►
Description
Coverage of the Joint Planning Commission/Housing Commission meeting of Tuesday, July 5, 2022 (Part 3 of 3)
B
C
B
B
E
D
E
F
G
A
F
A
My
perspective
on
30du
is
that
you'd
have
some
townhomes
you'd.
Have
some
podiums
you'd?
Have
some
condos
be
able
to
sit
there
right?
Sometimes
you
have
multi-story
units
townhomes.
Sometimes
you
have
single
story,
but
you
see
this
kind
of
mix
types
more
and
more
in
developments,
but
that
was
my
thought
so.
C
H
G
And
so
I
guess
that
see
seems
to
go
in
the
opposite
direction
of
some
a
lot
of
what
we're
trying
to
do
with
the
housing
element,
which
is
to
include
you
know,
units
for
all
incomes
and
abilities,
and
so
a
thing
that
occurs
to
me.
I
mean
within
our
excuse
me
within
our
below
market
rate
housing.
We
do
have
for
for
purchase
you.
If
you're
going
to
build
this
many
houses,
you
build
one
affordable
unit
and
if
you
are
doing
rentals,
it's
x
number
of
units.
F
Right,
I
mean
usually
again,
you
know,
then
david
can
help
me
with
this,
but
for
the
rental,
housing
usually
happens
more
at
the
higher
densities
than
at
the
lower
densities,
whereas
for
sale,
housing
occurs
at
the
lower
densities.
So
even
if
they
were
part
of
our
bmr
program,
the
lower
densities
would
generate
our
moderate
and
median
income
level
units,
whereas
the
rental
development
would
generate
the
vli
and
the
li
units.
G
And-
and
I
do
understand
the
point
about
in
the
grand
scheme
of
things
being
more
affordable,
however,
we
are
doing
it
more
in
the
legal
scheme
of
things,
which
is
that
we
have
to
hit
certain
targets
and
people
that
earn
certain
amounts
of
money
can
apply
to
be
in
these
homes,
but
cannot
but
people
that
earn
more
than
that
cannot
apply
to
be
in
those
homes.
And
it's
a
very,
very
specific,
and
so
I
guess
it
occurs
to
me.
I
have
not
been
keeping
a
running
total
of
how.
H
Well,
prior
jared,
cunningham,
okay,
it
is
important
for
us
to
think
about
this
graphically
like
with
the
map.
So
when
we
think
about
east
versus
west
it's
been
discussed,
we
do
have
much
fewer
sites
on
the
west
side
of
town
that
reach
this
30
dwelling
units
per
acre.
So
we
do
want
to
try
to
distribute
the
affordable,
the
the
this
proxy
default
density
as
affordable
units
throughout
the
community
as
much
as
possible.
H
C
C
G
A
A
A
D
B
B
B
And
I
could
actually,
let's
see,
can
I
share
my
screen
here
and
show
you
what
I
was
talking
about?
Okay
right,
it's
these!
I
I
know
someone
that
lives
here
and
they
did.
This
is
in
downtown
palo
alto
and
they
managed
to
you
know,
build
at
higher
density,
probably
around
30
units
per
acre.
By
doing
it,
this
way.
B
And
it's
still
yeah
I
mean
it
looks
nice
and
but
you
know
you,
you
can
see
that
stairway.
There
you
go
up
and
then
you've
got
two
level
town
homes
above
single
level,
flats
and
you're.
Still
in
I
don't
know
it's
three
stories.
So
what
is
that
45
feet
or
so
and
then
in
the
the
parking
is
in
the
back,
it's
kind
of
underneath
underneath
the
two
level
units.
So
I
guess
the
the
bottom
ones
are
much
smaller.
B
I
Thank
you,
chair
yeah,
so
I
just
yes,
I
I
propose
that
we
keep
it
at
30
and
also
keep
in
mind
that
a
lot
of
people
that
have
single-family
homes
that
size
down
we
need
to
provide
them.
Two
bedrooms.
Eleven
hundred
square
feet.
Condos
to
live
in
los
altos,
has
plenty
of
condos
luxury
condos
that
it
was
high
density,
and
so
there's
nothing
like
I
said,
los
altos
and
los
gatos
has
them
there's
nothing
wrong
with
having
condos
and
if
it
provides
us
with
some
low
income
housing.
Then
great.
