►
Description
Coverage of the June 14, 2022 Cupertino Planning Commission Teleconference Meeting.
A
A
E
F
A
A
D
D
G
I
can
help
answer
that
the
it
is
the
city
council's
direction,
that
the
planning
commission
minutes
the
action
minutes
and
that's
what
these
minutes
reflect.
The
planning
commission
meetings
are
recorded
and
kept
for
99
years.
They
are
the
public
record
for
the
meeting
and,
as
a
result,
the
council's
direction
was
to
have
action
minutes
for
the
planning
commission.
D
G
A
Okay,
so
we
are
not
including
right
it's.
These
are
not
detailed
minutes
that
are
a
transcription
of
everything
that
was
said
in
the
meeting.
For
that
you
do
have
to
go
and
watch
the
recording
which,
as
was
stated
it
it
will
be
available
for
99
years
wow.
I
hope
we're
all
around
that
long
to
go
back
and
watch
them.
A
C
H
A
A
J
High
chair,
sharp
you're
going
to
need
a
majority
of
those
present
to
approve,
and
so
I
can
we
can
defer
to
another
meeting
when
chair
wong
is
here
and
maybe
a
third.
Having
said
that,
I
do
want
to
say
generally,
it
makes
sense
for
commissioners
who
are
actually
present
to
attend
a
meeting
to
you
know
to
to
approve
a
meeting
or
abstain
or
reject
as
appropriate.
J
Having
said
that,
since
meetings
are
recorded,
it's
also
possible
that
commissioners
who
were
unable
to
attend
to
the
extent
they
did
watch
and
view
the
meeting
on
the
recorded
basis.
Certainly
they
would.
They
would
be
entitled
to
be
able
to
note
the
minutes
and
and
be
able
to
approve
those
as
well.
In
that
circumstance,
just
just
moving
forward.
Just
let.
A
No
okay,
so
maybe
my
next
meeting
you
could
watch
that.
Hopefully,
commissioner
wong
will
be
back
by
then
as
well,
but
that's
a
that's
a
good
point
about
watching
minute,
watching
meetings
that
you're
unable
to
attend.
I
I
didn't
think
of
that,
but
yeah
that
makes
sense,
and-
and
I
would
you
know
that
this
is
standard
procedure
for
the
planning
commission.
We
don't
do
a
transcribed
minutes
like
they
do
for
city
council
meetings
and
I
don't
think
we
have
any
plans
to
do
that.
K
A
E
L
A
A
A
A
C
A
B
B
on
june
7th
2022,
the
cupertino
city
council
issued
two
proclamations,
the
one
for
lgbtq
pride
months
states
in
part.
We
in
the
city
of
cupertino,
stand
alongside
the
lgbtq
community
and
demand
equal
rights
for
all,
promoting
a
world
in
which
all
people
can
live,
free
from
discrimination
and
violence,
the
one
for
the
immigrant
heritage
month,
states
in
part
the
role
of
immigrants
in
building
our
nation,
has
frequently
been
overlooked
and
undervalued
throughout
our
history
and
continuing
to
the
present
day.
B
B
Read
these
proclamations
watch
the
pride
flag.
Raising
these
two
photos
of
the
council
were
published
by
the
city
to
show
their
commitment
to
lgbtq
people
and
immigrants
take
in
what
that
means
for
our
community.
What
can
you
do
at
the
planning
commission
meeting
later
this
month
that
discusses
the
housing
element?
Do
these
three
things
expand
the
number
of
sites
being
considered,
reject
the
sites
that
would
kick
hundreds
of
people
out
of
their
existing
homes,
write
land
use
policies
that
make
it
possible
to
build
multi-family
housing.
These
are
all
within
your
authority
with
proclamations
and
photos.
B
The
city
council
shows
that
it
wants
us
to
discuss
the
housing
element
that
plans
homes
for
our
residents.
What
can
you
do
as
the
housing
commission
begin
tonight
to
enable
homes
that
will
meet
the
needs
of
all
residents
of
cupertino?
You
inhabit
a
special
time
in
history.
Dig
deep.
Do
the
right
thing.
Thank
you.
M
Thank
you,
mr
char,
mr
chair
hi,
I'm
jennifer
griffin
and
speaking
on
the
housing
element.
There
is
a
drama
going
on
in
southern
california,
I'm
learning
about
scag
skag,
which
is
equivalent
to
our
a
bag
up
here
and
if
people
weren't
aware
southern
california
is
about
six
months
ahead
of
us
in
their
housing
element,
drama
and
many
many
of
the
cities
in
southern
california
were
not
certified
by
hcd.
M
They
have
resubmitted
multiple
times.
Hcd
holds
the
guillotine,
basically
over
them
and
will
not
certify
them.
We
have
questions
about
the
legitimacy
of
hcd.
Doing
this
it
it's
it's
very,
very
strange,
but
what
the
problem
is
that
hcd
is
saying
that
if
southern
california,
this
is
probably
250
cities
do
not
get
their
housing
elements
passed
by
hcd.
M
M
These
are
things
that
are
happening
like
sb9
and
sb10,
and
this
outrageous
arena
numbers
with
the
housing
element
where
you
have
hcd,
who
is
run
by
someone
that
hasn't
even
been
elected.
Yet
he
was
appointed
you
you
don't
this
isn't
the
way
to
run
the
state,
and
I
am
scared
to
death
that
they
are
going
to
go
for
every
state
and
the
federal
we
right
now.
I
believe
that
groups
are
trying
to
get
hcd
to
back
off
and
give
them
more
time,
but
but
yet
what
happens?
M
M
I
I
don't
think
that
this
can
continue
this
way
they
have
to
get
hcd
under
control.
