.
You
know
services
so
that
that's
the
reason
why
and
it's
it's
allocated
throughout
various
different
budgets.
You
know
in
our
in
our
ground
maintenance
budget,
various
different
funding
programs.
So,
but
that's
the
reason
why
we're
not
requesting
additional
funding
for
this.
N
Okay,
thank
you
and
I
do
want
to
make
one
one
statement
about
this
item.
I'm
really
happy
to
see
this.
The
climate
action
plan
being
mentioned
in
there
in
that
connection
and
I
did
look
up
with
regards
to
carbon
sequestration
and
the
importance
of
having
the
trees
being
healthy.
N
S
Typically
speak
with
our
sustainability
folks,
every
time
we
put
together
a
staff
report
to
get
their
input.
D
Any
more
questions,
no
question
comment.
A
We
are
going
to
public
comment
first,
okay,
so
I'm
going
to
open
public
comment
for
this
item.
Do
we
have
any
cards
or
Zoom.
C
F
Thank
you,
I'm
glad
to
have
the
discussion
about
this.
I
have
actually
used
West
Coast
arborist
I
have
a
a
Modesto
Ash
in
my
backyard,
which
is
cabled
and
braced
I've
had
the
tree
maintained
since
I
purchased
the
house
in
1995.
I
purchased
the
house
understanding
that
I
would
have
to
maintain
the
back
tree
and
we
have.
We
have
spent
a
lot
of
money
on
the
back
tree.
I
am
happy
to
report
that
there
was
nothing
lost
in
those
winds
and
we
have
cables
and
braces
installed.
F
I
did
consult
with
West
Coast
Arbors
several
times.
Probably
15
years
ago,
was
very
very
impressed.
I
had
to
have
my
Modesto
Ash
trimmed
a
year
ago,
I
actually
looked
at
West
Coast
arborist,
but
I
was
able
to
have
another
person
because
they
were
able
to
come
in
for
the
PG
e
clearances.
I
would
recommend
West,
Coast,
arborists
and
I
would
say.
Remember
when
Rancho
Rinconada
annexed.
It
was
understood
that
my
neighborhood
in
2000
part
of
the
planning,
was
that
we
came
in
with
fully
mature
trees.
F
Fifty
thousand
dollars
was
spent
to
purchase
the
equipment
that
actually
lifts
people
up
to
trim
the
trees.
So
there
is
an
understanding
that
we
have.
There
is
an
understanding
by
the
neighborhood
of
Rancho
Rinconada
that
Cupertino
will
maintain
our
trees.
That
was
one
of
the
agreements
when
we
annexed
it
was
very,
very
important
to
us.
Rancho
Rinconada
has
some
of
the
most
mature
large
trees
in
Cupertino
and
I've
been
very,
very
pleased
with
the
city's
maintenance
of
them.
F
But
when
you're
you
know,
if
you're
going
to
be
building
a
road
or
doing
something
else,
maybe
you
can
have
the
lowest
contractor,
but
you,
when
you're
bidding
on
tree
work,
you
have
to
look
at
whether
the
group
will
do
a
significant
job
and
they
know
they're
different
types
of
trees.
You
cannot
trim
trees
same
way
per
species
and
you
can't
take
a
40
year
old,
full-grown
tree
and
trim
it
the
way
you
would
a
5
to
10
year
old
tree.
F
There
is,
if
people,
if
people
don't
remember,
one
of
our
big
ashes
in
Rancho,
has
been
valued
at
twenty
five
thousand
dollars.
Now
you
can
go
back
and
look
up
the
records
from
10
years
ago,
so
you
do
not
want
someone
coming
in
during
a
time
when
they're
on
call
and
start
hacking.
The
trees
up
believe
me,
I
have
seen
it.
I
saw
our
full-grown
Street
trees
cut
down
to
one
foot
from
the
base
before
we
annexed,
and
that
is
why
we
annexed
to
protect
our
trees.
F
I
think
that
the
city
understands
the
investment
they
have
in
our
big
trees.
The
big
trees
that
are
at
velco,
which
are
the
chamel
ashes,
which
are
different
than
Modesto
ashes.
But
I
am
pleased
that
the
city
is
looking
at
using
the
West
Coast
arborists
I.
Think
that
they're
a
very,
very
good
group,
and
that
we
will
know
when
the
winds
blow.
H
Hi
I
apologize
in
advance
if
this
isn't
an
appropriate
time
to
bring
this
up.
But
I've
been
wanting
to
ask
this
question:
when
Street
trees
were
planted,
Years
Ago
by
the
city
and
they
were
responsible
for
them,
they
had
and
I.
Don't
know.
If
this
has
anything
to
do,
I
think
the
city
was
doing
it
themselves,
but
it
is
important
to
the
growth
of
the
trees
and
the
health
of
the
trees.
H
They
had
water
bags
on
them
and
a
Truck
would
come
by
every
once
in
a
while
some
schedule.
It
was
appropriate,
I
assume
to
fill
those
bags
and
I
don't
see
those
anymore,
and
so
many
Street
trees
died
very
young
that
they're
never
going
to
need
the
service
of
any
of
these
Arbors.
So
if
we
could
just
clear
that
up,
that'd
be
great.
I
Council
I
would
like
to
understand
through
the
council,
is
that
is
element
of
this
that
can
be
looked
at,
which
is
on
call
activity.
200
000
good
year
is
a
fairly
steep
amount.
How
much
of
that
is
cost
attributed
to
the
on-call
nature
of
this
partnership,
contract
versus
the
use
of
an
external
arborist,
but
without
non-call
the
reason
I
bring?
This
up
is
because
my
understands
the
311
request.
I
There
is
an
on-call
service
that
is
looking
at
the
request
after
hours
for
after
hours,
we
need
to
call
emergency
numbers
that
are
listed
and
so
I'm
wondering
if
the
on
call
is
fully
warranted
or
if
it
would
be
on
a
monthly
basis
or
during
a
storm
in
Winter.
If
we
did
have
a
season
of
stops
in
in
a
regular
season
on
call
services
are
not
warranted.
C
Looks
like
we
lost
audio
sand.
Are
you
still
there.
C
Okay
looks
like
the
call
dropped
mayor
that
is,
that
is
all
for
public
comment
for
for
this
item.
A
Thank
you,
Mada
city
clerk,
I'm,
going
to
close
the
public
comments
and
bring
it
back
to
council
for
comments.
Council,
member
Chow,
I.
Think
you
said
you
had
a
comment.
D
Yeah
I
I'd
like
to
thank
the
staff
for
providing
the
all
the
six
applications
respondents
to
the
RFP.
That's
really
good
practice
that
we
are
starting
I,
think
those
were
not
used
to
be
provided.
So
thank
you
for
that
and
I
wish
that
the
RFP
could
be
provided
also.
So
we
have
some
context
on.
D
E
So
the
the
amusement
code
provides
that
the
city
council
can
make
findings
to
to
award
contracts
to
other
than
a
lowest
bidder
in
certain
circumstances.
So
you
know
that
that
finding
is
not
necessary
here,
because
you
know,
based
on
the
combination
of
qualifications
and
price
Public
Works
is
recommending
that
the
council
select
the
lowest
bidder.
E
For
certain
types
of
contracts,
that's
required
for
others,
there's
there's,
there's
more
flexibility.
Oh.
D
E
D
D
Thank
you
so
much,
and
can
we
answer
some
of
the
Public's
question?
There
was
one
of
council.
A
Comments
or
oh
on
anybody
has
cancer
comments.
I
I
would
like
to
really
thank
the
public
works,
because
I
think
this
this
contract
seems
to
be.
We
have
residence.
Verification
is
a
really
good
company
and
we
really
need
on
call
with
trees,
because
this
is
with
the
weather
is
right.
Now
this
is
very
important
and
also
our
Public
Works
work
closely
with
the
sustainability
Department.
To
make
sure
our
you
know,
planetary
trees
are
being
taken
care
of.
So
thank
you
very
much.
Councilmember
Moore.
N
E
N
S
This
is
mostly
for
maintenance,
but
there
could
be
situations
where
removal
or
replacement
are
potentially
part
of
it,
but
most
of
this
is
really
going
to
be
for
for
trimming
and
and
damaged
trees.
S
With
respect
to
Replacements,
we
typically
replace
commercial
trees
where
necessary,
if
there's
gaps
that
people
are
noticing,
they
can
alert
us
to
those.
Typically,
if
you
see
gaps,
we've
been
trying
to
replace
those
and-
and
one
of
the
reasons
that
we
haven't
been
able
to
put
a
tree
in,
there
is
potentially
there's
a
PG
e
Vault
or
some
water
facility.
That's
underneath
it
that
it's
not
typically
a
good
idea
to
put
a
tree
over
those
facilities.
D
How
much
time
I
have
it's?
Okay,
a
couple
minutes
I
want
to
ask
the
question
I.
Think
one
of
the
public
member
asked
about
exactly
when
we
will
use
this
Uncle
maintenance
service.
My
understanding
is,
the
city
does
have
staff
on
we,
our
staff
does
have
the
ability
to
trim
trees
and
they
go
around
the
city
region
by
reaching
to
trim
them
and
maintain
and
maintain
them
over
the
years.
So
this
Uncle
is
not
a
regular
or,
unlike
I,
think
the
I
think
Sam
mentioned.
D
A
A
Thank
you,
councilmember.
Child
may
I
have
a
second
second
day
council
member
Throne.
If
there's
no
more
discussions,
let's
have
the
vote
by
light.
Please.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
mother,
City,
Kirk,
so
I'm
going
to
move
to
public
hearing,
that's
enter
number
seven
can
see
the
petition
for
reconsideration
regarding
the
city
council
decision
on
February
7th
2023
to
uphold
the
appear
in
part,
approved
one
of
the
two
requested
freeway
oriented
signs
and
deny
the
request
to
sign
exception,
application
number
e,
xc2022-003.
A
And
I
like
to
open
the
public
comment
right
now,
the
hearing
right
now
so
the
recommended
action
is
for
city
council
to
conduct
a
public
hearing,
adopt
resolutions
number
23039
I,
denying
the
petition
for
reconsideration
I
like
to
open
public
hearing
and
then
start
presentation.
Please.
E
I
I
would
just
I'd
like
to
remind
Council
that
our
new
newly
adapted
procedures
require
disclosure
of
any
ex
parte
context.
I
said
this
would
be
the
time
for
anybody
that
has
had
X
party
Communications
with
the
applicant
or
the
appellant
to
to
to
state
those
okay.
A
You
raise
your
leg,
no
I'm
councilmember
more.
A
N
So
I
spoke
with
the
appellant
wrote
a
fry.
U
R
So
I've
also
spoken
briefly
with
Miss
Frye
I've
reviewed
all
of
the
emails
that
she
has
sent,
including
the
ones
that
council
members
have
included
in
the
public
record.
In
addition
to
the
people
who
have
written
in
emails
to
council
I've
spoken
with
the
following
individuals
on
this
topic:
Connie
Cunningham,
Annie,
Yang,
Dr,
Shani,
kleinhaus,
SEMA,
Lynn's,
cogniel,
Park,
McClintock,
Gene,
Bedard,
Michael,
Moore,
Jennifer,
Sheeran,
Tara,
Shri,
Krishna,.
V
About
that
John
martier,
Senior,
planner,
Community
Development.
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
good
evening,
mayor
and
Council
and
to
the
community
and
the
Cupertino
community
at
large.
V
Again,
the
the
introduction
by
mayor
way
is
essentially
the
subject
as
well,
as
you
know,
I'll
repeat,
as
well
as
the
considered
petition
for
reconsideration
regarding
the
city
council
decision
of
February
7
2023
to
uphold
the
appeal
of
playing
commission
resolution.
Number
6962
in
part
approved
one
of
the
two
requested
free
RNA
signs
and
deny
the
request
to
sign
exception.
The
applicant
who's
also
the
appellant
as
well
during
the
council.
Hearing
on
February
7th
is
David
four
from
all
science
Services.
V
He
is
in
the
he's,
an
intent
and
attendance
as
well,
and
we
have
petitioner
Rhoda
fry
I
do
want
to
let
you
know
that
earlier
this
afternoon
after
the
council
received
their
presentations,
I
did
make
some
modifications
to
the
presentation
just
to
have
a
read
more
clear
and
consistent
with
the
staff
report.
So
if
causing
any
confusion,
I
apologize
but
I
want
to
get
that
made
you
aware
of
that
before
I
started.