A
B
That's
a
very
good
point
because
you
know
there's
seniors
living
in
homes
that
are
too
big
for
them,
but
they
don't
want
to
rent
for
the
rest
of
their
lives.
And
you
know
you
know
I
come
from
florida
and
they
the
progression
there
is
you
sell
your
single
family
home
and
you
move
into
a
condo.
You
know
a
55
plus
condo
and
you
know
it's
more
manageable.
B
You
have
no
maintenance,
you've
got
other
people
the
same
age
to
do
things
with,
and
we
don't
really
have
that
in
this
area,
because
there's
very
few
for
sale,
adult-only,
communities-
and
I
mean
this-
wouldn't
be
adult
only,
but
it
would
be
a
suitable
place
to
move.
If
someone
chose
to
and
prop
19
does
encourage
that.
H
H
B
E
F
C
B
Right
this
was
supposed
to
be
well,
I
shouldn't
say
supposed
to
be,
but
it
was
planned
to
be
developed
as
housing
for
the
developmentally
disabled.
Probably
you
don't
need
parking.
You
know
as
much
parking
because
you
know
they're
unlikely
to
be
driving
cars
and
right
and
it
and
it's
walkable
to
places
like
you
know,
grocery
stores,
whole
foods
or
walking
to
target
plus
there's.
But
you
know
a
bus
plus
there's
a
22
bus
right
right
on
stephen's
creek.
B
K
Thank
you,
mayor
charfest,
mr
sharp.
Yes,
you
know
this
is
an
interesting
site
and
I'm,
if
we
put
it
on
the
housing
element,
are
we
gonna
get
ourself
in
trouble?
For,
let's
say
the
the
the
the
current
proposal
is
not
going
to
pan
out
and
someone
else
wants
to
do
something
with
it,
etc,
etc.
You
guys
want
to
put
a
dog
park
an
off
leash
dog
park.
Somebody
wants
to
put
in
car
storage,
who
knows
it,
what
does
putting
it
on
the
housing
element
site
do
to
it.
K
This
is
the
part
I'm
concerned
about,
especially
if
we're
up
zoning,
the
property
and
hcd
is
going
to
have
a
cow
if,
if
we're
not
building
stuff
at
that
density,
hcd
does
not
understand,
does
not
care
anything
about
our
city,
and
I'm
just
worrying
about
that.
We're
going
to
compromise
this
property
by
putting
it
on
the
housing
element
and
I'll
just
remind
you,
there's
a
baffle
new
potential
housing
law
that
you
can
put
developers
can
put
adus
in
in
in
new
developments.
E
D
F
B
F
B
L
Okay,
thanks
just
in
the
vein
of
clarification-
and
I
just
wanted
to
make
a
statement
and
ask
a
question:
when
you
had
your
last
meeting,
there
were
21
to
22
attendees
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting,
and
by
midnight
there
were
only
eight
tonight.
There
were
13
now
it's
down
to
eight
and
the
comment
was
made.
You
know,
purchased
by
scott
conley,
about
participation,
and
so
just
noting
that
it's
sad
to
me,
but
but
on
the
flip
side
of
that
there
were
multiple
letters
sent
today
about
the
subject
and
gladly
hope.
L
L
B
I
B
I
H
I
I
I
F
Is
nothing
in
place
right
now?
It
is
only
the
only
thing
that
uses
allowed
on
the
site
currently
is
transportation
and
that's
it,
which
is
parking
or
streets,
and
things
like
that,
but
the
goal
is
to
get
it
to
where
there
has
been
discussions
about
the
kind
of
housing
and
the
the
number
of
housing
units
that
can
go
on
there
and
the
goal
is
to
try
to
get
that
in
place.
J
Yeah,
I
think
the
here
the
idea
of
having
30
dwelling
units
makes
a
lot
of
sense
because
I
think
then
it
will
qualify
for
low
income
and
very
low
income.
So
that's
one
of
the
observations
that
I
have.
The
other
thing
is,
I
want
to
make
sure
you
know
there
was
a
pardon
me
pu.
I
think
you
mentioned
that
as
a
proposal
to
dispose
it
off.
J
F
It
would
continue
to
remain
the
city's
property.
I
think
we're
just
trying
to
figure
out
a
way
to
achieve
what
the
city
council
has
has
expressed
a
desire
to
do,
which
is
to
create
a
site
for
developmentally
disabled
persons
at
the
extremely
low
income
level.
That
is
the
goal
right
now,
and
that
is
the
goal
that
we're
trying
to
achieve.