These
laws
were
not
voted
on
by
anyone.
They
were
passed
by
a
secret
group.
That's
all
I
can
say
about
that,
but
you
know
we're
going
to
be
stuck
in
the
same
situation
up
here.
If
we
don't
so
so
I
my
problem
with
this,
is
we
all
know
what
putin
is
doing,
but
is
this
what's
happening
in
our
state?
Hcd
has
no
right
to
demand
this.
You
cannot
rezone
the
state
this
way.
Thank.
N
So
I
you
got
to
do
what
you
can
do
when
you
can
do
it,
and
I
think
that
that
is
exactly
what
planning
commission
and
staff
did
regardless
and
not
knowing
whose
idea
it
was
to
hold
that
second
discussion
and
giving
also
mind
you
the
public
one
of
the
only
only
chances
to
talk
about
site
selection
at
this
point,
so
I'm
just
putting
that
out
there.
So
thank
you
for
having
that
second
discussion
and
honestly
wish.
There
would
be
more
there's
also.
A
N
A
Okay,
thank
you
lisa
for
being
brief,
and
I
don't
see
any
more
members
of
the
public
wishing
to
speak
on
oral
saira.
I
know
that
I
res
I
don't.
I
received
one
submission
to
be
read
during
world.
I
don't
know
if
there
were
others
that
I've
missed
in
the
last
minute
or
so,
but
you
may
go
ahead
and
read
whatever
was
received.
A
C
So
it
says
dear
chair,
sharp
and
planning
commissioners,
please
ensure
that
cupertino's
housing
element
for
the
sixth
cycle
arena
is
put
back
on
track.
I
have
been
watching
the
planning
commission
meetings
and
the
strategic
advisory
committee
meetings
on
zoom.
The
planning
commission
and
the
strategic
advisory
committee
have
been
working
diligently
to
move
the
housing
element
forward.
They
are
allowing
for
extensive
public
comment
on
both
the
site
selection
and
on
affirmatively
furthering
fair
housing.
C
I
have
been
impressed
with
the
diligence
of
the
planning
commission
and
the
strategic
advisory
committee
in
their
efforts
to
ensure
that
cupertino
creates
a
compliant
housing
element.
I
also
believe
that
the
cupertino
housing
commission
should
become
more
involved
in
the
creation
of
the
next
housing
element.
C
C
Imagine
their
frustration
when
highly
paid
consultants
and
city
staff
members
are
not
performing
as
the
residents
of
cupertino
expect.
I
urge
the
city
manager
to
take
appropriate
actions
to
get
the
housing
element
process
back
on
track.
The
engaged
numbers
of
the
engaged
members
of
the
public
are
very
concerned
about
the
delays.
If
the
city
fails
to
complete
a
certified
housing
element
by
the
state
deadline,
the
consequences
will
be
dire
and
the
blame
will
rest
squarely
with
emc
and
the
city's
planning
staff.
C
Finally,
I
wish
to
commend
both
the
city
council
and
the
planning
commission
for
their
emphasis
on
trying
to
make
as
much
of
the
new
housing
to
be
for
sale,
housing.
My
family
with
two
young
children,
currently
rents,
but
we
are
trying
to
purchase
a
home
in
cupertino
or
within
the
cupertino
school
district
boundaries.
Lakshmi
redchat,
gopalan,
three-year
cupertino
resident.
A
A
J
You
thank
you
shark,
so
upon
further
reflection,
I
I
believe,
actually
a
quorum
for
this
five
member
commission
is
three
and
we
have
four
members
here
and
by
a
two
to
one
vote.
One
abstention
on
the
minutes.
I
believe
actually
that
that's
sufficient
some
number
to
pass,
and
so
let's
go
back
there.
I'd
like
to
revisit
I
apologize,
but
for
efficiency
purposes.
I
wanted
to
move
that
along,
so
we
don't
have
to
revisit
it
at
the
next
meeting.
A
A
Okay,
great
thank
you
for
clarifying
that.
Okay,
we
will
move
on
written
communications,
we
don't
there.
There
were.
I
think
there
were
some
other
written
communications,
but
those
were
not
for
oral,
so
those
are
available
for
the
public
to
read.
We
don't
have
anything
on
consent,
calendar
and
now
we
are
on
to
public
hearing
so
item.
One
consider
renewal
of
a
conditional
use
permit
for
an
existing
mono-eucalyptus
wireless
communication
facility.
You
2011-10
recommended
action
that
the
planning
commission
adopt.
A
G
O
O
The
wireless
facility
is
located
on
a
hill
that
has
been
landscaped
to
screen
the
existing
satellite
dishes
due
to
the
height
of
the
existing
vegetation.
The
lower
portion
of
the
mono
eucalyptus
and
the
equipment
enclosure
is
substantially
screamed
from
the
public,
as,
as
you
can
see
from
these
photos
on
the
slide,
there
are
also
a
row
of
existing
tall
eucalyptus
trees
that
aren't
photoed
here,
but
between
the
project
site
and
I-280
that
screen
the
wireless
facility
from
the
highway
for
highway
vehicles
and
los
altos
residents.
O
There
are
no
changes
proposed
to
the
landscaping
or
the
mono-eucalyptus
at
the
site.
We
staff
has
conditioned
the
project
to
maintain
the
tree,
pool
appearance
and
continue
ongoing
maintenance,
which
includes
providing
artificial
branches
to
obscure
the
appearance
of
the
panel
antennas
and
any
associated
mounting
framework
that
may
be
visible.
O
O
The
renewal
of
the
use
permit
does
not
propose
physical
alterations
to
the
existing
mono-eucalyptus
and
is
found
to
be
appropriately
screened
from
the
public.