So,
a
little
bit
a
little
bit
background,
starting
with
February
7th
Council
on
February
7th
2023,
upheld
appeal
of
plan.
V
Commission
resolution
1662
in
part
proved
one
of
the
two
requested
freeway
oriented
signs
and
denied
the
request
to
sign
exception.
10
days
later,
as
is
customary
within
the
10-day
period
to
reconsider,
wrote
a
fry
submitted,
a
petition
for
reconsideration
for
council's
decision
city
council
reconsideration,
Municipal
Code,
section
2.08.096
authorizes
any
interested
person
to
petition
the
city
council
to
reconsider
Eddie
at
judicry
decision
made
by
the
city
by
the
council.
V
Three
proof
of
facts
which
demonstrate
that
the
city
council
proceeded
without
or
in
excess
of
its
jurisdiction
petitioner
argues
that
city
council
proceeded
without
or
in
excess
of
its
jurisdiction,
citing
an
undefined
validation
from
Caltrans
staff,
recommends
denying
reconsideration
on
this
ground,
as
Council
has
jurisdiction
to
review
the
planning
commission's
decision
and
affirm,
modify
or
reverse
it
grounds
for
reconsideration.
4
proof
of
facts
which
demonstrate
that
the
city
council
failed
to
provide
a
fair
hearing.
V
Staff
recommends
denying
reconsideration
on
this
ground,
as
there
is
no
evidence
that
any
interested
party
one
was
deprive
the
opportunity
to
present
evidence
or
two.
The
hearing
did
not
meet
standards
of
procedural
fairness,
including
notice
and
opportunity
to
be
heard
and
finally
grasp
for
reconsideration
number
five
proof
of
facts
which
demonstrate
that
the
city
council
abuses
discretion
by
not
preceding
in
a
matter
required
by
law
and
or
rendering
a
decision
which
is
not
supported
by
findings
of
fact
and
or
rendering.
A
decision
which,
in
the
findings
of
fact,
were
not
supported
by
the
evidence.
V
V
One
one
irada
that
was
brought
to
our
attention
a
few
days
ago
was
a
revision
staff
report.
Page
two
paragraph
four
first
It
should
read.
First
petition
argues
that
reconsideration
is
warded
because
there
is
relevant
evidence,
so
the
no
should
be
crossed
out.
We
don't
know
in
there
recommended
actions
that
the
city
council
conducted
public
hearing
and
adopt
resolution
number
23
attachment
a
denying
the
petition
for
reconsideration-
and
that
concludes
my
staff
presentation.
W
Good
evening,
thank
you
for
the
opportunity.
Council
voted
to
approve
the
sign
without
having
the
necessary
data
and
direction
to
make
an
informed
decision.
The
red
arrow
points
to
the
proposed
sign
location.
Next
slide.
You
only
need
one
reason
to
reconsider
and
there
are
many
now
you
have
the
opportunity
to
respond
to
your
residence,
health
and
safety
needs
and
to
follow
new
Municipal
Municipal
Code
next
slide
per
the
city
website.
W
The
sign
ordinance
provides
the
regulations
that
the
city
has
adopted
to
ensure
that
signage
does
not
impinge
upon
the
Aesthetics
of
the
city
and
does
not
inconvenience
the
public.
The
building's
excessive,
exterior
lighting
gives
you
an
idea
as
to
the
impact
of
the
proposed
sign
next
slide.
There
were
many
missteps
during
the
approval
process.
You
could
not
have
a
fair
hearing,
because
relevant
evidence
was
improperly
excluded.
You
were
told
that
you
had
to
vote
for
one
freeway-oriented
sign
because
the
building
had
none.
W
W
The
staff
report
next
slide
assume
that
only
sign,
2
and
3
shown
below
are
freeway
oriented
and
incorrectly
assumed
that
sign
one
is
not
freeway
oriented
I
mentioned
in
the
reconsideration
petition.
Sign
one
is
visible
from
the
highway
280..
Consequently,
Council
rendered
a
decision
that
was
not
supported
by
findings
of
fact.
Next
slide.
W
The
fact
that
the
proposed
sign
directly
faces
homes
across
the
freeway
was
improperly
excluded.
The
above
picture
is
what
you
were
shown.
The
below
one
is
what
you
should
have
been
shown.
The
voices
of
your
most
impacted
constituents
were
muted
because
they
were
not
notified.
They
were
deprived
the
opportunity
to
provide
evidence
next
slide.
W
The
proposed
sign
number
three
has
the
appearance,
that's
the
one,
that's
more
northward
being
625
square
feet,
but
the
council
was
told
165
square
feet.
So
here
is
my
schematic
of
the
dimensions
with
a
six
foot
tall
person,
as
it
turns
out,
an
illuminated
sign
is
not
measured
by
the
size
of
the
rectangle.
It's
measured
by
the
area
of
illuminated
letters.
Who
would
know
that
next
slide,
you
were
not
told
that
the
building
was
supposed
to
be
nearly
invisible
from
the
freeway.
W
How
can
you
justify
approving
a
highly
visible
sign
now
Planning
Commission
approved
this
building,
because
it
was
supposed
to
be
a
low
impact.
Building
a
low
impact
building
doesn't
require
multiple
signs,
illuminated
signs
or
giant
signs.
The
previous
building
had
no
freeway
oriented
sign
for
40
years.
The
staff
report
even
said
allowing
more
than
one
wall
mounted
sign
to
a
single
business,
is
contrary
to
the
intent
and
purpose
of
the
sign
ordinance.
W
Next
slide,
Council
approved
the
new
Public
Storage
sign,
based
on
the
false
assumption
that
it
would
be
the
only
freeway
oriented
sign
and
its
impact
would
be
comparable
to
that
of
the
Cupertino.
Hotel
here
is
an
existing
sign
that
is
Public
Storage,
that
is
about
one-third
the
size
of
the
proposed
sign,
and
it
is
much
more
impactful
of
the
Cupertino
Hotel
sign,
which
is
pointed
to
by
the
blue
arrow,
because
otherwise
you
wouldn't
see
it
next
slide.
Council
was
unable
to
provide
a
fair
hearing,
because
Council
failed
to
obtain
clear
instructions
from
staff.
W
W
The
design
criteria,
which
is
key
to
approving
science,
was
improperly
excluded
from
the
staff
report
and
from
the
hearing.
Even
after
a
council
member
requested
its
display
and
subsequently
asked
for
a
constituent
continuance,
the
development
requirements
were
also
improperly
excluded.
The
sign
shall
be
compatible
with
the
aesthetic
character
of
the
surrounding
developments
and
neighborhood.
Now
this
area
is
residential
and
office
per
the
north
De
Anza
special
area
of
the
general
plan.
The
building
was
promised
to
look
like
an
office
office.
Signs
cannot
exceed
40
square
feet.
W
The
images
below
you
can
see
that
the
south
side
of
the
building
is
dark,
but
the
freeway
oriented
sign
s
is
not,
and
that's
the
side
that
faces
residents
next
slide
and
and
then
the
other
the
long
side
also
faces
residents.
The
design
criteria
dictates
that
color
illumination
shall
not
produce
a
distraction
to
motorists.
The
applicants
stated
that
he
would
want
the
sign
to
be
visible
to
motorists
driving
at
75
miles
per
hour.
W
It
would
produce
a
distraction.
All
the
designs
of
forged
residents
will
be
blinded
by
the
sign
when
they
enter
their
driveway.
That's
a
safety
hazard.
Now,
if
you
look
at
the
picture
below
that
was
taken
from
a
residence
window,
the
red
arrow
points
to
the
general
location
of
the
sign,
the
design
criteria
dictates
the
color
and
illumination
shall
not
produce
a
distraction
to
Residents,
allowing
light
to
shine
into
people's
homes
is
a
health
hazard
and
a
public
nuisance
next
slide.
W
Now,
let's
see
I
wanted
to
have
a
little
case
study
about
how
a
good
sign
program
works.
This
is
the
Cupertino
hotel
and
that
was
approved
in
2016.
It
went
from
May
through
August.
First,
they
determine
the
size,
then
they
determine
the
illumination
and
then
what
they
do
is
they
refine?
They
look
at
the
design
criteria.
They
took
a
close
look
at
that
they
say.
Is
this
compatible
with
the
aesthetic
character
of
the
surrounding
developments
and
neighborhood,
and
then
they
ask
how
about
the
color
and
illumination?
W
W
Etc
next
slide,
please
now
I'm
going
to
compare
the
public
storage
building
with
the
Hyatt
House
sign,
which
is
a
hotel.
This
is
that
picture
was
taken
at
at
dawn,
the
building
that
the
building
that
you
see.
That's
actually
what
the
sign
that
that's,
what
that's
the
size
of
the
sign
that
actually
faces
the
freeway
but
I
couldn't
get
an
image
in
it.
So
I
took
a
different
one.
It
is
the
same
size,
the
other
one,
with
the
trees.
That
is
the
sign
from
the
freeway.
W
W
It
faces
residence
homes,
it's
an
intensification
of
a
non-conforming
use
and
it
filed
some
Municipal
Code
next
slide.
You
know
mistakes
can
happen.
We
can
fix
it.
It's
accepting
that
the
hearing
went
wrong
and
rejecting
the
sign
proposal
allows
the
applicant
to
reapply
and
work
with
staff
and
propose
a
more
appropriate
sign
consequences
of
accepting
a
sign
public
nuisance,
health
hazard
safety,
hazard,
excessive
energy
use,
light
pollution.
Let's
do
something
about
the
elimination
on
the
building.
Look,
let's
say
I
want
you
to
think
about
this.
W
If
my
home
was
allowed
to
have
only
one
swimming
pool
and
I
already
had
one
that
was
accidentally
permitted
as
and
had,
but
had
a
small
hot
tub
upon
realizing
the
error.
Would
the
city
allow
me
to
have
a
second
swimming
pool
with
the
knowledge
that
it
would
be
a
public
nuisance,
a
health
and
safety
hazard?
Can
you
answer
that
question
now,
there's
been
public
outcry.
Next
slide,
you've
got
over
160
signatures
on
change.org
Audubon
Society
Sierra
Club.
Now
you've
got
several.
A
E
A
We
ask
questions,
I
think
I
think
she
can
answer
right.
E
You
can
ask
questions
of
the
the
appellant.
E
D
A
Maybe
a
metal
city
clerk
can
show
the
last
slide.
Oh.
D
So
I
have
a
question
regarding
you
mentioned
the
the
general
plan.
It's
you,
you
say
it's
not
compliant
with
the
general
plan.
D
Plan
the
petitioner
claims,
the
public
storage
building
sits
in
I,
think
the
staff
report
I
read
so
many
versions.
One
of
the
staff
reports
says
that
current
zoning
is
I,
think
office
and
Industrial
on
for
that
site,
but
I
think
the
petitioner
is
claiming
that
the
general
plan
for
that
side
is
not
industrial
use.
Therefore,
it's
a
non-compliant
use.
It's.
O
O
Q
D
My
understanding
is
last
time
when
we
approved
that
we
had
to
make
findings
that
design
complies
with
I
think
there
were
a
few
findings
and
one
of
them
is
harmonious
to
the
neighborhood.
D
Q
D
It
is,
but
the
district
is
office
and
residential
use
and
the
industrial
building
is
conforming.
E
D
D
Petition
attached
2006
approval,
we
referenced
the
general.
V
A
Okay,
you
have
30
seconds
council
member
Moore.
A
N
W
W
Had
this
visceral
reaction
to
having
a
sign
on
the
freeway
and
so
I
contacted
my
friends
at
the
committee
at
the
committee
for
green
Foothills
and
Audubon
Society,
who
are
naturally
opposed
to
it
and,
and
you
know
they
agreed
and
and
and
you
know,
the
Planning
Commission
rejected
the
sign
and,
and
that
was
in
fact
KQED
was
even
interested
in
the
project
and
then
when
it
came
back
to
City
Council,
of
course,
I
I
assumed
that
it
would
have
been
the
same.
W
You
know,
I
I,
just
I
lived
here
for
40
years,
I've
I've,
gotten
involved
in
various
issues:
trees,
garbage
school
safety,
all
sorts
of
things,
and
this
one
just
just
I-
had
a
visceral
reaction
to
it
and
I
think
a
lot
of
other
people
do.
Is
you
notice
you
know?