It
would
still
continue
to
be
owned
by
the
city.
J
F
A
Yeah
pew
thanks
for
the
clarification
that
that
was
helpful
to
understand
the
city
ownership.
I
think
my
question
is
I
I
don't
know
a
single
developer
that
wouldn't
be
happy
with
a
higher
density
if
they
could
get
it.
I
think
the
question
was
whether
we
could
support
50
du
there,
and
I
also
kind
of
curious
as
to
griffin
number
one's
question
about
what
happens
in
the
view
of
hcd
when
this
looks
says
different
areas.
A
So
two
questions
one:
can
we
support
50du
right
if
we
needed
to
and
then
the
traffic
in
that
area
is
pretty
tight?
That
is
my
big
concern:
give
westport
building
there.
That
will
be
a
pretty
hard
spot.
I
think
the
access
is
that
coming
from
that's
coming
from
the
east
side
of
85
right,
so
it's
the
mary
avenue
access
right.
B
B
C
C
D
J
H
F
C
B
K
Thank
you
yes,
and
could
you
guys
put
up
that
one?
There
was
one
that
floated
by
that
was
on
north
danza.
I'm
sorry,
north
foothill
boulevard,
it
looked
like
an
office
building.
Is
that?
What
is
that
exactly?
Is
that
across
the
street
from
the
baptist
retirement
community
I
mean
or
the
from
the
retirement
home.
K
F
K
Units,
okay
and
that
would
be
town
homes,
maybe
or
something
like
that.
Something
like
that:
okay
yeah,
I
one,
if
it's
not,
is
it
occupied
or
is
it
because
I
remember
when
that
building
was
built,
so
I
mean
yeah,
I
I
don't
know
about
that.
I
I'm
really
concerned
about
losing
retail,
but
if
you
guys
think
that
it's
a
potential
for
building-
and
I
would
think
there
might
be
fire
danger
back
in
there-
I
mean
we're
getting
up
toward
the
hills
back
there.
Thank
you.
L
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
any
of
these
and
I'm
actually
grateful
that
you
found
some
properties
to
do
some
higher
density
and
so
cleaning
up
those
weird
numbers,
but
there's
another
weird
number
in
the
chart
that
you
may
want
to
clean
up
to
when
that's
8d,
which
says
3.4
units
per
acre.
Nobody
mentioned
that
I
I
saw
it.
I
thought
it
was
wonky,
but
if
you're
trying
to
get
rid
of
that,
you
need
to
address
that.
A
Yeah,
I
think
of
all
the
sites
that
are
there,
like.
I,
in
good
conscience,
can't
put
anything
higher
density
in
some
of
those
neighborhoods
that
are
being
suggested
here.
Only
because
if
you
look
at
one
d,
ca1
e
I
mean
these.
Are
I
mean
these
are
communities
that
were
set
up
to
be
like
estates?
I
mean,
and
so
one
c
one
d-
I
I
I
just
doesn't
make
any
sense
to
me,
but
I
like
one
e
as
an
as
a
placement
for
someone
to
look
at.
A
I
think
there
is
a
law
office
there
or
like
a
accounting,
firm
van
pelt,
e
and
james,
or
something
like
that,
was
there
not
sure
what
they
do,
but
that's
that's
there.
So
I
would
advocate
splitting
it
out
and
really
considering
putting
the
attention
on
the
the
half
acre.
That's
the
0.62,
acre
in
at
10050
north
fort
hill.
B
Yeah
I
mean
I
kind
of
disagree.
I
mean
I
agree
with
what
you
said.
You
know
what
these
were
intended
for,
but
you
know,
on
the
other
hand,
we
are
trying
to,
you,
know,
meet
our
arena
and
add
some
housing
to
the
west
side.
You
know,
god
knows
we
added
massive
quantities
to
the
east
side,
and
so
I
you
know
I
would
favor
keeping
all
three
of
these
sites
in
the
in
the
tier
one.
C
I
was
wondering
you
know
if
once
he
has
an
opportunity
for
more
right,
I
agree
with
you
know
the
other
look
sites
know
living
leaving
them
alone,
given
the
surroundings
and
all
that,
but
once
he
seems
like
you
know
ripe
for
some,
you
know
row
homes,
you
know
quite
a
bit
given
that
no
it's
train
tracks
on
one
side
and
you
know
in
the
creek
and
it's
not
you
know
peeking
into
any
single
family
homes
backyards
and
nothing
like
that.