Staff
therefore
recommends
that
the
planning
commission
adopt.
The
proposed
draft
resolution
find
that
the
proposed
actions
are
exempt
from
sequa
an
approved
use,
permit
u-2022-001.
O
A
E
E
E
O
E
Right
so
so
don't
don't
we
expect
the
release
renewal
to
occur.
You
know
before
the
expiry
of
the
previous
one,
so
otherwise,
now,
how
do
we
account
for
this
six
month
gap?
Is
there
a
legal
requirement
that
says
you
know
you
have
to
renew
within
this
time
frame
or
they
could
have
gone
like
this
for
another
two
years
right.
G
I
can
try
to
help
answer
that
through
the
chair,
pugoce
planning
manager,
the
lease
this
is
on
private
property,
so
the
lease
is
on
a
different
schedule,
potentially
than
what
the
conditional
use
permit
is
on.
And
yes,
there
is
a
six
month
gap
and
yes,
they
could
have
potentially
gone
on
for
a
couple
of
years,
but
they
would
not
be
able
to
acquire
building
permits
and
other
such
requirements
from
the
city
in
order
to
be
to
have
permitted
structures
and
therefore
they
were
required
to
come
in
to
renew
their
antenna.
Cp.
E
Interesting,
so
it's
interesting,
so
one
comment
and
I'll
wrap
it
up
with
that.
So
I'm,
given
the
amount
of
you,
know
feedback
that
we
got
on
the
micro
cell
towers
that
have
been
installed.
You
know
all
around
the
city
right.
I'm
surprised
that
no,
we
didn't
get
any
single
comment
from
88
public
outreach
right,
so
it
could
be
because-
and
it's
an
existing
tower
may
be
the
case.
E
But
certainly
you
know
my
thinking
is
you
know
hey
our
public
outreach
is,
you
know,
checking
the
box
in
terms
of
you
know,
meeting
the
legal
requirements
and
all
that
somehow
we
are
missing.
The
mark
of
you
know
getting
real
comments
from
public,
not
sure
what
can
be
done
about
it,
or
at
least
no
that's
an
observation,
because
we
we
heard
a
lot
of
comments
on
you
know
the
cell
towers,
the
microcell
towers
that
are
being
put
on
right,
so
zero
comments
on
this.
You
know
a
little
surprising.
D
So
it
looks
like
the
information
is
missing
in
this.
First
of
all,
leasing
a
site
does
not
allow
a
technology
to
operate,
because
the
property
on
which
it
is
installed
technology
has
as
a
different
implications.
So
I
disagree
with
the
few's
comment
on
that
that
if
you
have
a
lease
available
on
it,
so
we
can.
You
can
actually
mount
the
antenna,
but
you
cannot
operate
it
second
thing
in
this
presentation.
D
What
is
missing
is
the
density,
so
distance
is
probably
okay
but,
as
you
know,
the
4g,
when
we
went
from
4g
to
5g
the
density
of
the
radiation
from
these
antennas,
wireless
antennas
increase
significantly
because
they
are
very
uni
directed
to
a
user
or
cell
phone.
They
have
a
technology
in
5g.
So
what
that
means
is
that
in
a
given
area,
a
small
square
meter
or
whatever
the
number
of
users
increased
significantly
for
the
same
amount
of
same
antenna.
D
So
what
it
would
have
made
sense
to
have
here
in
this
table
which
you
presented
to
have
a
density
around
that
antenna,
did
it
remain
same
or
is
it
the
implication
of
the
5g
or
whatever
the
technology
they
are
using?
Which
is
not
even
mentioned
here
that
has
any
implication
of
that,
so
basically,
that
radiation
level
changes,
even
though
you
keep
the
antenna
same,
keep
the
everything
same.
Basically,
so
I'm
just
wondering
that,
where
is
that
information?
D
D
Basically,
just
unless
you
define
how
many
people
who
are
serviced
around
that
antenna
in
a
given
square
meter,
we
do
not
know
whether
the
same
antenna
was
servicing
some
set
of
people,
some
density
around
that
thing
now
it
is
servicing
much
larger
density,
so
it
has
some
implication
because
it
is
a
lot
of
people
are
getting
affected
because
of
that
same
antenna,
you
need
not
change
anything.
You
just
change
the
wireless
technology.
G
The
the
rf
study
that
was
but
we're
kind
of
bound
by
the
fcc's
rules
and
regulations
on
how
we
can
measure
radiation
and
what
the
thresholds
are
for
radiation
and
safety.
We
cannot
go
anywhere
beyond
that.
I
do
want
to
put
that
out
there.
However,
if
the
applicant
is
here,
maybe
they
can
also
respond
to
it,
but
I'm
pretty
sure
they
will
also
rely
on
the
fcc
version
regulation,
but.
A
G
O
P
P
J
You,
sir
sharp,
and
so
I
think
these
are
good.
Questions
are
being
asked,
but
you
know
the
fcc
has
very
precise
regulations
as
to
the
discretion
that
that
we
have,
when
a
situation
like
this,
which
is
essentially
a
request
to
to
to
extend
an
existing
conditional
use
permit
for
another
10
years
and
to
the
extent
that
the
applicant
has
submitted
the
appropriate
rf
study,
which
you
know
that's
a
factual
matter.
That
appears
they
did
so
and
there's
an
attachment.
You
know
I
think
they've
complied
with
with
their
their
obligations.
A
A
A
Secretary
all
right
well
I'll
accept.
I
just
wish
we
would
look
into
this
because
I
know
my
neighbor
actually
loved
that
paper
and
she's
asking
you
know
is
why
doesn't
it
come
anymore,
and
I
said
I
don't
think
they
publish
anymore,
but
apparently
they
still
do.