I
did
a
change
that
art
petition
you've
gotten
over
160
signatures,
Audubon
Society,
ACR
Club
are
on
board
with
this
and
you've
gotten
a
lot
of
letters.
W
How
I
would
like
to
know
how
many
letters
you
got
and
I
I
just
think
it
would
be,
as
I
said,
I
I
think
it
was
during
on
February
7th,
certainly
in
October
this
would
defile
our
our
our
beautiful
Highway
and
not
just
manner.
N
For
a
moment,
sorry,
so
you
you
mentioned
the
the
building
is
the
sign.
Where
can
you
explain
where
that
is
from
because.
C
W
Locate
that
because
there
was
there,
was
something
about
that
got
it
yes
and
actually
before,
just
before
that.
Regarding
the
the
general
plan,
the
Zoning
for
the
north
De
Anza
special
area
that
is
still
in
place,
it
was
in
place
and
you
know-
and
so
it
is
residential
and
an
office.
That's
what
that's
what
it
says
and
that's
why
this
a
project
that
was
smaller
than
this
one
at
Public
Storage
was
rejected
in
2006..
W
So
as
far
as
the
building
is
assigned,
that's
kind
of
interesting
Public
Storage
has
come
up.
Their
Architects
have
come
up
with
this
idea,
and
then
they
had
it
in
their
blog
about
how
they're
it's
their
new
design
and
that
the
building
is
the
sign.
So
you
know
that's
why
they
have
the
orange
wall,
which
is
like
six,
for
that
particular
one
is
625
square
feet,
and
then
they
put
the
sign
on
it,
but
they
actually
did
they're
saying
the
building
is
the
sign.
So
the
impact
is
that
you've
got
this.
W
You
know
billboard
size
sign,
looking
at
you
and
then,
of
course,
there's
these
illuminated
hallways
that
are
fake
and
they're
also
shining
into
residence.
Bedrooms,
and
that
is
also
that
that
whole
idea
of
the
design
about
the
building
being
it
actually
says
the
building
is
the
sign
with,
is
an
italics
on
there
on
their
blog
and
the
the
buildings.
Architects.
Q
N
I
do
have
a
question
for
the
attorney
with
regards
to
the
the
hallways,
so
I
had
some
vague
recollection
that
the
hallways
were
not
usable
and
then
I
believe
we
discussed
this
item
during
the
previous
meeting
and
I'm
bringing
this
up,
because
I
think
this
is
a
special
circumstance
where,
if
you're
having
a
brightly
lit
hallway
with
doors
that
don't
open
and
in
a
way
that's
advertising.
N
What
this
building
is
that
I
think
we're
getting
into
an
area
where,
from
the
municipal
code,
I
think
we're
getting
into
an
area
where
it's
a
special
circumstance
and
I
mentioned
that,
because
we
do
have
there's
another
structure
in
the
city
and
I
noticed
that
it
had
a
very,
very
large
window,
clear
story
window
and
a
hallway
behind
it,
and
they
put
in
very
large
letters
the
name
of
the
business
and-
and
it
reminds
me
of
this
situation
here
so
I'm
wondering
about
if
we
haven't
gotten
into
a
special
situation
with
regards
to
signage,
where
there's
being
creative
use,
that's
needs
to
be
considered
and
be
considered
as
actual
signage.
E
So
I,
don't
I,
don't
think
an
internally
illuminated
hallway
would
would
be
a
sign.
It
doesn't
have
any
of
the
indesia
being
signage.
I'd
also
say
that
you
know
that
when
this
building
was
originally
approved,
you
know
neither
the
hallway
nor
the
building
was
treated
as
a
sign
and
that
that
decision
is
is
final
and
is
really
not
the
subject
of
reconsideration.
Tonight.
There
are
Provisions
for
non-residential
indoor
right
Lighting
in
the
bird
safe
development,
ordinance
and
those
are
are,
are
being
enforced
with
respect
to
this
building.
So.
E
Yeah
explain
what
it
means
yeah,
so
so
the
the
the
bird
safe
development
ordinance
spread
requires
that
there
are
that
that
that
interior
lighting
is
is
in
non-residential.
Buildings
is
turned
off
at
night.
E
N
A
Thank
you,
okay,
so
I'm
going
to
ask
the
staff
a
few
questions.
You
know
we
we
have
Council
here.
We
we
make
ordinances,
we
follow
city
codes,
we
have
follow
state
and
federal
laws,
so
I
think
we
need
to
follow
our
own
laws.
When
we
at
this
sign
is
it
anywhere
design
is
in
violation
of
our
codes
or
objective
standards?
E
Again,
yes,
we.
V
Believe
it
is
in
what
was
approved
Council
on
February
7th
is,
in
conformance
with
with
a
sign
ordinance.
A
So
so
my
next
question
is:
if
somehow
we
we
don't
like
this
residents,
don't
like
this
council
members,
don't
like
this.
We
can
possibly
revisit
the
ordinance,
but
that's
not
going
to
affect
this
project.
A
If
we
revisit
our
science
ordinance
and
have
a
different,
you
know
way
to
prevent
something
like
to
happen,
but
that's
not
going
to
retrof
retrospect
to
regulate
this
project
through.
A
O
So
the
sign
has
been
approved
by
the
Council
on
February
7th.
That
was
a
final
decision
made
by
Council
and
you're
absolutely
right.
If
the
council,
members
and
the
members
of
public
find
difficulties
in
what
has
been
regulated
in
the
sign
ordinance,
that
is
a
different
task.
O
Perhaps
Council
can
consider
directing
staff
to
revisit
design
ordinance
as
a
work
study.
A
work
program
item
is
council.
Member
more
alluded
to
earlier
during
the
meeting
today.
However,
the
current
sign
that
was
approved
by
council
is
in
full
compliance
with
the
regulation
that's
in
place
today
and
with
that
said,
I
would
also
like
to
read
my
counsel
as
laid
out
and
staff
report.
The
petition
for
reconsiderations
can
only
be
made
based
on
the
five
findings
and
criteria,
as
laid
out
in
section
2.08096
understand.
A
Okay,
I,
that's
my
question.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
the
the
petition,
the
applicants
are
following
all
the
ordinances,
object,
standards
and
city
codes.
One
more
question:
you
know
that
the
petition
mentioned
that
the
sign
is
huge,
but
when
I
we
were
told
the
sign
is
not
huge.
It's
165
square
feet,
but
the
petitioner
says
500
or
600
square
feet.
Can
you
tell
me
the
difference.
V
Sure
mayor,
yes,
you
know
the
petitioner
had
measured
and
I
think
she
even
clarified
herself
in
her
presentation
at
least
that's
how
I
understood
it.
She
had
counted
the
orange
background
as
sign
area.
You
know
the
way.
1908
definitions
in
the
municipal
code
defines
how
defines
how
we
measure
signs-
and
you
know
potentially
individually
letter
signs
like
the
one
that
was
approved,
is
just
very,
very
delineated
or
just
around
the
letters
themselves
and
whatnot
and
that's
a
sign
area
now,
if
it
has
the
fine
background,
that's
illuminated.
V
That's
structurally
part
of
the
the
sign
itself.
Yes,
there's
other
ways
of
measuring,
but
as
the
signs
are
designed
you
measure
around
the
lettering
and
the
the
orange
background
will
not
be
considered
sign
area.
Okay,.
A
V
A
So
I'm,
that's
my
question.
Council
member
from
advice,
my
mind:
do
you
have
questions
who
who
slides
on
councilman
Memorial
five
minutes
is
up.
You
can
yeah.
Yes,
please.
U
Yeah,
so
my
question
was
about
the
dark
sky
Ordnance.
This
also,
my
understanding
is:
it
complies
with
the
dark
sky
ordinance
in
terms
of
brightness
intensity.
Yeah
am
I
right.
V
Correct
the
the
sign
ordinance
has
the
the
250
foot
Lambert
restrictions
on
it.
You
know
if
the
signs
are
indeed,
you
know
turned
off
by
a
certain
time,
and
that
includes
even
the
interior
ones,
which
are
not
up
for
reconsideration
now.
You
know
those
would
be
in
compliance
with
the
dark
sky
ordinance,
correct.
U
We'll
go
ahead.
One
quick
question
now:
there's
something
called
the
The
Good
Neighbor
policy
right.
Can
we
is
there
any
way
that
sort
of
outside
of
the
contract
staff
can
negotiate
or
bring
some
of
these
things
to
the
attention
of
the
story.
O
Through
the
mayor,
if
I
understand,
the
request
from
vice
mayor
is
if
there
is
a
request
that
could
be
passed
on
to
the
developer,
to
be
a
good
neighbor
to
the
community
to
voluntarily
turn
off
your
light
at
a
certain
time
so
that
it
minimized
the
impact
to
the
residents
around
the
facility,
and
that
will
be
a
volunteering
gesture
on
the
developer
and
operator.
Side
and
staff
can
definitely
follow
up
with
the
conversation.
But
that
will
be
a
voluntary
gesture
on
the
operator
side.
V
They're
supposed
to
be
for
the
ordinance
correct,
it's
it's
the
way
or
industry
specifically
is
two
hours
after
closing,
or
in
a
business
or
11
pm.
Whichever
is
later.
R
Yeah,
just
a
few
in
clarification,
one
I'd
I'd,
like
staff
to
opine
on
the.
V
Thank
you
the
way
it
was
taken
in
we,
we
had
made
the
Judgment
at
the
time
of
application.
For
for
this.
You
know
it
was
an
exception
and,
as
even
subsequently
as
a
building
permit,
that
this
was
not
a
free
oriented
sign.
Do
the
direction
was
facing
as
well
as
just
by
the
way
the
plan
sets
were
drawn
out.
We
made
a
termination
of
time.
The
building
permit
was
has
been
approved,
the
signs
have
been
installed
and
and
whatnot,
and
so
it
was.
It
was
a
call
that
we
made
with
that.
R
Okay,
in
addition,
I
had
sent
in
a
number
of
questions
in
advance
and
I
had
wanted
to
get
some
comparative
information
with
regard
to
the
signage
that
is
freeway
oriented
at
the
Hyatt
House
I
was
told
that
it
was
below
the
the
threshold
that
we
allow,
but
do
you
know
the
precise
level
of
Luminosity
of
those
signs.
R
And
then
to
the
City
attorney,
every
decision
that
we
make
with
respect
to
the
five
potential
grounds
for
reconsideration
has
to
be
backed
by
substantial
evidence.
Yes,
correct.
E
A
substantial
evidence
is
defined
as
enough
evidence
to
allow
a
reasonable
person
to
conclude
that
the
decision
made
by
the
approval
Authority
is
correct,
so
that
does
give
discretion
to
council.
E
However,
speculation,
conjecture
or
unsubstantiated
opinion
does
not
constitute
substantial
evidence
under
the
law
so
that
that's
the
general
standard,
so
there
you
know,
you'd
have
to
want
to
point
to
concrete
facts
that,
for
example,
showed
that
there
was
evidence
presented
so
just
taking
the
example
of
the
first
finding
for
for
reconsideration
that
there
was
evidence
presented
by
the
petitioner
here
that
both
was
not
made
available
to
council
by
the
petitioner
or
another
party
and
also
could
not
have
been
made
available
by
reason.
Diligence.
E
So
so
you
know,
given
that
the
location,
size
orientation
color,
you
know,
all
of
those
characteristics
of
the
sign
were
known
at
the
time.
Council
needs
to
apply
that
standard.
In
light
of
those
facts,.
R
And
on
the
fifth
prong,
the
abusive
discretion,
prong
and
another
administrative
proceedings,
it
would
be
sufficient
to
say
that
something
was
wrong
as
a
matter
of
law
in
order
to
be
able
to
reverse
it.
But
is
it
correct
to
say
that
in
this
instance,
you
would
also
have
to
support
it
with
a
a
finding
of
substantial
evidence?
Yeah.
E
There'd
have
to
be
substantial
evidence
that,
for
example,
there
was
a
legal
error
or
or
a
factual
error
that
was
made
by
council
at
the
initial
hearing.
A
So
I
have
one
more
question
for
staff,
because
the
petition
does
also
say
that
the
planning
commissioner
denied
it.
So
she
expect
the
council
to
also
deny
that
what,
under
what
condition,
was
the?
How
has
the
plane
commission
denied
it
or
do
they
deny
that?
Did
they
have
the
right
to
deny
it
or
do
they
did
our
legal
counsel,
consult,
you
know,
give
them
advice.