Right.
G
G
B
G
B
G
Can
I
ask
a
question
then,
because
then
there's
the
other
thing
that
this
this
big
east
versus
west?
You
know,
I
just
find
it
interesting
that
the
planning
commission
or
the
city
council
are
in
the
least
bit
interested
in
giving
the
hamptons,
even
though
the
cinder
of
of
an
option
like
once
the
two
two
years
is
up
gone
guys
and
and
that
there
are
tier
two
replacements.
G
That's
the
part
that
surprises
me
the
most
because
there
is,
there
is
a
lot
of
passion
around
it,
and
I
understand
the
passion
around
that
the
the
east
gets
because
they've
got.
You
know,
that's
where
that
great
big
land
mass
was
so
anyway.
That's
part
of
it.
I
do
appreciate
your
response
that
you're
thinking
that
those
folks
will
not
be
actually
displaced
permanently
in
order
to
build
this,
but
I
have
to
admit
I
I'm
also
surprised
that
the
planning
commission
doesn't
seem
to
be
a
little
bit
more
like
okay.
G
B
G
B
E
G
B
E
B
Still
got,
I
guess
four
more
years
and
you
know
I
think
it's
being
looked
into
to
get
a
more
definitive
answer
like
did
you
abandon
this,
or
are
you
just
delaying
it
and
when
I
talk
talked
to
them
in
the
past
as
well?
You
know
we
delayed
it
because
the
construction
costs
we
have
all
these
other
projects
we're
working
on
in
the
area.
But
no
you
know
we.
We
have
not
abandoned
this,
we're
still
planning
to
build,
but
that
could
change.
G
G
Well,
it
was,
it
was
partially
that
I
mean.
Obviously
I'm
glad,
I'm
very
glad
for
your
explanation
about
the
displacement.
I
had
certainly
thought
it
was
the
other
which
was
all
those
people
had
to
go,
find
someplace
else
to
live,
but
the
other.
I
mean
one
of
the
reasons
that
I
spent
so
much
time
trying
to
figure
out.
Why?
What
could
you
do
there
over
at
bub
road
and
could
you
you
know?
Is
there
a
reason
why
apple
might
want
to
yeah?
B
G
E
J
Yeah
I
I
wanted
to
speak
so
chad
do.
I
have
your
permission.
Yeah
go!
Okay!
Thank
you!
Thank
you
and
then
the
thing
is,
I
think,
1c1d
and
one
e
all
show
are
good
properties
too.
To
consider
so
I
I
still
believe
that,
because
one
is
little
short,
a
little
smaller
one,
just
0.62
acres,
I
think
the
15
density
makes
sense
it.
J
It
could
go
higher,
but
I'm
little
bit
not
very
sure
about
that,
but
the
other
two
sides.
I
think
it
might
be
better
to
round
it
off
to
10
10
unit
drilling
units
per
acre.
That
might
give
us
some
little
bit
of
boost
here.
So
that's
my
recommendation
is
to
reconsider
a
1c
and
1d
at
10
and
a
1
e,
I'm
open
to
other
suggestions
in
terms
of
high
density.
B
A
C
B
C
B
M
F
From
a
perspective
of
whether
this
should
develop
as
row
houses
or
townhouses,
you
know
I
wouldn't
suggest
that
given
what's
around
it,
but
that
is
again.
This
is
the
planning
commission's
recommendation
from
my
professional
perspective.
I
would
not
suggest
that
these
include
homes
or
townhomes,
because
it
only
has
a
very
tiny
driveway
entrance
on
adriana.
E
C
F
C
F
D
F
F
I
F
F
F
The
other
one
we
were
suggesting
would
be
similar
to
how
the
batte
brothers
developed
batte
brothers
also
had
a
15
unit
per
acre
density,
but
they
developed
at
11
that
was
most
profitable
for
them
because
they
wouldn't
have
to
do
the
bmr
stuff,
and
all
that
there
were.
There
were
things
that
they
wanted
to
avoid.
F
F
J
J
J
J
B
D
B
B
G
A
I'm
just
lowering
it
just
does
so
you
already
called
on
me
I'm
fine
with
1c
being
developed
out,
and
I
totally
understand
why
the
constraints
are
r15,
I'm
having
a
hard
time
with
1d.
Only
because,
like
I
don't
live
there,
I
have
no
interest
there.