Is
it
only
online
or
do
they
print
it
as
well?.
A
E
I
do
have
one
question
before:
oh:
go
ahead,
raise
my
hand
so
to
the
applicant.
So
we
are,
we
are
approving
conditional
use
permit
based
on
the
rf
study
done
now,
but
then
presume.
We
know
over
the
course
of
10
years
there
will
be
equipment,
changes
that
happens.
You
know
either
for
new
technologies
and
you
know
whatever.
So
is
there
a
requirement
to
do
rf
study
every
time
you
know
there
is
an
equipment,
change
or
a
technology
change.
P
It
would
only
hold
true
if
there
was
no
modifications
done
to
the
facility.
I
mean
some
modifications
proposed
to
facility,
don't
necessarily
modify
the
antennas
or
the
technology,
sometimes
there's
other
equipment
like
rru's
or
batteries
that
they're
swapping
out
or
power
cabinets.
I
don't
really
know
how
to
answer
your
question.
That
would
be
something
I
would
think
relate
to
your
policy.
P
F
E
Okay,
yeah
it's
just
hold
on
so
so
so
yeah.
I
did
see
why
10
years,
because
I
believe
you
know
the
technology
changes
and,
and
also
you
know
we
may
change.
You
know
the
aesthetic
requirement
and
all
that
stuff,
but
I
did
not
see
anywhere
mention
of
you
know
if
they
change
the
technology,
because
you
know
right
within
the
10-year
window
that
they
are
required
to
do
a
rf
study.
You
know
that
part.
I
didn't
see.
So
it's
it's.
I'm
glad
to
hear
that.
E
No,
we
have
that
requirement
whenever
there
are
equipment
change,
let's
make
sure
that
the
conditional
approval
permit
includes
that,
like
like
you
know,
because
we
don't
want
this
to
be,
you
know
one
and
done,
and
then
you
know
and
then
something
disastrous.
You
know
happen
later
on
and-
and
you
know
not
be
able
to
you
know,
hold
them
accountable
for
the
same
levels
that
you
know
we
approve
the
permit
for.
A
D
D
We
expected
to
change
this
technology
by
within
the
next
two
years,
or
something
like
that,
so
so,
given
that,
unless
this
is
the
the
provider
sticks
to
the
fact
that
whatever
the
study
and
radiation
levels
it
has
quoted
here
in
this
attachment,
which
I
have
read
now,
it
adheres
to
that
in
the
next.
Whatever
changes
they
bring
about
in
the
wireless
technology,
this
will.
This
will
be
good
that
way
that
just
just
recommend.
So
this
has
to
be
conditional
approval.
A
D
A
D
H
A
A
G
G
O
O
In
2011,
the
existing
verizon
wireless
was
approved
for
the
conditional
use
permit
architectural
and
site
approval,
height,
exception
variants
and
trigger
removal
permit,
which
allowed
for
the
construction
of
a
70
foot
tall
monopine
with
associated
base
equipment.
Six
six:
sorry,
a
six
mounted
64
tall
panel
antennas,
reduced
setback
of
8
feet
from
an
abutting
residential
property
and
a
true
removal.
O
O
The
wireless
facility
is
located
on
a
moderately
sloped
area,
with
landscaping
to
screen
a
portion
of
the
existing
antennas
and
pole
mounted
equipment
and
due
to
the
height
of
the
existing
vegetation,
as
well
as
the
topography
of
the
site.
The
lower
portion
of
the
monopine
and
the
equipment
enclosure
is
substantially
screened
from
public
views
from
stevens
canyon
road.
O
Prior
to
the
planning
commission,
140
mailed
notices
were
sent
to
owners
within
300
foot
radius
of
the
site.
A
site
sign
was
posted
on
the
property
and
a
legal
ad
in
the
paper.
Two
public
comments
were
received
in
support
of
the
project
as
few
mentioned
and
were
provided
to
the
commission
as
a
desk
item.
O
The
renewal
of
the
use
permit
does
not
propose
physical
alterations
to
the
existing
monopine
and
is
found
to
be
appropriately
screened
from
the
public.
Staff
therefore
recommends
that
the
planning
commission
adopt
the
proposed
draft
resolution
to
find
that
the
proposed
actions
are
exempt
from
secret
and
approved
use.
Permit
u-2022-002.
O
A
A
E
Okay,
so
a
couple
of
questions
to
the
staff
right,
so
I
know
this
is
existing
10-year
lease,
that's
being
it
has
to
be
renewed,
but
I'm
just
curious.
You
know
last
time
when
it
was
approved,
looks
like
another
couple
of
exceptions
made.
For
example,
the
height
is,
you
know,
allowed
is
55
feet,
but
we
are,
we
seem
to
have
approved
70
feet
height
and
similarly,
you
know
the
distance
to
the
near
nearest
residential
unit.
E
G
I
can
try
to
help
answer
those
that
was
the
applicant's
request
at
that
time.
The
planning
commission
reviewed
those
requests
and
did
approve
them
with
regard
to
the
eight
foot
setback
from
the
nearest
residential
property.
This
this
antenna
is
located
within
an
r1
cluster
zone,
so
the
homes
are
clustered
and
it
is
located
in
the
common
space
for
the
development,
and
it
was
a
decision
by
the
hoa
and
was
supported
by
the
by
the
development
at
that
time.
To
have
the
antenna
be
installed
in
this
location.
E
E
E
O
E
G
At
the
end
of
the
day,
I
guess
it
is,
it
does
serve
a
public
purpose.
The
facility
does
there
is
no
cell
coverage
in
that
area.