V
Yeah
I
mean
it's
it's
a
judicary
decision
with
the
plant
commission
as
well,
and
you
know,
as
noted,
you
know,
in
the
pride
in
the
staff
report
for
February
7th,
that
the
it's
de
novo
decision
from
the
city
council,
so
Planning
Commission,
you
know,
denied
the
the
exception
and
the
app
and
any
freeway
oriented
sign
as
well,
and
so
it
was
the
applicant
who
actually
appealed
it,
and
so
they
they
want
a
new
de
Nova
Hearing
in
front
of
city
council.
V
So
both
sets
of
bodies,
decision-making
bodies
have
the
ability
to
either
approve
or
deny
the
application
as
presented.
R
E
E
A
Okay,
thank
you,
I
think
we're
done
with
our
questioning
time.
Councilmember
yeah!
Let's,
let's
hear
the
public
comments.
First,
okay:
let's
open
up
the
public
comments,
please.
C
Oh
come
here:
I
have
five
cards
blue
speaker
cards
that
have
been
submitted
in
Community,
Hall
and
I,
see
several
hands
raised
on
Zoom.
Please
have
your
hands
raised
or
submit
speaker
cards
submitted
in
the
next
nine
minutes.
I
have
starting
with
Jennifer
Griffin
Albert
Lee
and
Connie
Cunningham
welcome
Jennifer.
F
Good
evening
city
council
I
was
at
the
Planning
Commission
meeting
last
fall
and
when
they
discussed
this
public
storage
and
then
I
have
attended
the
other
City
Council
meetings
pertaining
to
this,
and
in
the
past
23
years,
I
have
in
Cupertino,
attended
I,
think
it
was
design,
review
and
Planning
Commission
meetings
where
we
have
discussed
signs
in
depth.
So
it
is
not
unprecedented
for
people
in
Cupertino
to
have
participated.
We
actually
worked
on
some
of
the
ones
for
some
of
the
shopping
centers.
F
That's
why
I
remember
this
and
I
was
probably
at
the
2006
or
I
thought
she
said.
16
meetings
of
that
then
again,
I
will
just
start
out
and
say
that
one
of
the
things
that
got
everyone
off
on
the
wrong
foot-
it's
nobody's
fault.
There
is
a
new
law
that
just
went
in
in
January,
where
you
cannot
have
plan
sets
shown
to
anyone
and
that
has
completely
just
kind
of
tip
the
Apple
card
over.
Nobody
knew
that
the
law
was
there.
F
Yes
and
okay:
it's
a
law
but
we're
having
to
deal
with
it
without
any
preparation
and
I
feel
like
it
tied
everyone's
hands:
the
city
council,
the
the
staff
I
was
dumbfounded
by
it,
because
I
couldn't
figure
out.
There
were
no
pictures
of
the
signs,
so
I
think
and
I
I.
Think
the
developer
too
I
I
think
that
this
was
unfortunate.
But
this
is
the
cross
we
bear.
We
have
to
try
to
figure
out
how
to
deal
with
this
new
law.
F
The
other
thing
is
that
Cupertino
did
not
have
a
Cupertino,
has
a
freeway
running
through
the
middle
of
it,
and
it
was
a
city
and
then
in
1968
280
was
put
in.
So
you
have
a
city,
that's
divided
by
a
freeway,
so
there
are
people
that
are
going
to
be
concerned
about
what
is
visible
as
you
go
through
the
city
of
Cupertino
and
head
on
up
to
Los,
Altos
or
you're,
going
south
and
hit
San
Jose
I
I
think
that
it's
very
very
important.
Now
we
have
the
dark
sky.
Ordinance.
F
I
think
it's
very
important
that
we
try
to
have
a
dark
presence
as
we
go
through
Cupertino
on
280.
I,
I'm
quite
attached
to
280.
We
have
our
beautiful
Bridge
up
there.
The
that
goes
from
homestead
over
to
Mary
and
I.
Think
that
we
need
to
have
I
mean
Cupertino
to
me
is
quality
Elegance.
We
need
to
make
sure
that
the
experience
of
going
through
Cupertino
is
as
beautiful
as
being
in
Cupertino.
F
X
Hi,
thank
you.
My
wife
and
I
have
been
living
in
Cupertino
for
the
past
22
years.
Our
kids
were
born.
Q
X
And
yeah
I
only
recently
found
out
about
this
sign,
so
I
hope
I'm,
not
too
late,
but
we
live
in
the
the
the
Anza
porch
Condominiums
across
the
freeway,
from
the
public,
storage
building
and
yeah
one
night
I
was
just
going
to
bed
and
our
bedroom
blinds
are
open
and
I
noticed
a
bright
light
coming
from
outside
and
I
thought
it
was
like
construction
or
I,
I
I
thought
for
sure.
X
It
was
on
our
side
of
the
freeway
because
it
was
so
bright,
but
it
yeah
it
turned
out
to
be
the
lights
from
the
hallway,
from
the
public,
storage
building
and
I
feel
like
yeah
having
another
big
sign.
There
would
just
make
it
a
lot
worse
and,
of
course,
we
can
close
our
blinds.
Some
light
does
leak
through
I
actually
have
no
problem
falling
asleep
at
night,
but
my
wife
and
our
high
school
daughter
are
more
sensitive
so,
and
another
thing
that
was
already
mentioned
was
about
the
highway
280..
X
A
X
And
then
yeah,
the
issue
about
280
was
already
brought
up.
280
along
our
stretch
of
Cupertino
is
an
official
California.
Scenic
Highway
and
most
buildings
along
280
are
painted
like
a
neutral
color
to
blend
in
with
the
scenery,
whereas
the
public
storage
building
has
bright
orange
panels
and
I
feel
like
and
also
on
scenic
highways.
X
Billboards
are
not
allowed.
We
don't
want
to
make
it
like
101
or
880.,
and
I
feel
like
having
a
huge
sign
in
addition
to
the
orange
color,
and
all
the
hallway
lights
basically
makes
it
like
a
huge
billboard,
which
I
think
is
in
violation
of
the
spirit
of
our
Scenic
Highway
program,
so
yeah
I,
hope
I'm,
not
too
late,
but
I
ask
the
council
and
even
the
developers
to
reconsider
this
sign
and
yeah.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
Thank.
R
So,
as
we
understand
it,
the
sign
is
I
should
say:
the
hallway
is
supposed
to
be
off
at
9
00
PM.
If
it
were
off
at
9,
00
PM.
Would
that
satisfy
your
needs?.
C
Y
Thank
you
good
evening,
mayor
vice
mayor
and
council
members,
and
thank
you
to
staff
for
this
report.
I
am
Connie
Cunningham
I'm,
a
resident
Audubon
member
and
housing.
Commissioner
speaking
for
myself.
Only
if
it
is
possible
I
would
urge
the
city
to
approve
this
reconsideration.
Y
The
illuminated
signs
are
a
health
and
safety
hazard.
If
that
is
not
possible,
I
would
ask
that
the
council
ensure
that
this
does
not
happen
again.
I
respect
the
right
of
businesses
to
make
a
good
living.
However,
businesses
have
responsibilities
to
the
communities
that
they
serve.
It
may
be
hard
to
balance
these
two
needs,
but
health
and
safety
risks
are
the
most
important
considerations.
City
policies
establish
guidance
to
help
businesses
and
residents
make
decisions.
A
strong
safety
net
is
an
imperative
for
government
to
provide
for
less
fortunate
and
vulnerable
residents
in
our
city.
Y
Y
First
I
urge
Public
Storage
management
to
consider
limiting
the
hours
that
they
leave
lights
on
to
be
in
keeping
with
the
intent
and
spirit
of
city
ordinances.
If
business
hours
end
at
9,
00
PM,
please
turn
off
lights
at
that
time.
Please
listen
to
the
people
who
are
affected
by
your
work
and
many
have
spoken.
We
want
your
storage
units.
We
want
you
to
make
a
good
living.
We
also
want
you
to
respect
the
needs
of
the
residents
and
drivers
in
and
through
our
community,
your
community
too.
Y
Secondly,
I
urge
city
council
to
direct
staff,
to
revise
the
sign
ordinance
to
strengthen
the
requirement
for
reducing
light
pollution
and
light
trespass.
This
would
prevent
harm
to
Residents
and
drivers.
The
applicant
stated
that
there
was
precedent
for
using
lighted
signs.
Wording
in
our
ordinance
must
clearly
state
that
the
fact
another
firm
has
a
lighted
sign
does
not
give
added
weight
to
the
new
request.
No
precedent
stuff
I
have
spoken
before
about
declining
biodiversity
at
city
council.
This
is
just
one.
Y
This
one
is
just
one
of
many
decisions
that
will
impact
the
health
of
our
residents
and
biodiversity.
One
indicator
of
the
damage
caused
by
light
pollution
is
that
birds
are
dying
by
the
billions
B
billions
because
of
light
pollution.
Scientists
have
warned
us
that
by
their
deaths
they
are
a
harbinger
of
the
deadly
impact
of
light
pollution
on
the
human
body.
Just
like
the
canary
in
the
coal
mine
these
birds,
untimely
deaths
can
serve
to
help
us
save
human
lives.
By
limiting
light
pollution
in
closing
and
I
did
put
it
in
the
whatever.
Y
C
H
Make
a
comment,
then:
when
councilmember
frew
and
talk
ask
the
question
of
this
gentleman
about
the
nine
o'clock
shutoff
of
the
current
glaring
lights,
with
the
fake
Hall
and
fake
doors,
he
said
yes,
turning
them
off
early
would
help,
but
that
wasn't
an
answer
as
to
how
he
feels
about
an
additional
sign.
So
I
feel
like
that
may
have
been
misleading
and
I
wish
that
he
had
been
asked
that
question
as
well.
So
please
respect
the
work
done
on
behalf
of
our
community
by
Rhoda
fry.
H
H
All
this
in,
in
essence,
all
the
support
is
to
reverse
your
previous
vote,
which
I
think
was
done
under
some
form
of
duress.
That
meeting
was
very
odd
and
I.
Don't
think
you
were
getting
full
information,
you
thanks
to
Rhoda,
have
a
lot
more
now
and
I.
Just
you
need
to
understand
that
you
do
have
wiggle
room
and-
and
if
it's
let
me
put
it
this
way,
this
is
a
perfect
example
of
Give,
a
Mouse,
a
Cookie
If
You
Give,
a
Mouse,
a
Cookie
I.
H
Don't
think
that
this
developer
gives
a
kahoot
about
Cupertino
and
I.
Think
they're,
displaying
that
by
not
offering
to
compromise
and
I
I
didn't
know
that
the
sign
size
was
determined
by
just
the
lettering.
But
when
you
put,
we
can
see
how
everything
reflects
in
the
interior,
which,
by
the
way,
is
light,
trespass
and.
H
I
can't
reply,
I
think
it
was
vice
mayor
that
asked
about
dark
sky
ordinance
if
it
complies
Darkseid
ordinance
has
more
than
just
the
facet
use
specified.
There's
also
light
trespass
light
trespass,
it
will
definitely
be,
and
it
already
is,
for
the
neighbors
across
the
freeway
and
motorists,
so
there's
so
much
wrong
with
this
and
I'm
so
disappointed
that
we
have
someone
that
wants
to
be
part
of
our
community
and
is
forcing
things
down
our
throat
that
no
one
wants
and
I'm
sure
they
wouldn't
want
it
in
their
own
communities.
Thank
you.
Thank.
G
Z
We
did
a
couple
of
disability
studies
to
see
the
impact
from
the
freeway
really
going
on
the
280.
You
barely
see
the
property.
You
have
all
these
eucalyptus
trees
from
Caltrans
that
block
the
facility,
even
when
we
are
at
four
Stories.
The
only
point
that
we
really
see
the
top
floor
is
with
the
through
the
bridge
when
you're
driving
on
the
bridge
through
the
ends
when.
P
N
AA
Are
all
internal
and
all
of
our
displays
are
with
faux
doors.
So
when
you're
looking
at
some
of
the
views
that
we
have
and
you
see-
storage
doors,
those
are
not
actual
storage
doors
you're
not
seeing
inside
into
the
storage
building,
we've
created,
yeah
we've
created
a
separate
space
and
those
are
lit.
By
can
lights.
AB
Good
evening,
City
Council
I
live
right
in
front
of
this
storage,
so
I
am
witnessing
the
light.