I
have
nothing
there.
It's
just
in
that
neighborhood
I
mean
that's,
that's
just
massively
disruptive
for
that
neighborhood.
All
the
other
decisions
we've
made
today
like
took
into
account
the
the
neighbors
around
them
the
lots,
the
type
of
units,
the
heights,
the
limits.
A
B
A
A
B
G
B
F
At
the
at
the
current
land
use
density
and
the
current,
not
the
zoning,
just
the
land
use
density,
they
could
have
six
or
seven
units
on
that
property.
So
you
could
keep
it
at
that
current
land
use
as
a
housing
element
site.
It
could
then
be.
You
know
we
can
figure
out
what
the
zoning
needs
to
be,
what
the
minimum
lot
sizes
need
to
be,
but
at
least
they
could
have
at
least
six
units
on
there.
C
F
C
F
Figure
the
number
out,
but
I
think
just
with
their
what
they
have
in
terms
of
land
and
the
current
land
use
designation.
They
can
have
6.75
units
on
the
site.
I
believe
at
this
point
so
whatever
it
is,
if
you,
if
you
kept
it
on
the
list
at
the
existing
land
use,
it
will
have
some
yield
and
we
can
figure
out
what
that
yield
is.
C
F
A
B
G
B
A
F
B
F
D
B
B
I
M
G
M
G
B
G
G
Right
there
were,
you
know,
a
number
of
our
from
the
planning
commission's
recommendations
out
to
what
the
staff
was
trying
to
implement
for
this
housing
element
had
a
couple
of
things.
I
mean,
of
course,
everything's
in
tension
anyway,
but
they
seem
to
be
absolutely
opposed,
which
is
don't
upzone,
but
go
throughout
the
city
and
those
kinds
of
things,
and
so
we
didn't
have
anything
from
like
three
different
housing
elements,
including
crossroads,
which
I
lived
near
and
I
thought
well.
G
It
seems
to
me
there
were
a
few
that
could
have
been
put
on
there,
but
they
a
couple
of
them,
had
been
discussed.
So
I
decided
not
to
go
in
to
say
the
third
one
that
I
knew
about,
but
so
I
just
was
wondering
why
those
were
so
ground
ruled
out
and
why
the
planning
commission
didn't
want
to
do
them.
But
anyway,
I
thought,
okay,
what
I'll
try
to
do
is
come
up
with
you
know.
G
I
was
going
through
everything
and
when
I
saw
that
information
about
apple
and
realized
that
that
that
big
companies
use
lots
of
factors
for
why
they
decide
to
do
the
different
things
they
do
to
bring
up
that.
The
apple
company
might
want
to
do
something
more
than
the
two
and
a
half
billion
dollars
worth
of
land,
allotments
that
they
made
earlier
and
a
couple
of
years
ago,
which
none
of
them
came
to
cupertino.
G
If
there
wasn't
some
some,
I
mean
not
meaning
they'd
do
anything
for
free,
but
that
there's
some
mutual
interest
in
them
being
able
to
get
out
of
there
and
us
have
it
and
the
property
owners
being.
There
may
well
want
to
to
build
something
that's
available,
and
that
would
also
make
them
money
and
be
good
for
the
economy
and
all
that,
so
I
thought
that
was
a
good
one.
At
least
one
try
to
get
away
from
all
of
those
homes
over
in
the
east
which
people
have.
I
mean
it's
just
been
non-stop.
G
You
know
from
the
people
that
speak
to
us
and
then
also
all
amongst
ourselves
that
how
how
much
the
east
gets
stuck
with
all
the
housing
and
the
west
doesn't,
and
to
think
that
you
wouldn't
want
to
take
something
off
the
hamptons.
Just
say:
okay,
you
don't
have
to
do
it
not
to
worry.
We
we,
you
know,
just
don't
don't
do
anything
as
a
matter
of
fact,
we've
gotten
them
right.
G
Just
don't
bother
to
do
anything
guys
because
we've
got
you
covered.
We've
got
all
these
other
all
these
other
properties,
and
so
do
you
not
quite
get
why
I'm
surprised
that
you
aren't
more
interested
in
the
idea
of
moving
things
away
from
the
hampton
and
maybe
taking
that
off
of
our
housing
element
and
putting
other
things
in.