Of
course,
the
city
could
take
the
the
position
that
we
could
do
code
enforcement
on
them
at
this
point,
we're
just
trying
to
play
nice
and
remind
them
of
their
obligations
to
renew
their
permit.
There's,
certainly
fines
and
other
things
that
we
can
resort
to,
but.
A
G
G
E
A
C
D
D
I
don't
know
what
to
say
to
this.
Basically,
second
thing
is
looks
like
the
numbers
are
up,
I
presume
are
quoted
for
atm
and
the
same
tower
is
using
verizon,
so
the
radiation
level
cannot
be
is
probably
quoted
for
the
antennas,
which
belongs
to
a
dnt.
I
mean
from
a
perspective
of
a
resident.
I
don't
care,
it
is
coming
from
a
tnt
antenna
plate
or
it
is
coming
from
horizon
plate
now.
For
me,
it
is
a
combination
of
cumulative
exposure,
so
who
will.
A
D
If
you
go
and
look
at
the
erp
that
the
basically
that's
exposure
radiation,
you
will
see
that
it
is.
Those
numbers
are
dipped
out
same
with
the
previous
three.
We
just
passed
that
one
right
now
in
this.
In
addition
to
this
antennas,
we
also
have
a
riser
right,
so
so
how
can
so?
I
don't
know
I
mean
so.
D
G
I
I
can
try
to
help
answer
that.
Actually
there
is
a
statement
in
the
report.
I
just
found
that
statement.
It
says
the
maximum
predicted
power
density
level
resulting
from
all
18t
mobility
operations
is
50.27
percent
of
the
fcc's
limits
based
on
the
operating
parameters.
Independent,
say,
the
cumulative
power
density
level
at
this
location
from
all
antennas
is
50.433
percent
of
the
fcc
general
population
amendment.
So
it
does
reflect
that
this
is
on
page.
G
D
A
E
C
A
I
A
A
J
J
Of
course
he
has
all
rights
to
to
to
present
his
appeal
and
the
reason
why
we
want
to
move
into
attendee
status
is
that
we
want
to
separate
and
just
assist
so
the
public
knows
as
well
as
the
commissioners
that
you
know
we
have
to
separate
commission.
Commissioner
kabil's
rose
as
a
commissioner
versus
his
rights
as
an
appellant
and
that
that
made
it
clearer
and
removed
into
attendee.
J
However,
I
note
that
the
homeowners
are
here
as
panelists
and
and
and
you
know,
unless
we
move
all
parties
over,
I
think
it's
appropriate
to
to
allow
commissioner
kapil
to
attend
here,
but
to
everyone
to
note
that
he's
not
attending
as
a
commissioner,
but
solely
in
his
private
capacity
as
the
appellant,
and
so
I
I
propose
that
we
allow
the
the
you
know
the
staff
presentation.
We
take
public
comments
and
then
we
allow
the
homeowner
to
present.
H
J
A
G
O
O
O
O
For
context,
I'll
provide
a
brief
overview
of
the
project
timeline.
With
more
details
available
in
the
staff
report
on
august
12
2021,
the
applicant
submitted
an
application
for
a
proposed
two-story
residence
with
attached.
Adu
staff
conducted
a
review
of
the
proposed
project
and
found
it
to
be
complete
on
december
2nd
2021.,
the
required
two-week
note
public
comment
period
took
place
on
december
9
2021
through
january
3rd
2022.
O
We
received
comments
from
one
property
owner
at
this
time.
The
comments
included
concerns
about
the
development
of
a
two-story
home
in
the
neighborhood
setbacks
for
the
residents
and
adu
privacy
impacts
of
the
two-story
windows
and
sizes
of
the
windows
staff,
responded
to
the
comments
and
included
a
summary
of
comments
and
responses
in
the
action
letter.
O
O
The
first
basis
of
appeal
is
regarding
the
attached
adu
appellant
compeel
provides
several
statements
about
the
adu,
such
as
window
placement
for
the
proposed
adu
impacts
privacy
and
allows
views
to
the
backyard
of
6544
clifford
drive.
Setback
of
pg
e
poll
is
five
feet
from
the
adu
which
has
been
ignored
on
the
plans
with
the
small
setbacks.
The
adu
placement
should
be
modified
to
avoid
potential
fire
hazard
as
it's
within
close
proximity
of
the
pole.
O
O
O
O
Landscape
plans
include
privacy,
plantings
between
the
proposed
adu
and
fence
that
were
reviewed
and
proposed
by
a
licensed
landscape,
professional.
In
summary,
state
law
permits
up
to
an
800
square
foot
adu
with
minimum
four
foot.
Setbacks
and
with
the
proposed
project
does
comply
with
the
minimum
development
standards
per
the
state,
and
further
review
of
the
adu
will
be
performed
at
building
permit
stage.
O
The
r1
ordinance
implements
regulations
such
as
building
envelope,
building
setbacks
and
height
limitations
to
ensure
the
provision
of
light
air
and
a
reasonable
level
of
privacy
to
residents
per
the
r1
ordinance.
A
reasonable
level
of
privacy
is
afforded
to
neighbors
rather
than
complete
privacy
and,
as
a
result,
the
objective
privacy
protection
planting
is
to
provide
substantial,
not
complete
screening
within
three
years
of
planting
to
mitigate
second
story
window
privacy
impacts.
O
As
a
note,
the
code
does
not
require
privacy
findings
for
the
first
floor
and
privacy
plantings
are,
are
considered
protected,
trees
and
shall
be
protected
and
maintained
by
recorded
covenant
against
the
property.
These
trees
will
not
be
permitted
to
be
removed
without
obtaining
a
true
removal
permit
and
providing
replacement
plantings.
O
O
Staff
and
the
director
of
community
development
have
found
the
project
to
comply
with
all
r1
ordinance
requirements.