Every
night
I
usually
go
to
bed
at
around
one
o'clock.
The
light
is
still
on,
and
this
guy
is
tearing
lies.
Okay,
so
and
you
make
a
decision
based
on
the
truth,
priests.
C
C
B
Okay
hi
good
evening,
everyone,
my
name-
is
Vanessa
techmanski
I'm,
a
30-year
Cupertino
resident
31
years,
I,
really
like
to
think
of
any
notable
change
that
we
make
in
our
city
in
terms
of
the
benefits
added
not
only
to
our
residents
but
to
the
public
in
general
and
I.
Don't
really
understand
what
another
what
this
new
freeway
sign
does
for
anyone
other
than
maybe
the
business,
but
for
even
them,
maybe
not
because
most
people
are
going
to
use
Google
or
look
online
to
find
a
Public
Authority
the
storage
facility.
B
I
also
thought
it
was
unfair
that,
in
the
previous
sign
consideration
the
last
meeting
that
I
didn't
feel
the
council
really
understood
on
that.
No
sign
was
one
of
their
options
and
I
don't
see
that
they
were
made
aware
that
the
business
already
had
the
one
sign
there
and
in
I
also
feel
like
the
the
canned
lights
with
the
doors
on
the
side
of
the
building.
B
It
may
not
have
letters
but
to
me
that
is
like
a
big
sign,
so
this
is
like
they're
getting
a
third
sign:
I,
don't
I,
don't
I,
don't
get
it
I,
don't
want
to
set
a
precedent
for
other
businesses.
B
I've
talked
to
a
lot
of
residents
who
think
that
the
public
storage
building
and
those
big
lights
that
are
emitted
are
ugly
and
don't
tie
in
with
the
surrounding
landscape.
I.
Think
it's
extremely
unfair
to
the
neighbors
and
I.
Don't
want
to
see
Cupertino
look
like
101
I
mean
already.
B
We
have
graffiti
on
the
freeway
that
hasn't
been
cleaned
up
for
a
while
near
280
on
280,
near
portal
and
Blaney
I
I
think
it
just
is
really
unfitting
with
our
city
so
and,
as
I
said,
I
think
it
sets
a
really
bad
precedent,
they're
just
kind
of
squeezing
in
the
the
one
sign
and
then
the
can
light
sign.
And
now
it
seems
like
a
third
sign
so
trying
to
think.
B
AC
Good
evening,
mayor
and
council
members
I
think
it's
a
good
opportunity
at
this
point
for
us
to
understand.
You
know
what
actually,
how
you
really
serve
the
public
in
terms
of
addressing
their
concerns.
So
if
you
one
of
the
slides
of
Buddha
fry,
identifies
as
consequences
of
accepting
the
sign
now,
it
says
public
nuisance,
health,
hazard
safety,
hazard,
excessive
energy
use,
light
pollution,
so
I
think
what
we
need
to
understand
is
this
not
only
affects
human
species,
it
affects
other
species
as
well,
because
we
are
by
Nature.
AC
We
are
used
to
you,
know
daytime
and
the
night
time
you
know,
and
so
I
think
it's
to
some
extent.
That
was
very
well
spoken
by
Connie
Cunningham,
another,
a
distinguished
member
who
actually
talked
about
it.
So
I
think
I
don't
want
to
revisit
that
part.
AC
But
what
I
want
to
say
is
that
whenever
a
certain
resolution
comes
up,
especially
as
a
denovo
kind
of
thing,
where
you
know
they
have
a
right
to
appeal,
one
has
to
go
back
and
look
at
the
consequences
of
what
your
actions
could
be
and
in
this
case
case
it
is
very
much
there.
I
mean
you,
you
have
literally
opened
the
doors
for
every
other
business
to
come
back
and
overrule
whatever
is
done
by
the
Planning
Commission.
AC
So
I
would
request
that
please
revisit
sign,
Auditors
and
make
it
as
tight
as
possible
so
that
consequences
of
the
sign
are
are
addressed
before
you
approve
us
anything
which
is
related
to
sign
up
signing.
So
that's
one
thing:
I
would
definitely
appreciate
to
see
from
the
council.
The
other
thing
is,
there
are
different
kinds
of
business
types.
You
know
there
are
some
businesses
which
require,
you
know,
visibility
at
night.
This
is
not
one
of
those.
AC
You
are
not
going
to
drive
by
public
storage
and
say:
oh
it's
eight
o'clock
in
the
night,
you
go
there
and
you
say:
let's
go
and
kind
of
you
know,
do
something
at
nine
o'clock
or
ten
o'clock
you're
not
going
to
do
that
they
have
their
own
business
hours.
So
that's
another
thing:
I
would
like
you
to
point
out
that
there
are
different
business
type.
There
are
some
which
do
want
which
operate
in
the
night
time
as
well.
You
know
they
have
a
reason
to
have
more
signage,
but
this
is
not
the
one.
AC
The
third
one
another
thing
I
want
to
point
out
is,
though
we
only
take
the
lettering
in
our
sign.
If
there's
a
bright,
till
IT
background,
I
think
that
should
be
included,
and
we
you
should
turn
this
down
there.
You
know
in
Cupertino
has
the
benefit
of
having
world's
best
business.
The
Apple
computer.
Look
at
that
they
are,
they
are.
They
are
not
selling
themselves
by
science.
They
are,
they
are
never
trying
to
make
their
footprint.
Look
that
odd,
so
I
think
from
that
point
of
view,
I
would
request.
AC
Please
enact
take
a
sign
ordinance
as
quickly
as
possible
and
please
do
not
set
in
motion
any
domino
effect
so
that
other
businesses
will
rush
to
the
city
council
to
get
certain
concessions
which
they
are
whenever
they
feel
little
offended.
Thank
you
very
much
and
I
hope
everything
is
taken
into
consideration.
Thank
you.
Thank.
AD
Good
evening,
mayor
way,
vice
mayor,
Mohan
and
console
members,
my
name
is
Annie
Yang
and
I'm.
The
chair
of
the
environmental
action
committee
of
the
Santa
Clara
Valley,
Audubon,
Society,
I'm,
also
a
resident
of
Cupertino.
We
are
against
adding
this
large
illuminated
illuminated
science.
This
building,
as
you
know,
artificial
light
at
night
has
becoming
a
serious
Hazard
to
humans,
wildlife
and
the
ecosystem.
AD
We
know
that
the
city
takes
light
pollution
seriously,
as
evidenced
by
our
dark
sky
ordinance.
So
we
hope
that
you
can
find
a
way
to
prevent
this
illuminated
sign
from
polluting
our
city,
whether
or
not
that
is
possible.
We
also
encourage
you
to
revise
the
sign
code
such
that
that
this
situation
doesn't
occur
in
the
future.
AD
Finally,
we
encourage
the
city
to
always
consider
supporting
biodiversity
in
conditions
of
approval
and
the
permitting
process.
This
is
accomplished
in
many
different
ways
from
thinking
about
the
illumination
that
comes
from
businesses
and
developments
to
using
native
plants
and
landscaping,
for
example,
if
we
think
about
supporting
biodiversity
as
a
value
in
all
we
do,
we
will
incur
ensure
that
we
are
supporting
a
healthy
Urban
ecosystem
that
benefits
both
wildlife
and
us,
as
residents.
Thank.
C
J
Good
evening,
council
members
and
staff
I'm
going
to
try
and
match
the
grounds
to
the
reasons
one
offer
a
relevant
evidence
excluded
at
prior
City
hearing
the
fact
that
there
were
only
seeing
those
two
wall
signs
directly
facing
them
and
it
wasn't
mentioned
I'm
not
saying
that
you
didn't
notice
them
that
they
were
too
far,
but
they
were
facing
and
the
staff
should
be
mentioned
and
mentioned
it.
The
Omission
that
the
exam
wall
sign
is
actually
a
freeway
oriented
sign.
J
Gian
said
it
was
a
judgment
call
before
it
was
installed,
but
after
it
was
installed,
it
resulted
in
a
freeway
oriented
sign
because
it
is
very
much
visible.
This
should
have
been
mentioned
to
inform
the
council,
even
though
it's
not
quote
freeway
oriented
by
the
permit,
how
the
square
footage
of
the
sign
was
measured.
J
Nothing
was
said,
the
square
footage
was
only
the
letters
lighted,
thus
the
existing
sign,
which
is
51
square
feet,
and
the
proposed
sign,
which
is
three
times
that
size,
but
they
have
the
same
letters-
means
that
this
new
proposed
sign
is
going
to
be
three
times
the
size
of
what
now
lit
up
past
Behavior.
The
owner's
constant
violation
of
the
sign,
ordinance
and
writing
regarding
the
building
and
the
existing
sign
should
have
rounds
on
whether
or
not
you
allow
them
to
have
another.
One
Council
city
council
failed
to
provide
a
fair
hearing.
J
It
was
not
clear
by
the
planning.
Commission's
denial
was
invalid.
The
explanation
did
not
address
why
specifying
the
minimizing
extraction
to
motorists
was
an
invalid
reason.
The
scenic
highway,
the
the
Dark
Skies
was
quoted,
but
the
part
about
distracting
motorists
wasn't
addressed
after
the
break
city
manager.
Wu
discussed
the
three
findings
you
that
you
required
a
b
and
c,
but
the
municode
that
was
displayed
was
wrong.
It
was
confusing
the
actual
design
criteria.
J
19.104
220
was
never
in
the
staff
port
or
presented.
The
council
was
told
they
had
to
approve
one
of
the
signs
when
in
actuality
he
could
have
found
it.
Not
neat
design
criteria,
city
council
abused
its
discretion,
rendering
a
decision
which
findings
affect
were
not
supported
by
evidence.
There
was
no
evidence.
The
city
council
assumed
that
the
Cupertino
Hotel
sign
was
similar
to
the
public
storage
side,
but
nothing
was
presented
or
to
justify
this.
The
council
decided,
based
on
using
this
assumption,
please
reconsider
this.
Thank
you.
M
Hi
good
evening
again
and
thank
you
so
as
I
drove
through
Los
Altos
and
Palo
Alto
and
the
neighboring
neighborhoods
I,
literally
Los
Altos,
was
driving
from
there
yesterday
I
was
asked
why
it
was
so
dark
and
I
said
well.
Definitely
the
animals
can't
handle
the
lights.
M
You
know
they
have
coyotes
and
boxes,
and
you
know
owls
and
nature,
and
one
of
the
biggest
things
that
stood
out
from
the
last
meeting
was
the
municipal
code
and
how
it
was
supposed
to
blend
in
or
conform
to
the
neighborhood
to
the
residential
neighborhood
I,
don't
see
how
this
does
conform
to
it
and
I
know.
It
was
mentioned
several
times
in
this
meeting
that
it's
non-relevant
because
it
does
conform
to
the
other
municipal
code.
M
I,
don't
see
how
also
it
was
kind
of
confusing
during
the
last
meeting,
because
there
was
a
break
and
there
was
a
insinuation
that
the
city
council
had
no
jurisdiction.
They
just
had
to
vote
for
one.
We
couldn't
I'm
having
a
hard
time
just
finding
where
that
is
stated
in
the
staff
report
from
the
last
meeting,
but
whatever
it
is
I'm.
M
You
know
we
have
a
new
city
manager,
I'm,
not
sure
if
Gian
was
around
for
the
last
meeting,
but
I
I
kind
of
feel
like
we
can
step
back
and
take
a
look
at
whether
or
not
this
is
actually
conformed
and
should
have
been
approved
or
if
it
was
a
confu
confusion
from
previous
from
predecessor
that
had
approved
it.
It
was
from
my
perception
like
it
was
already
approved.
M
There
was
nothing
no
further
discussion,
but
there
was,
and
so
I'd
like
to
point
that
out
and
see
if
that
could
be
reconsidered,
because
that
would
account
for
data
that
was
not
presented.
That
should
have
been
presented,
something
else.
I
heard
and
I
know,
I,
don't
know
if
it's
actually
a
a
factor,
but
if
it
is
I
did
research
a
little
bit
and
I'm,
not
a
lawyer.
M
So
I
couldn't
tell
you
if
this
is
all
the
data,
but
freedom
of
speech
was
mentioned
as
some
a
reason
why
a
sign
had
to
be
approved
and
I'm
not
sure
how
this
would
be.
But
regarding
that
matter
of
freedom
of
speech,
there's
a
quo.