B
Mean
I
think,
in
terms
of
the
hamptons,
you
know
the
irvine
wanted
that
approval
and
they
agreed
to
the
community
benefits
and
all-
and
it's
not
saying
telling
them,
oh,
you
don't
have
to
do
it,
they
already
know
they
don't
have
to
do
it,
but
I
know
it
seems
like
they
want.
You
know
they
want
to
do
it,
but
they
just
didn't
want
to
do
it
right
away
because
of
the
rental,
housing
market
and
construction
costs,
and
you
know
several
other
things.
In
fact
they
originally
asked
for
more
you.
D
B
L
B
B
G
G
C
C
J
J
F
H
Well,
as
as
with
other
things,
we've
discussed
it,
it's
a
complicated
combination
of
things
that
we
need
to
look
at
in
order
to
come
up
with
our
analysis,
but
we'll
have
that
going
forward
in
working
with
council.
So
as
they
look
at
these
numbers,
we'll
be
getting
closer
to
understanding
what
that
distribution
will
look
like
among
these
sites.
J
H
J
J
Total
and
the
breakdown
to
realize
you
know
we
all
in
a
lie,
because
what
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
is
that
if
we
do
the
right
distribution
on
the
western
east
side,
that's
one
thing.
The
other
thing
is
that,
generally,
are
we
meeting
the
goals
that
is
required
in
terms
of
you
know
whatever
we
are
really
wants
us
to
do.
M
So
the
concern
was
that,
as
if,
as
you
went
through
the
properties
you
took
sites
off
or
you
lessened
the
density,
we
would
need
to
pull
in
the
tier
two
sites.
So
as
we've
gone
through
and
made
the
changes,
I
I've
calculated
it
and
I
could
be
off
slightly,
but
you
actually
added
about
45
units,
so
you're,
not
in
a
position
where
you're
having
to
get
more
units
because
you
lessen
the
buffer
so
you're.
You
probably
are
now
closer
to
30
hcds,
recommending
15
to
30.
M
J
So
the
second
point,
second
part
of
my
this
thing
is
actually
I'm
kind
of
I
I
was
I'm
also
very
curious,
just
as
commissioner
cunningham
is.
I
think
we
need
to
know
the
intent
of
holding
on
to
properties.
Typically,
you
know
it's
one
of
the
reasons
other
than
you
know,
having
apple
among
in
our
in
our
city.
J
It's
very
difficult,
so
I
think
in
some
sense
you
know
if
they
can,
if
there's
a
way
for
us
to,
we
can't
persuade
it
so
after
all
the
private
pro
this
thing,
but
because
they
have
leased
it,
they
have
the
lease
on
that.
Definitely
the
owner
doesn't
want
to
sell
it,
so
we
are
not
able
to
take
benefit.
J
Of
that
I
mean
we
can
wait
till
the
next
housing
element
cycle,
but
I'm
just
saying
that
you
know
that's
something
of
concern
because
eventually
we
I
don't
know
how
tina
will
change
between
this
housing
element
cycle
and
the
next,
but
it's
one
of
the
things
that
bothers
a
little
bit.
I
think
overall,
I'm
very
happy
the
way
we
have
done
these
things.
I'm
I'm
very
happy
that
you
know
we
had
the
advantage
of
andy
being
able
to
bring.
In
this
perspective.
J
I
understand
scd
requirements
much
better.
We
know
what
we
can
do
as
a
city,
so
I
really
appreciate
the
you
know
help
that
the
planning
department
has,
you
know
been
able
to
clarify
and
also
from
andy's
team.
I
mean
very
well.
I
think
it's
been
very
educational,
although
it's
been
challenging,
but
it's
very
educational.
Thank
you.
L
Thanks
so
I
appreciate
connie's
effort
to
to
come
up
with
something
creative,
and
I
kind
of
hope
that
between
now
and
city
council
there'll
be
more
of
that
kind
of
thing
to
suggest,
and
I
would
say
it's
it's
not
just
on
bob
that
this
same
conversation
could
be
held
with
apple.
They
they
camp
out
at
a
lot
of
the
bambley
drive
sites,
which
are
you
know,
prime
sites
for
housing.
I
think,
given
what
we
have
to
accomplish
to
please
hcd.
L
K
K
you
had
manufacturing
over
in
that
area
and
when
you
have
manufacturing
you
have
the
potential
of
soil
contamination,
not
that
it
was
intentional,
etc,
etc.
But
there
may
be
reasons
that
certain
tech
companies
sit
on
sites.