Furthermore,
the
applicant
revised
the
right
side
elevation
to
reflect
concerns
from
the
appellant
and
is
also
agreeable
to
mitigate
further
by
proposing
a
hinged
window.
Design
staff
therefore
recommends
that
the
planning
commission
adopt
the
proposed
draft
resolution
to
find
that
the
proposed
actions
are
exempt
from
cq
and
deny
the
appeal
and
uphold
the
director's
decision.
Approving
r-2021-023.
A
J
A
L
L
L
Okay,
so
so
it's
a
it's
actually
a
very
quick
presentation.
I
just
want
to
cover
a
few
points
and
a
few
backgrounds
of
the
design.
From
the
architectural
standpoint
now
for
from
the
planning
requirement
standpoint,
we
are
originally
allowed
to
have
a
66
of
first
to
second
floor
ratio,
which
is
about
1250
square
feet
in
this
project.
However,
we
choose
to
provide
a
much
smaller
footprint
of
the
second
floor,
which
is
about
twenty
two
point:
four
percent:
seven,
seven
hundred
and
twenty
five
square
feet
with
this
small
second
floor
area.
L
There
is
only
one
loft
and
one
bedroom
and
the
size
provides
us
opportunities
to
reduce
privacy
issues
now
in
cupertino.
The
second
floor
can
be
actually
located
closer
to
the
back,
but
in
this
case
we
propose
to
have
a
46
foot,
six
inches
setback
from
the
rear
property
line,
so
the
second
floor
is
set
to
be
away
from
the
next
door,
neighbor
and
the
back
neighbor
as
much
as
possible
and
make
it
closer
to
the
street
corner.
L
L
L
You
see
that
I
mean
we
captured
the
wheel
of
state
drive
as
well
as
part
of
our
backyard
space,
and
this
is
the
adu
windows
and
also
the
adu
bedroom
windows,
and
then
this
is
the
views
that
is
turned
towards
the
southwest
and
the
entire
ridge
basically
cover
our
neighbors
so
yeah,
so
that
is
it
and
yeah.
That's
that's!
That's
all
I
want
to
say
and
thank
you
very
much
and
I
hope
you'll
consider
our
project.
Q
This
is
the
picture
that
I
just
wanted
to
present
earlier,
presented
by
brianna
as
well,
that
this
is
our
south
plain
neighborhood
on
wilson
park
and
the
properties
are
in
question
522,
where
the
fourth
building
plan
building
plan
is
proposed
for
two
or
two
stories
and
six
five.
Four
four
is
the
our
current
we
are
residing
here.
Q
The
the
edges
that
are
in
question
are
the
common
shared
north
ambulation
that
is
being
called
north
elevation
in
the
plans
for
successor
to
and
the
south
elevation
towards
courier,
which
is
the
real
yard.
Here's
the
rear
side,
the
streets
are
the
clifford
drive
on
the
east
side
and
then
east
estate
stripe
on
the
other
side,.
Q
So
this
is
the
front
view
of
our
home,
which
is
six
five,
four
four
perfect
guy
and
the
symmetry
of
the
house
is
in
height
and
elevations
around
our
neighborhood.
This
is
the
current
6522
clifford
drive
front
adjoining
our
home
six
five,
four
four
single
story:
buildings.
Next,
our
next
door,
neighbors
on
the
right
side,
six,
five,
six,
six
and
eight
five
eight
then
drive.
All
of
them
are
single
story
buildings.
Q
I'm
going
to
present
our
major
concerns.
After
looking
into
all
the
plans,
our
major
concerns
are
like
categorized
in
four
categories.
First,
is
the
scale
of
construction
and
I'll
go
over
some
of
the
pictorials
to
present
our
case,
and
the
first
is
like
the
scale
of
construction,
which
is
like
current
state
in
the
current
state.
The
house
is,
a
construction
area
is
covered
area,
excluding
the
garage
is
1080
square
feet
and
what
is
being
proposed
is
like
3.3
acts,
which
is
like
three.
Q
Five
is
nine
square
feet,
including
the
adu
and
including
the
garage.
It
was
like
four
thousand
seven
square
feet
so
by
itself
it
is
like
a
metal
design
in
our
neighborhood,
which
I
looked
up.
This
is
all
my
understanding
of
the
codes
and
things
so
I
might
be
not
correct,
but
this
is
what
I
found
that
we
have
to
ensure
a
reasonable
level
of
compatibility
with
scale
of
structures
within
the
residential
neighborhoods
and
reinforced
the
predominantly
low
intensity
setting
in
the
community.
Q
Q
The
rear
yard
setback
in
a
natural
like
a
single
family
home
is
supposed
to
be
20
feet,
but
we
here
we
are
looking
in
isolation,
the
regulations
for
the
adu
and
and
the
single
family
home,
so
the
setback
has
been
reduced
from
20
feet,
which
is
required
for
a
single
family
home
to
five
feet,
which
is
probably
four
feet
required
for
the
adu.
But
this
is
like
a
attached
ada.
That
is
one
of
the
questions
I
had
which
shares
the
wall
with
the
primary
residence.
Q
Q
We
also
want
to
have
this
presentation
listed
as
a
proof
of
notification
to
the
city
and
to
the
to
the
successfully,
because
the
drive
property
owner
that,
in
case
of
any
mishap
teaching
yourself
that
now,
because
of
this
probability
of
electric
fault,
radio
and
students-
that
is
this
will
be
a
proof
that
we
already
have
raised
the
power
consent.
Yeah.
D
Q
So
other
thing
is
that
this,
this
kind
of
like
a
sparky
and
something
happened
in
like
one
of
the
years
that
we've
been
living
here
on
the
property.