Does
freedom
of
speech
include
signage,
Justin,
Stevens,
deliberate?
M
The
opinion
of
the
unanimous
court
with
Justice
O'connor
filing
a
concurring
opinion
Stevens
first
noted
that
signs
are
a
form
of
expression
protected
by
the
First
Amendment,
but
he
also
said
signs
pose
special
problems
that
are
subject
to
government
regulation,
so
they
can't
just
do
whatever
they
want.
Otherwise,
we
wouldn't.
Why
have
immunicode
if
they
could?
Anyone
and
everyone
could
say
they
had
freedom
of
speech.
Another
quote
I
have
is
First.
Amendment
forbids
the
government
to
regulate
speech
such
as
signage
in
any
way,
favor
some
viewpoints
or
ideas.
M
So
this
would
be
relevant
to
some
idea,
not
just
promotion
of
the
business.
A
city,
however,
is
not
powerless
to
regulate
signage
within
the
jurisdiction,
and
the
courts
have
recognized.
I
That
evidence
was
not
produced
at
the
previous
hearing,
so
on
the
first
basis
for
reconsideration,
I
would
like
to
offer
that
impacted
residents
were
not
old
and
their
feedback
was
not
submitted
to
Europe
on
the
second
criteria,
an
offer
of
relevant
evidence
which
was
improperly
excluded
at
any
private
City.
Hearing.
I
would
like
to
submit
to
you
that
the
question
that
council
member
Taylor
just
asked
of
Staff
as
to
why
they
did
not
bring
up
that
there
was
an
existing
freeway
facing
sign
and
the
reaction
to
that
which
was
in
their
judgment.
I
I
would
also
submit
that
you
were
not
advised
that
you
could
vote
for
zero
silence
and,
finally,
on
the
third
criteria,
where
proof
of
facts
to
demonstrate
that
the
city
council
proceeded
without
or
in
excess
of
its
jurisdiction,
I
believe
that
you
were
not
advised
on
the
basis
for
which
the
Planning
Commission
had
denied
the
denied
the
approval,
and
so,
in
the
absence
of
that
I
believe
you
were
asked
to
proceed
without
understanding
the
basis
or
the
jurisdiction
to
override
planning,
Council
or
Planning
Commission
or
the
fourth
I
want
to
point
out
proof
of
facts
which
demonstrated
the
Ste
Hanson
failed
to
provide
a
fair
hearing.
I
City
staff
made
no
effort.
Absolutely
none
collect
input
from
the
impacted
residents
and
denied
a
fair
hearing
to
the
residents
that
were
impacted
and
so
on.
The
fifth
proof
or
facts
which
demonstrated
the
city
council,
abused
its
discretion
by
not
preceding
a
manner
required
by
law,
renting
a
decision
which
is
not
supported
by
findings
of
fact
and
rendering
a
decision
makes.
The
funding
is
a
fact,
but
not
supported
by
evidence.
There
was
no
evidence
again
either
from
impacted
residents,
and
there
was
no
data
gathered
on
the
actual
impact
of
lighting
on
the
freeway
signs.
I
In
fact,
City
attorney
even
admitted
that
Caltrans
Scenic
Highway
regulations
was
not
something
he
had
looked
at.
That
is
a
world
record
on
the
previous
call.
So
I
would
like
you
to
consider
each
of
these
points
that
I
went
through
and
please
deny
the
previous
signage
and
approve
the
reconsideration.
Thank.
A
Thank
you,
mad
LCD
clerk
now
I
would
offer
two
minutes
to
the
applicants
or
the
petitioners
to
answer
questions.
W
W
Why
weren't?
The
most
impacted
residents
notified?
How
can
Public
Storage
get
a
second
freeway
oriented
sign
when
they're
allowed?
To
only
have
one
I
want
to
repeat
the
general
plan's
North
De
Anza
special
area
as
designated
for
office
and
residential
I
think
that
they
need
to
be,
and
you
also
need
to
look
at
the
the
whole
the
sign
is
on
the
building.
You
need
to
make
it
compatible.
Also
years
ago
we
had
massive
truck
traffic.
W
There
is
a
connection
here
between
the
two
quarries,
the
city,
county
and
Sheriff,
said
insisted
that
it
was
okay,
it
wasn't
and
I
provided
the
information
to
the
city
why
it
wasn't
and
they
put
an
end
to
it,
which
is
part
of
the
reason
why
I
got
the
public
safety
word
for
from
the
city
of
Cupertino
in
2022.
You
need
to
put
an
end
to
this.
The
lights
on
the
hallways
serve
no
purpose
other
than
to
advertise.
A
building
it
is
a
sign,
it
is
not.
Okay.
W
I
would
like
to
clarify
my
understanding
that
the
dark
sky
ordinance
does
not
apply
to
signs,
so
you
can
say:
oh
yeah,
all
signs
are,
you
know,
dark
sky
compliant
because
it
just
doesn't
apply.
I
also
requested
the
city
staff
bring
in
10
square
feet
of
250
Lamberts,
and
then
you
can
determine
for
yourself
whether
it's
bright
or
not
give
the
residents
who
are
affected
the
highest
priority
in
addressing
the
current
and
future
light
pollution.
W
A
Does
the
applicant
want
to
speak
up?
No
okay?
So
if
there's
no
more
speakers
and
I'm
going
to
close
the
public
comment,
close
the
public
hearing
and
bring
it
back
to
the
council
for
discussion,
we
each
have
five
minutes
to
you
know
make
our
comments,
because
I
think
we've
heard
a
lot,
and
this
is
our
second
time
hearing
it
council,
member,
more.
N
Okay,
thank
you.
So
I
am
looking
at
the
staff
report
from
February
7th
and
it
says
per
the
sign
ordinance.
All
wall
or
building
mounted
signs
proposed
within
660
feet
of
a
landscaped
freeway,
measured
from
edge
of
right-of-way
and
oriented
towards
the
freeway,
must
be
approved
by
the
Planning
Commission,
so
that
sign
should
have
gone
to
the
Planning
Commission
according
to
in
that
sign,
meaning
the
one
on
the
east
end
of
the
building
should
have
gone
to
the
Planning
Commission
and
I.
N
Do
want
to
point
out
that
from
the
last
meeting
it
sounded
as
though
two
of
the
council
members
had
not
even
seen
this
building
at
night
to
be
aware
of
its
impact.
N
N
V
Yes
again
we're
you
know,
staff
is
going
to
consider
that
you
know
at
the
time
we
didn't
consider.
Freeway
awareness
sign
just
how
it
was
facing
and
the
direction
of
the
freeway,
as
well
as
the
how
the
wall
faces
and
even
in
the
event
that
that
was
considered,
a
freeway
ordered
a
sign.
V
If
you
look
at
that
same
section
of
the
ordinance,
if
that,
if
a
freeway
oriented
sign,
is
not
exclusively
visible
from
a
freeway,
rather
it's
visible,
also
from
a
street
or
right
away,
whether
in
fee
or
an
easement
that
is
approved
by
CDD
staff.
So
would
not
have
to
go
to
plan
a
commission
in
either
way.
N
Okay
and
it's
visible
from
the
freeway,
so
it's
freeway
oriented
so
I
think
that
that
decision,
what
what?
What
method
could
counsel
or
member
of
the
public
have
been
able
to
appeal
that
decision
like
when,
when
would
the
public
have
been
informed
that
that
decision
happened,
so
it
could
have
been
contested
because
I
I,
don't
I.
Personally,
don't
agree
with
with
that.
N
With
with
what
happened
there,
I
I,
don't
I
drive
on
the
280
I
see
that
sign
it
catches
my
eye.
It's
always
been
dark,
and
so
it's
that's
generally
how
signs
are
placed
when
you're
going
along
a
freeway
or
a
highway
they're
placed
perpendicular
to
the
roadway.
So
to
you
know
the
the
Caltrans
doesn't
put
their
signs
parallel
to
the
freeway.
They
run
them
perpendicularly
so
that
you'll
you'll
spot
them.
R
19.104.200,
which
discusses
freeway
orientation
and
the
municipal
code,
there
is
a
table
there
that
provides
who
the
Authority
for
approval
is
for
both
with
respect
to
a
sign
that
is
oriented
to
the
regular
straight
system
adjoining
the
property,
rather
than
exclusively
visible
from
the
freeway.
The
approval
Authority
is
CDD
if
it
is
a
freeway
orientation.
Otherwise,
then
it
would
be
the
Planning
Commission.
A
D
Okay,
so
first,
oh
sure,
no
okay
yeah.
So
this
is
from
the
California
Business
and
Professional
codes
on
why
they
regulate
freeway
sign
at
all
according
to
them,
because
freeway
is,
is
there
trying
to
protect
public
investment
in
the
freeway
and
then
it's
to
protect
Public,
Safety,
Health,
welfare,
welfare,
convenience
and
enjoyment
of
public
travel,
and
any
sign
should
be
presented
to
be
safely
and
effectively.
It
just
needs
to
be
effective,
so
I
don't
know
how
come
don't
go
down.
D
According
to
this
definition,
in
our
code
and
the
California
business
professional
code,
sign
one
is
a
freeway
oriented
sign
here
is
a
map,
and
then
the
red
rectangle
here
is
sine
one
and
if
you
are
driving
facing
on
the
west
or
north
to
80.,
that
sign
is
very
visible,
not
only
just
visible,
even
with
trees.
It's
fixable,
okay,
so
sign
one.
It
doesn't
matter
whether
it's
approved
as
freeway
sign
or
not.
D
It's
a
freeway,
already
side
per
our
code
and
California
Business
and
Professional
code.
Therefore,
we
had
inaccurate
information
from
the
staff
report
on
February
7th,
which
claimed
sign.
1
is
not
a
freeway
oriented
sign
and,
as
a
result,
we
were
told
with
their.
They
are
allowed
maximum
two
signs,
and
then
we
had
I
think
we
were
given
accurate
information
in
our
decision
and
also
this
is
the
approval
condition
for
this.
D
Development
lighting
for
development
should
not
spill
over
to
other
joining
property,
and
also
there
are
other
conditions
that
it
should
be
harmonious
to
the
neighborhood
and
the
zone,
and
here
is
the
front
of
the
building,
and
then
the
brightness
is
not
harmonious
to
the
building,
and
this
is
the
information.
I
did
not
have
on
February,
7th
and
I.
Think
councilmember
Moore
mentioned
it
at
the
time
I
drove
by
the
property
afterwards.
D
Finding
the
windows
on
very
bright
but
I
didn't
see
this
side,
and
then
I
didn't
see
this
until
last
Wednesday
when
I
went
on
site
with
the
petitioner.
That's
when
I
realized.
If
you
are
living
across
from
this
side,
how
bright
it
is
and
I
visited
the
condos
also
and
then,
if
you
view
it
across
from
the
condo,
the
current
interior
light
is
already
very
bright,
adding
on
top
a
sign,
it's
extremely
bright.
That's
something
that
we
have
not
ever
seen
in
Cupertino
and
the
approval
condition
was
the
building
should
emulate
an
office
building.
D
This
does
not
emulate
the
office
building,
because
in
office
building
lights
are
shining
down
to
the
desk
working
area.
It
doesn't
interior
light,
doesn't
go
ahead,
shine
towards
outside,
but
the
interior
light
of
this
building
is
facing
outwards,
which
is
not
like
an
office
building,
and
it's
supposed
to
be
harmonious
with
adjusting
structure.
D
It's
not
according
to
and
also
I
did
not
understand
what
it's
meant
by
illuminated
science
at
the
time,
I
thought
illumination
is
kind
of
like
what's
seeing
on
the
left
here
on
some
kind
of
Illumination
just
enough,
so
people
can
see
the
sign
but
turns
out
for
Public
Storage.
The
entire
letter
is
a
light
tube,
so
it's
very
very
bright.
So
imagine
if
you
wait
a
long
one,
there
could
be
10
20
a
long
Cupertino.
Is
that
something
we
want
I
think
also.
D
We
didn't
know
that
and
I
think
we
did
not
notify
the
residents
our
Municipal
Code
actually
says.
Even
though
the
minimum
distance
is
300,
if
necessary,
we
should
notify
any
impacted
residents
and
that's
the
discretion
of
the
city.
We
did
not
do
that.
So
I
think.
With
all
these
reasons,
I
think
we
I
have
reasons
to
believe
we
did
not
have
information.