You
cannot
put
housing
on
every
site,
contrary
to
what
buffy
wicks
seems
to
not
understand
is,
and
I
I'm
really
really
concerned
about
this
lack
of
understanding.
K
D
I
Thank
you
chair.
I
just
wondered
if
we're
gonna
have,
if
housing
I'd
like
to
suggest
that
we
have
another
session
where
we
have
maybe
before
presenting
these
to
city
council,
that
we
come
up
with
some
policies
that
we'd
like
to
suggest
this.
Wasn't
I
don't
want
to
take
credit
for
my
wonderful
ideas,
just
that
back
in
2000,
the
last
cycle,
housing
element.
Actually
housing
was
the
one
that
let
the
the
first
round
of
site
selection
and
had
proposals
for
policies
to
change.
I
F
I
A
Thanks
to
thank
everybody
for
getting
this
far,
I
think
this
was
a
great
effort.
I
know
a
lot
of
people
put
a
lot
of
time
and
effort
into
this
and
it's
it's
important.
You
know
I'm
glad
the
staff
stepped
up
to
aid
the
consultants.
I
think
that
was
useful.
I'm
still
not
happy
with
all
the
work
from
the
consultants,
but
I
think
we
eventually
got
to
it.
A
A
I
agree
with
tessa
I
I
went
back
and-
and
you
know
I-
I
heard
something
that
we
did
this
in
2014
and
it's
every
eight
years
and
I
went
back
and
looked
at
some
of
the
videos
as
well
with
tessa
housing.
Commission
should
be
leading
this
effort.
We
should
not
be
relegated
to
the
back
end.
I
have
no
idea
why
that
wasn't
set
up
that
way,
but
it
should
have
been
like
that
in
the
beginning-
and
we
shouldn't
have
waited
this
long
to
get
consultants
on
the
notion
of
apple
they've
left
us.
A
They
put
a
billion
dollars
into
rdu
a
billion
dollars
in
north
austin.
There's
22
000
people
being
employed
there,
so
I
don't
think
we
can
always
count
on
apple
being
here.
So
I'm
really
really
worried
about
retail
tax
revenues,
food
drug
services,
gas
stations,
services
that
are
going
to
be
available.
So
I
think
we
should
always
keep
that
in
mind.
It's
great
of
all
this
housing
and
no
services.
A
What
are
you
going
to
do,
and
so
I
think
it's
important
to
preserve
the
balance
of
affordability,
quality
of
life
and
and
to
make
sure
that
housing
costs
don't
get
out
of
control,
and
I
think
we've
done
a
good
down
that
good
job
there.
I
do
have
one
regret
in
this
process.
We
probably
got
like
70
letters.
I
don't
know
what
people
are
doing,
but
we
got
a
whole
bunch
of
letters
and
hopefully
we
can
read
those
to
counsel
from
the
residents
and
share
those
granted
like
you
know.
A
B
B
B
B
G
G
So
I
want
to
thank
all
of
the
staff
and
the
emc
consultants,
and
I
did
want
to
say
thank
you
to
all
the
commissioners
and
to
the
chairs,
both
for
all
of
the
input
and
the
thought
that
went
into
the
different
comments
that
went
in.
I
guess,
as
always,
I'm
left
with
one
last
thing
I
need
to
say
I
guess
I
would
take
a
little
issue
chair
with
your
comment
that
form
letters
aren't
regarded.
We
continually
get
as
citizens
that
we
should
be
contacting
our.
G
You
know
our
our
council
and
we
should
be
this
emails
matter
person
being
in
person
matters
more
if
you
can
at
least
just
get
your
name
in
there,
so
that
they
know,
because
each
one
of
those
letters
has
a
different
name
on
it,
and
each
of
those
people
have
taken
the
time
to
write
to
you,
and
I
mean
you,
you,
you
should
be
happy.
You
know
we
in
the
housing
commission
don't
get
nearly
this
many
letters.
You
know
like
hey
look,
people
are
talking
to
you,
oh
you're,
so
nice.
G
So
I
guess
I
I
would
say
as
a
resident
it.
It
rings
a
little
odd
that
we
are
constantly
told
that
if
we
could
just
get
in
our
comments
the
way
we
think
about
it
and
from
our
perspective,
so
that
you
can
at
least
think
about
them
and
see
you
know,
like
maybe
there's
an
error,
maybe
there's
something
else,
but
I
hear
errors
too,
but
you
try
to
think
through
what
is
the?