So
it's
not
something
that
is
not
like.
It's
not
something
that
you
can
say
will
never
happen,
okay,
so
the
next
next
concern,
of
course,
is
the
privacy
of
the
neighbors,
and
it's
mainly
because
of
the
size
of
the
project
and
the
two
structure.
Q
Two-Story
structure
of
the
building
height
of
the
windows
and
some
some
privacy
issues
are
because
the
city
guidelines
are
such
that
they
they
do
not
consider
everything
in
totality.
That's
what
we
always
think
here.
We
are
again
I'm
quoting
the
cnc,
which
is
like
avoid
the
reasonable
level
of
privacy
to
the
individual
residential
parcels.
Q
Next
to
our
bedrooms
and
in
case
of
any
partials,
were
damaged
to
this
airline.
At
any
point,
it
would
become
a
haptic
like
that
as
well.
Other
concern
was
like
the
80
entries
from
the
side
yard,
which
could
easily
be
from
the
heavens
from
the
eastern
sky
that
it
is
from
our
side,
like
this,
the
side
yard,
which
is
adjacent
to
our
property
and
that's
going
to
add
the
foot,
traffic
and
nutrients
closer
to
our
bedrooms.
Q
Another
one
is
ada.
Keeping
bathroom
windows
are
also
towards
our
side
yard,
taking
a
backyard,
and
we
feel
that
is
the
invasion
of
privacy
and
a
good
fire
hazard.
As
I
present
into
more
slides
privacy,
trees
are
proposed
in
the
five
feet
new
years
like
that
from
18
to
10,
and
that
will
be
like
those
those
those
trees
will
be
even
further
closer
to
the
electric
force.
As
we'll
see
in
this
so
the
concerned,
one
is
the
scale
of
the
construction.
Q
Q
So
this
is
just
the
numbers
that
I
consider
the
76
houses
around
in
the
neighborhood
order,
which,
like
just
nine
or
less
than
two
thousand
square
feet,
and
so
on.
So
that
gives
me
like
a
ninety.
Two
percent
houses
are
less
than
twenty
five
hundred
square
feet
and
none
of
the
houses
two
thousand
greater
than
and
most
of
them
are
industrial
homes.
Q
Second
hazard
is
like
the
fire
and
the
safety
assault
presented
earlier
days
because
of
the
poles,
and
this
is
the
pictorial
of
the
current,
the
fall
that
we
have
in
our
backyard
next
to
the
fence.
So
this
is
the
common
fence
on
the
side
yard.
This
in
the
right
right
side
is
six
by
four
for
our
residents.
So
this
is
the
current
state
of
like
the
house.
Next
door
just
looks
like
32
clifford
drive,
and
you
share
this
id
next
to
the
area.
Q
The
pictorial
v
is
showing
the
current
state
neglected
state
of
the
house
next
door
in
our
16
years
of
residing
at
this
property.
We
have
never
seen
the
house
to
be
occupied
by
the
owners.
It
has
been
neglected
in
terms
of
like
a
fans
and
landscaping
or
the
backyard
maintenance
and
now
clearly
like
this.
This
adv
is
right
next
to
the
floor.
Q
On
the
other
side
that
I'll
show
in
the
next
picture
and
to
give
a
perspective,
this
is
the
measurement
I
did
for
the
full
two
by
five
by
five
feet
is
only
this
much
kind
of
like
the
plant
that
we
have
in
our
backyard.
That's
how
much
is
like
500
feet
distance
from
before,
and
here
I'm
just
trying
to
show
here
that
the
pole
is
right
there.
This
is
the
fence
and
the
led
will
be
on
the
other
side
of
the
fence.
Q
Q
D
Yeah,
so
this
is
what
I
had
already
discussed
with
the
I
think
brand
in
the
past,
and
so
maybe
there
is
something
some
so
I'm
just
showing
you
on
the
side
view
of
our
on
the
on
the
left
hand,
side.
This
is
a
six
feet,
height
fence
and,
as
you
know,
the
on
the
left
hand,
side
is
a
proposed
plan
and
those
are
the
windows
which
basically
are
they
have
a
direct
view
of
our
bathroom
windows.
I
don't
care
what
the
law
says.
D
D
This
is
the
basically
south
elevation,
as
you
can
notice
that
the
floor
to
this
is
a
raised
floor
and
floor
to
the
the
ceiling
is
10
10
feet
and
three
inches
and
from
there
they
have
four
feet:
the
lower
lower
cell
of
this
window-
and
if
you
take
this,
this
is
becomes
a
fourteen
feet.
Three
inches
from
the
from
the
floor.
Six
feet
is
the
height
of
this,
this
fence,
so
it
is
a
clear
coat
violation.
D
D
So
I'm
not
speaking
on
the
on
the
property
on
the
back
side
of
the
things,
because
that
is
the
concern
of
that
property
owner.
But
but
it
is,
as
you
can
clearly
see,
that
it
has
a
clear
view
of
their
their
house
from
from
from
here,
and
there
is
only
five
feet:
provision
provided
from
the
edu
and
so
what
kind
of
plantation
they
can
do.
I,
and
what
the
trunk
diameter
would
be.
D
D
So
that
that
diameter
has
to
fit
into
that
five
feet,
whatever
is
provided
there.
This
is
not
my
concern,
but
this
is
a
violation
period.
It
is
not
in
the
code.
This
is
the
the
the
windows
provided
on
the
east
side
and
they
are
three
point:
six
three
feet:
six
inches
from
the
second
floor,
and
this
is
a
4
feet,
6
inches
height.
So,
but
this
is
not
a
privacy
issue.
For
me,
it
is
a.