D
I
would
like
to
ask
what
recourse
is
there
if
the
council
decision
was
based
on
inaccurate
or
unavailable
information,
and
what
records
is
there
if
the
our
current
design
criteria
on
paper
is
not
sufficient
to
regulate
the
lighted
tube
LED
signs
that
we
see
here,
I
did
not
know
the
impact
until
I
see
it.
Thank
you.
A
E
I,
don't
think
there
was
a
question
I
think
there
was
a
statement
of
law,
statements
of
law
and
I
mean
I've
already
advised
Council
on
on
the
law
and
the
standards
that
apply.
O
The
pseudo
mayor,
if
I
may
I,
just
wanted
to
bring
councilman
back
to
what
is
in
front
of
the
council,
which
are
the
five
findings
in
the
municipal
code.
I
am
not
advocating
for
the
sign.
I
am
just
wanting
to
making
sure
that
the
council
understands
the
action
before
you
we're
not
discussing
the
sign.
O
N
Thank
you
so
also
looking
in
the
previous
staff
report,
I
could
not
find
the
19.104.220
C
and
G
findings
explicitly
made
and
I
know
in
the
in
the
previous
meeting.
I
said
that
I
could
not
make
those
two
findings.
So
question
for
the
City
attorney
is
if,
if
three
of
the
council
were
all
in
agreement,
that
they
couldn't
make
the
findings
of
C
and
G
at
that
time,
would
that
have
been
adequate
to
have
denied
this
appeal.
E
E
You
know,
as
and
and
I
believe,
the
the
most
Pro,
the
the
most
of
the,
although
they're
characterized
in
in
different
ways,
sort
of
the
the
most
of
the
arguments
that
are
being
made
by
the
petitioner
in
this
case
are
attempting
to
introduce
new
evidence
that
was
not
introduced
at
the
prior
hearing,
and
so
first
there
would
need
to
be
a
finding
that
you
know
a
that.
E
There
is
new
evidence
that
exists
and
B
that
it
could
not
have
been
produced
with
reasonable
diligence
at
the
prior
hearing
after
that,
council
could,
if
Council,
were
able
to
make
that
finding
or
one
of
the
other
for
of
the
total
five
findings
in
the
reconsideration
process.
Council
would
be
able
to
consider
those
the
the
findings
in
the
sign
ordinance
and
if
it,
if
it
concludes
tonight,
that
those
findings
can
cannot
be
made
and
they're.
You
know
and
there's
substantial
evidence
to
support
that
decision.
E
Council
could
reverse
its
prior
decision
and
deny
the
appeal.
N
Another
question
so,
with
regards
to
finding
g,
I
I
don't
recall
having
any
mention
about
how
a
motorist
would
be
able
to
read
the
sign
given
its
brightness
without
and
with
the
trees
around
it
I,
without
turning
their
head
away
from
the
freeway,
while
they're
going
65
miles
an
hour
or
more
as
we've
seen,
but
is
that
that's
concerning
because
I
know
I've
driven
that
route
many
times
and
when
you
come
upon
the
Cupertino
Hotel
building
and
sign
they've
they've,
muted,
those
colors
I,
you
know
kudos
to
staff
for
getting
them
to
do
that.
N
E
So
I
I
don't
know.
If
that's
that's
a
question
for
me
or
a
statement.
N
Well,
it's
it's
with
regards
to
producing
a
distraction
that
wear
in
the
packet,
and
maybe
this
is
for
staff
where
in
the
packet
did
it
show
accurate,
Renditions
and
and
I
had
asked
to
continue
this
this
item.
So
we
could
get
that
information
and
it
wasn't,
it
wasn't
provided
so
we
were.
We
were
truly
missing
that
information
and
and
I
tried
to
point
this
out
and
I.
You
know
I
failed,
but
going
back
to
CNG.
N
O
A
N
So
through.
A
A
I
denied
it,
you
made
your
point
yeah,
so
I
I
would
like
to
make
my
comment.
If
I
can
for
five
minutes,
I
think
there
is
sort
of
agreement
that
this
I
may
is
not
a
favorite
of
the
community,
but
I
want
to
reinforce
by
saying
we're
elected
officials.
We
don't
make
rules,
we
make
rules,
but
we
have
to
follow
our
own
rules.
Like
Tessa
Parish.
Just
say
we
have
government
regulations.
Why
do
we
have
government
regulations?
Because
for
us
to
follow,
we
have
to
follow
our
own
laws?
A
If
we
don't
like
our
own
laws,
we
can
change
it.
You
can
change
our
City
municipal
codes.
We
can
change
our
city
ordinance.
We
can
change
our
objective
standards.
I
feel
like
that.
My
hands
are
a
little
tight
here
because
we
are
doing
a
reconsideration
and
there
are
no
new
facts.
As
for
the
lighting,
the
color,
the
lighting
that
council
member
Moore
mentioned
I
I
used
the
objective
standards
that
the
the
the
how
big
the
letter
is,
how
light
what
lighting
is
one
third
of
what
our
our
Municipal
codes
allows.
A
So
everything
is
within
our
own
rules.
Our
own
Municipal
codes
I,
want
to
say
that
I
wish
I
hope
I.
Could
we
could
make
any
decisions
that
we
love
to
make,
but
we
are
soaring
to
follow
laws.
Okay,
our
own
codes,
I
I,
am
I,
am
wary
of
we
are
going
to
in
the
next
years,
have
more
developments,
maybe
more
height
and
personally
I.
Don't
want
lights.
High
every
building
has
a
light
like
that
and
advocating
for
apartment
for
a
specific
store.
A
So
I
would
like
to
stop
this
okay,
so
but
I
I
feel
that
at
this
point
at
this
particular
item
it
is
very
hard
for
me
to
say
just
because
we
don't
like
it
that
we're
not
going
to
follow
our
own
Municipal
codes,
our
own
regulations,
for
example,
if
you're
remodeling
your
own
home,
you'll,
you're,
doing
everything
according
to
what
city
codes
and
then
all
of
a
sudden
somebody
said:
I,
don't
like
it,
so
I,
don't
care
whether
you
comply
to
city
codes
or
not.
You
can't
do
it.
A
I
think
that's
unfair
to
anybody,
but
we
we
could
not
let
this
happen
again
when
this
project
was
approved.
2019
I
think
none
of
us
are
on
Council,
maybe
Council
Mormons,
a
council
member
child
was
encounter,
but
the
design
and
everything
is,
is
not
what
we
maybe
what
not
what
we
anticipated.
As
for
the
lighting
indoor
lighting,
that's
light
up
until
midnight
or
after
midnight,
that
is
a
code
violation
and
our
staff
are
not
lying
they're,
just
we're
just
our
code.
A
Code
Enforcement
have
to
go
out
and
and
do
code
enforcement
and
I
I
think
we
are
doing
that
right
now.
So
that
is
not
going
to
happen.
It's
not
our
staff's
fault.
It's
the
business
or
residents
can
also
have
that
code
violation.
We
have
a
loan
blower
thing
that
you
cannot
blow
it
this
way
in
that
way,
and
then
we,
you
know
our
city
code
enforcement,
do
go
out
and
enforce
to
our
residents
too.
So
that
is
another
matter.
That
is
not
what
we're
considering
right
now.
I
I
would
love
if
I
can
say.
A
Let's
not,
let's
reverse
this,
whether
we
gonna
follow
our
own
laws
or
not
I
feel
that
I
I
can
do
it,
but
I
don't
think
this
is
going
to
happen
again.
I
do
think
the
council
is
very
aware
of
it
that
we
are
going
to
do
something
to
our
science
ordinance
to
make
sure
when
our
city
moves
forward
with
more
developments.
This
doesn't
happen
again.
I
do
not
want
a
whether
it's
a
freeway
facing
or
Steven's
Creek
facing
with
big
signs
of
their
advertising
for
anything
during
night.
So
I
think
we
can
stop
it.
A
I
actually
am
very
I.
Do
want
to
say
thank
you
to
rotify
for
all
your
work
and
your
study
and
and
all
the
wrestlers
that
bring
this
to
the
council's
attention.
We
need
your
help.
You
you're
helping
us
to
you
know,
move
forward,
making
a
good
decision
that
this
doesn't
happen
again
and
I
have
58
seconds.
A
I
do
want
to
say
for
businesses
Goodwill
counts
a
lot
I,
don't
think
Public
Storage
heard
us,
but
they
probably
heard
us
tonight
if
they
could
show
Good
Will
and
help
our
wrestlers
I
think
you'll
get
more
business
than
having
a
sign
light
up
there,
all
night,
long
and
or
up
to
11
o'clock
I
do
think
business
and
Goodwill
and
work
with
the
community
is
a
plus
for
any
business.
A
To
be
in
the
community
make
it
your
community,
even
though,
if
we
revise
our
signed
audience,
we
could
not
regulate
you,
but
I
hope
that
in
the
in
the
goodness
of
when
working
with
the
community,
it
will
bring
you
more
business
than
having
the
light
up
until
11
o'clock
or
or
Beyond.
So
that
that's
my
that's
my
comment.
Thank
you
and
council
member
froon
and
vice.
U
I
just
wanted
to
make
a
comment
that
when
I
saw
all
the
emails
that
we
got
about
most
of
them
not
happy
with
the
with
the
sign
and
the
lights,
you
know
it.
It
sort
of
struck
me
that
this
is
definitely
not
a
a
popular
action.
U
This
the
the
light,
the
the
in
indoor
light
of
the
the
building,
the
the
side
light
with
the
white
lettering
and
but
but
I
also
want
to
say
that
we
are
here
to
uphold
the
law
and
uphold
the
the
municipal
court.
So
we
don't
really
have
too
much
leeway
in
terms
of
changing
the
code
or
making
modifications
as
it
stands
now.
That
is
something
for
the
future
and
I
hope.
U
That
is
something
we
will
consider
for
the
future,
where
we
will
have
to
make
some
changes
and
come
to
some
clarity
in
terms
of
what
the
sign
ordinance
is
about,
but
we
have
a
very
restricted
and
limited
grounds
for
reconsideration,
as
laid
out
by
the
staff
report
and
the
city
attorney's
comments
So,
based
on
these
five
five
criteria,
which
you've
heard
many
times
today,
I,
don't
think
that
we
have
the
grounds
to
reconsider
our
earlier
approval
of
the
the
freeway
facing
sign,
which
we
made
in
February,
February,
7th
I,
believe
that's
all
I
have
to
say.
R
Sure
I
have
really
one
more
follow-up
question
for
the
the
City
attorney
with
respect
to
council
member
chao's
invocation
of
the
business
and
professions
code
and
its
definitions
of
visibility
from
the
freeway.
Irrespective
of
that,
we
would
still,
as
a
city
be
able
to
determine
which
approval
Authority
within
the
city
would
be
able
to
decide
that
a
freeway-oriented
sign
is
going
to
be
approved
or
not.
Yes,.
R
Good
okay,
I
will
Echo.
R
So
again,
I
will
repeat
that
the
we
do
have
a
specific
provision
of
the
municipal
code.
That
indicates
who
the
approval
Authority
is
for
a
freeway
oriented
sign,
regardless
of
whether
it
is
exclusively
visible
from
the
freeway
or
not,
and
in
this
case,
if
it
is
not
exclusively
designed
to
be
exclusively
visible
from
the
freeway
and
is
adjoining
a
a
regular
straight
system,
then
the
approval
Authority
would
be
CDD.
That's
clear
in
our
code,
I
think
we
need
to
uphold
our
code,
so
I
will
underscore
what
both
the
mayor
and
the
vice
mayor
have
said.
R
You
know
we
we
have
the
municipal
code,
we
should
be
following
the
municipal
code.
The
municipal
code
I
think
in
this
case
moves
us
only
in
One
Direction.
We
have
five
grounds
that
we
can
consider
for
reconsideration.
This
is
not
a
re-hearing
de
novo,
so
we
are
not
here
reassessing
what
the
law
is
or
what
the
facts
are.
We
have
a
circumscribed
realm
of
facts
that
we
are
supposed
to
be
dealing
with
in
the
record,
as
with
regard
to
the
large
number
of
emails
that
have
been
received
that
opposed
the
sign.
Q
R
I've
tried
lots
of
different
creative
arguments
that
I
have
passed
by
the
City
attorney
I'm
sure
I
annoyed
him
to
no
end
the
term.