What
is
the?
G
G
What
excuse
me,
sir,
why
do
you
think
they
don't
understand
it?
They've
read
before
they
signed
it.
What
makes
you
think
that
each
person
who
signed
that
letter
and
hit
go
and
had
their
name
their
address
and
all
that?
What
makes
you
believe
that
they
didn't
think
that
was
right
and
that
they
wanted
to
join
in,
but
they
didn't
themselves
have
the
time
to
sit
and
write.
G
C
Yeah,
so
I
I'd
like
to
thank
the
staff
and
data
and
the
consultants,
and
you
know
my
fellow
commissioners
for
the
work
and
the
diligence,
and
you
know
sitting
through
all
the
ups
and
downs.
I
know
we
are
not
an
easy
bunch
to
work
with
so
staff.
You
know
thank
you
for
putting
up
with
us
right,
so
we
are
very
demanding
so
on.
I
do
want
to
comment.
You
know
for
residents,
you
know
that
participated.
You
know
spent
time.
C
Thank
you
for
all
the
corrections
that
you
sent
our
way
and
all
that
stuff
and
also
you
know.
I
know
it's
been
frustrating
at
times.
You
know,
because
not
everybody
is
getting.
You
know
everything
they
want,
and
I
see
a
lot
of
frustration
directed
towards
you
know
being
forced
into
doing
this.
My
ask,
is,
you
know,
please
take
your
anger
on
the
people
that
are
like
you
know,
passing
all
these
laws
right,
because
we
are
just
doing
what
we
can
and
what
we
are
expected
to
within
the
framework
of
you
know
what's
needed.
C
I
I
just
wanted
to
comment-
and
I
I'm
I'm
sorry
to
bring
this
up,
but
being
that
connie
was
so
willing
to
make
that
comment
and
kind
of
bring
that
up.
I
just
wanted
to
bring
up
the
comment
that
commissioner
cunningham
had
a
two-minute
dissertation
on
why
the
housing
commission
should
not
be
involved
in
this
process,
and
so
I
don't
I
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
we
don't
want
to
bring
these
kind
of
things
up
to
the
meeting.
I
didn't
find
it
nice
to
bring
up
that
kind
of
a
comment.
I
B
J
J
So
whatever
you
know,
contrary
to
what
many
people
think
react,
I,
though
there
are
repetitions.
I
do
try
to
go
through
as
many
emails
as
possible,
but
I
am
not
supposed
to
speak
about
them,
so
I
don't
talk
about
them,
but
I
do
go
through
them
and
I
think
we
would
like
to
we
really
appreciate,
because
without
your
input
we
cannot
make
judgment
calls.
So
please
provide
inputs,
it's
very
important
because
it
helps
not
only
the
you
know.
J
H
Oh
just
briefly,
I
just
want
to
remind
the
public
and
and
all
commissioners
here
that
we're
we're,
leaving
the
balancing
act
up
and
available
for
comments
and
for
the
middles
of
a
of
a
full
housing
plan
and
also
our
surveys
on
the
website,
so
we're
leaving
it
up
through
july
12.
For
those
comments
to
then
be
folded
in
and
carried
forward
to
the
council
meeting
and
chair
parish.
I
just
I
just
want
to
commend
you
for
thinking
about
policies
and
and
getting
your
list
together
and
getting
started
with
that.
H
We
highly
value
that
and
can't
wait
to
work
with
you
on
that
and
the
whole
of
the
housing
commission.
But
I
I
do
want
to
also
just
state
a
reminder
and
and
have
some
shared
expectations,
so
this
council
meeting
we're
really
hoping
pretty
quickly
here.
We
can
get
this
list
going
so
that
the
sequa
process,
which
often
takes
up
to
nine
months
at
at
best
and
that
we
initiate
that
process
we
do
have
on
the
20th.
We
have
an
outreach
meeting
that
we're
hoping
feeds
into
the
policy
discussions.
H
That's
what
hcd
sees
as
just
golden
when
we
stand
out
with
something
that's
specific
to
cupertino,
they
see
that
they
recognize
it
and
they
and-
and
they
acknowledge
that
we're
we're
doing
what
they're
asking
us
to
do.
I
just
really
want
to
thank
all
the
commissioners
today.
Thank
you
for
all
the
input
and
for
helping
us
move
forward.