Creative
is
not
a
positive
one
in
the
practice
of
law,
it
is
usually
an
epithet,
but
I
tried
it
nonetheless
and
I
came
to
know
no
additional
useful
conclusion.
That
would
allow
me
to
find
a
reason
that
would
be
supported
by
substantial
evidence
that
would
allow
us
to
support
the
petition
for
reconsideration.
R
Q
R
Think
it
is
especially
important
because
we
know
that
the
city
will
densify,
that
there
are
buildings
that
will
be
taller
and
that
we
want
to
be
able
to
feel
good
about
the
city
that
we
live
in,
that
we
drive
through
that
we
walk
through
Etc.
So,
where
signs
are
how
bright,
they
are,
what
kind
of
light
pollution
we
see
in
the
city
that
we
are
containing
that
in
a
way
that
is
appropriate
to
the
applicant
I,
will
reiterate
also
the
points
that
have
been
made
by
my
colleagues.
R
You
have
a
choice
as
to
what
kind
of
neighbor
you
want
to
be,
and
I
would
really
hate
for
your
legacy
to
be
that
we
had
to
revisit
a
whole
host
of
things
in
our
municipal
code
in
order
to
regulate
what
this
one
building
does
to
those
neighbors
who
are
most
directly
affected.
I
am
an
open
door
to
you.
Let's
talk
about,
what's
going
to
help
make
this
better
for
you
if
it
means
that
you
need
more
screening,
I
am
very
open
to
a
discussion.
A
Okay,
so
I
think
all
five
of
us
have
used
our
five
minutes
and.
A
N
So
I'm
just
I'm
looking
at
the
map,
there's
some
mention
about
this
being
saying:
it's
Street
facing
and
I'm
looking
at
Valley,
Green
Drive
and
the
the
road
that
goes
down
to
the
condominiums
in
public
storage.
Is
that
a
public
Street?
V
So
the
way
we
Define
straight
and
right
away
in
our
you
know,
municipal
code
is
that
it's
either
in
fee
or
easement
if
it's
open
to
the
public.
So
it's
a
public
easement,
so
it
functions
as
a
street.
It
meets
the
definition
of
the
street.
N
Okay,
thank
you,
so
I
think
you've
got
your.
N
So
I
actually
side
with
the
petitioner
here,
I
move
that
we
accept
the
petition
for
reconsideration,
because
the
petitioners
demonstrated.
The
decision
was
not
supported
by
findings
of
fact
regarding
19.104.220
CNG,
particularly
with
regards
to
what
the
signage
looks
like
and
impacts
from
various
views
on
the
freeway
and
the
explanation
of
these
subdivisions
was
not
adequately
made
and
that
the
petitioner
provided
new
information
not
provided
at
an
earlier
hearing,
namely
that
the
freeway-oriented
sign
already
in
place
fulfilled
the
allowance
for
the
freeway
oriented
signage.
N
Yes,
I
already
have
said
that,
with
regards
to
what
the
signage
looks
like
and
the
impacts
from
the
various
views
on
the
freeway
and
the
explanation
of
the
subdivisions
was
not
adequately
made.
So
you
had
heard
me
ask
about
subdivision.
C
and
G.
I
still
do
not
have
a
clarification
about
about
those
two
and
lastly,
that
the
petitioner
provided
new
information,
namely
that
it
was
a
freeway
oriented
sign
which
it's
fitting
the
definition.
Thank
you.
A
Okay,
may
I
ask:
should
you
manager
a
question
or
a
City
attorney
both
both
so
is?
Having
presume
that
councilman
Memorial
believe
that
it's
a
new
information
that
this
one
sign
is
query
facing.
Does
that
justify
us?
E
What
are
the
criterias
new
information
that
that
that
could
not
have
been
presented
at
the
prior
hearing
with
reasonable
diligence.
A
A
Okay,
so
you
can
see
I'm
trying
very
hard
here
to
you
know,
to
make
myself
decide
on
something
and
I
hope.
The
public
knows
that
you
do
want
your
council
members
that
you
let
council
members
follow
laws
and
we
we
might
have
different
perceptions
of
of
what
laws
government
regulations
our
own
municipals,
so
I'm
trying
really
hard
to
understand
the
council
member
Moore's
point
of
view.
Okay,
thank
you.
N
Well,
through
through
the
mayor,
I
I
did
also
was
unable
to
make
the
findings
of
CNG
previously
and
now.
I
simply
know
much
more
information
about
this
project
and
the
the
process
and
and
the
sign
ordinance
as
well
than
I
did
before.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
So
we
have
a
motion
and
the
second
any
more
discussions.
A
If
not
mayor
who
who's
the
second
I,
think
councilmember
Moore
made
a
motion
and
council
member
Charles.
Second,
thank
you.
D
Q
A
Actually,
I
would
like
to
make
a
substantive
motion.
My
subject.
Membership
would
be
to
approve
the
recommended
action
from
staff.
A
D
Q
E
Program
implications
of
that,
but
that's
it's
certainly
something
that
would
be
appropriate
as
a
future
agenda
item.
A
D
I
I
think
we
can
have
three
motions
on
the
table.
I
would
like
to
offer
another
substitute
mojin,
which
is
my
reasons
are.
Can
we.
D
D
So
here
motion
to
approve
the
reconsideration
petition,
based
on
the
following
fact:
typo
the
fact
that
the
definition
of
freeway
signs
and
visible
were
not
made
available
to
the
council
in
the
last
meeting.
The
fact
that
sign
1
is
a
freeway
facing
sign
according
to
Cupertino
municipal
code
and
California
Business
and
Professional
code
was
not
made
available.
The
fact
that
the
development
already
has
one
freeway
facing
design
was
not
mentioned.
D
The
fact
that
the
council
did
not
know
sign
2
will
be
the
second
freeway
sign
and
the
fact
that
there
was
no
information
that
the
science
faced
the
condos
across
280
and
there's
no.
There
was
no
information
on
its
impact.
The
fact
that
the
council,
the
city,
did
not
do
our
due
diligence
to
notify
the
residents
beyond
the
minimum
requirement
to
include
the
residents
residential
developments
nearby,
who
will
be
significantly
impacted
by
the
science
at
the
discretion
of
the
community
and
Development
Department,
as
required
as
Allowed
by
our
municipal
code,
and
we
didn't
do
that.
D
D
Exercise
of
reasonable
diligence
could
not
have
been
produced
at
an
earlier
City
hearing.
I
believe
this
exercise
of
reasonable
geologies
is
a
subjective
on
evaluation.
So,
in
my
assessment
we
did
not
exercise
with
even
with
exercise
exercise
of
reasonable
diligence.
Last
time
we
I
could
we
could
not
have
made
those
findings
that
I
have
just
stated
as
facts
and
second
offer
of
relevant
evidence
which
was
improperly
excluded
at
an
early
prior
City
hearing
I
think
we
had
inaccurate
information.
D
Think
here
I
could
add
that
council
member
mentioned
the
division
CND
from
the
last
meeting
or
we
didn't
have
sufficient
finding
at
the
time
and
that
rent
we
rendered
a
decision
in
which
the
findings
of
fact
were
not
supported
by
evidence
and
I.
Think
we
didn't
have
enough
evidence
at
the
time
to
support
that
decision.
We
made
so
that's
my
motion.
R
The
screen
and
scroll
up
so
I
I
think
we've
addressed
every
single
one
of
these
issues
already
the
very
first
one
is
simply
not
relevant
to
the
discussion
per
the
discussion
that
we
had
a
moment
ago.
The
fact
that
sign
one
is
a
freeway
facing
sign
according
we've,
already
again,
we've
addressed,
who
has
the
approval
Authority
in
this
matter,
and
whether
or
not
we
need
to
make
a
decision
that
would
be
relevant
here.
That's
discussed
in
the
municipal
code.
R
R
With
respect
to
a
number
of
the
other
comments
here,
we
we
in
our
own
diligence,
either
walking
the
property
going
out
and
taking
a
look
at
the
space
could
have
known
most
of
the
facts
that
you
are
describing.
If
those
facts
are
substantial
to
be
able
to
deny
the
sign
in
the
first
instance,
so
I
and
I
disagree
emphatically
that
the
idea
that
that
this
expression
in
the
exercise
of
reasonable
diligence
is
subjective,
the
the
expression,
reasonable
diligence
is
a
trigger
word
in
the
law
for
a
a
an
objective
standard.
R
So
I
don't
think
that
we
have
any
any
such
grounds
based
upon
this.
This
motion,
I,
don't
think
it
is
legally
defensible.
D
So
I
I
did
not
argue
well,
who
is
should
be
the
approving
authority
of
sign
one
or
not,
and
it's
already
approved
I
know
sign.
One
is
not
at
the
issue
here,
but
the
important
fact
is
there
is
already
one
we
are
on.
The
table
is
whether
to
approve
a
second
freeway
sign.
That
fact
was
not
mentioned
in
the
last
hearing,
because
we
didn't
know
the
existing
sign
is
already
freeway
facing,
and
the
staff
report
has
an
error.
D
A
V
That
was
our.
That
was
our
recommendation
at
the
time.
That
was
our
decision
at
the
time
and
our
interpretation
of
the
sign
at
the
time,
and
you
know
as
part
of
the
as
part
of
the
findings.
You
know
that
was
this
was
a
fact
that
could
have
been
brought
up
by
a
member
of
the
public
and
was
not
at
the
time.
So
it
was,
and
these
were
available
to
the
public
to
bring
up.
A
A
A
I
I
do
believe
that
on
this
this
one
this
is
these
none
of
these
are
that
could
not
have
brought
up
in
the
first
hearing
and
that's
what
my
impression:
that's,
what
I'm
understanding
City
attorney
Jensen?
Can
you
verify
that
that
my
importation
is
still
not?
A
How
do
I
say
that
if,
if,
if
any
of
these
are
not
can
can
be
brought
up
in
the
first
hearing,
then
we're
not
considering
that
as
new
evidence
right.
N
Thank
you
mayor
so
in
in
trying
to
Define
it
as
a
a
wall
sign
it
would
and
not
freeway
oriented,
it
would
need
to
say,
and
we
needed
to
have
been
informed,
that
it
was
oriented
to
the
regular
Street
system
adjoining
the
property
rather
than
exclusively
visible
from
the
freeway
that
easement
that
they
have.
N
It
would
be
an
Ingress,
egress,
easement
I
believe
because
it's
not
a
the
road
that
you
go
to
get
to
Public
Storage
is
not
a
regular
Street
by
any
means,
and
that
also
you
know
we
were
not
informed
about
that,
and
it
was
only
when
I
pulled
up
the
map
and
noticed
that
it's
not
showing
up
on
our
land
use
map
as
being
the
city
street.
That's
that's.
N
The
first
I've
learned
that
it's
not
so
I
would
my
interpretation
of
this
code,
oriented
to
the
regular
Street
system
would
be
that
the
sign
was
oriented
towards
Valley,
Green,
drive
itself
or
or
North
dance,
a
Boulevard,
so
I
think
there's
yet
even
more
information
that
we
were
not
given
so
I
I.
This
is
a
freeway
oriented
sign.
That
is
not
a
regular
Street.
Okay.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
N
V
D
D
If
you
will
know
that
means
you
100
doesn't
think
any
one
of
these
is
true
and
then
I
would
like
to
say
that
John
mentioned
the
the
staff
at
the
time
didn't
think
it's
a
freeway
facing
sign,
but
I
think
he
did
not
say
it.
After
reading
this
code,
they
have
a
different
someone
could
interpret
actually
should
Implement
interpret
that
sign.
One
is
a
freeway
oriented
sign
prayer
code.
We
need
to
follow
the
code
like
mayor
said.
Our
code
clearly
said
sign.
1
should
have
been
a
freeway
sign.
D
O
You
mayor,
if
I
may,
point
out
the
clarification,
so
this
is
a
definition
that
CDD
has
implemented
to
interpret,
which
sign
is
a
freeway
oriented
sign.
So
the
sign
that
you
are
seeing
on
the
building
has
been
approved
by
CDD
administratively,
and
that's
why
it
was
not
included
in
the
staff
report
for
you
to
consider
the
approval
of
that
three-way
facing
sign
in
February,
and
this
is
an
interpretation
that
has
been
implemented
by
CDD
staff
to
regulate
all
other
signs.
A
I
understand
your
point,
so
let's
vote
for
a
substitute
motion.
C
The
motion
The
Substitute
motion
carries
with
ciao
and
more
voting
now.