D
It
is
probably
looking
overlooking
the
it
is
just
a
fourth
thing,
just
thinking
about
it.
Basically,
I
I
personally
think
that
that
there
are
a
numerous
number
of
solutions
available
to
avoid
such
things.
You
have
to
just
google
it
and
go
to
the
images,
and
you
will
see
hundreds
and
hundreds
of
solutions
available
in
the
market
to
to
to
take
care
of
such
a
thing,
and
these
are
the
some
of
the
examples.
I've
just
posted
it
here.
These
are
the
buildings
where
they
have
posted.
Q
Q
So,
although
this
is
on
the
first
floor,
all
of
these
windows
are
facing
our
backyard.
Another
thing
that
was
noted
was
that
the
drainage
and
the
sewer
line
is
running
has
been
rerouted
from
the
east
to
safe
sides,
to
the
side
or
side
yard
so,
and
that
that
runs
parallel.
That
runs
very
close
to
our
bathrooms
and
the
bedrooms,
which
is
definitely
a
health
hazard.
Q
Q
Okay
and,
of
course,
the
edu
height
itself
is
obscuring
our
morning
sunlight
and
used
from
the
backyard
as
well.
So
that's
that's
something
I
wanted
to,
as
I
mentioned.
So
basically,
our
whole
backyard
is
blocked
by
this
adb
plan
in
this,
in
this
fashion,
having
a
more
foot
traffic
on
our
side
yard.
Next,.
D
Q
This
is
the
window
height
kind
of
like
it's
just
it's
more
than
like
our
six
feet
because
of
the
grading
here.
That's
what
I
wanted
to
show
here
this,
like
one
level
one
feet
above
the
ground
up
that
I
understood
and
then
from
that
one
feet.
This
is
like
the
tenth
total
is
like
from
here
to
here
is
like
nine
feet,
so
any
anybody
who's
like
five
feet
of
dollar
thing
you
see
through
in
our
backyard.
Q
If
adu
side
in
the
year
yard
said
that
bigger
than
and
heat
or
adu,
I
forgot
to
mention
here:
ada
m3
should
also
be
relocated
to
the
east
states,
drive
or
other
street.
Not
the
side
yard
read
out
those
clear
lines
towards
the
east
states
on
the
ear
yard
and
increase
the
height
of
the
five
yard
fence
to
which
is
currently
standing
at
weeks,
and
that's
the
end
of
my
presentation.
A
M
Thank
you,
mr
scharf
hi,
I'm
jennifer
griffin
and
I'm
very
con,
I'm
very
sorry
for
everyone
involved.
This
is
this
is
the
third
adu
appeal
that
has
I've
seen
that's
gone
through
in
the
city
since
the
adu
laws
were
put
in
a
year
or
two
years
ago
for
good
or
ill.
I
just
had
a
question.
I
have
got
four
questions.
One
of
them
is
this:
is
a
7
500
square
foot
lot?
What
was
the
original
allowed
floor
to
area
ratio
a
bit?
M
What
was
the
size
of
the
allowable
house
on
the
property?
I
think
it
would
have
been
about
3
000
with
that
size
lot,
if
I
remember
correctly,
with
the
addition
of
the
adu
by
whatever
law
was
passed
in
the
last
year
or
two
that
allows
them
an
additional
800
square
feet,
which
means
that
the
house
now
went
from
3
000
square
feet
approximately
to
4
000.
that
that's
a
big
increase.
M
This
is
one
of
the
consequences
of
this
law,
which
no
one
got
to
vote
on,
but
I
just
was
curious
what
size
this
was.
The
second
question
I
have
is
concerning
the
adu
on
the
pg
e
easement.
Where
exactly
are
the
power
pole
lines?
Are
they
running
across
the
back
of
the
property
or
down
the
side
between
the
appellant
and
the
homeowner?
M
It?
You
can't
build
a
structure
in
inside
of
the
five
foot
clearance
it's
illegal.
I
know
that
because
we
have
power
pole
lines
across
the
back
of
our
property,
and
this
was
a
problem
with
the
barnhart
one
in
rancho
rinconata.
There
was
a
big
issue
with
the
adu
they
were
putting
in
there.
I'm
glad
they're
not
doing
four
feet
down
one
side
of
the
property,
that's
way
too
close.
M
So
what
are
where
is
where?
Where
is
the
power
pole
lines?
And
then
I
you
just
can't
plant
trees
in
the
power
pole
lines,
I
mean
the
the
pg
clearances.
These
adus
have
to
be
pulled
back
or
there
is
going
to
be
a
fire,
and
I
understand
I
think
the
appellant
is
very,
very
concerned
that
this
could
happen.
We
had
we've
seen
we've
seen
parts
of
poles
fall.
I
was
sitting
in
my
car
in
front
of
the
house
like
two
two
years
ago,
and
there
was
a
the
lines
fell
across
the
street
from
me.
M
So
we
need
to
be
concerned
about
this.
The
third
one
is:
the
adrieu
entrance
is
like
five
feet
from
the
property
line,
all
the
way
down
split
between
the
two
residences
and
that's
going
to
be
people
running
up
and
down
there
annoying
the
other
neighbors.
Why?
Where
is
the
entrance
to
this
adu
and
why
is
it
like
70
feet
into
the
back
of
the
property,
and
my
other
question
is
okay?
If
I
bought
this
house,
could
I
convert
the
adu
back
to
make
it
all
one
house?
M
G
G
However,
with
that
said,
adus
can
be
as
close
as
four
feet
from
the
side
and
rear
property
lines.
In
this
case,
I
believe
it's
just
shy
of
five
feet
in
one
side
and
at
least
five
feet
on
the
other
side
with
regard
to
whether
there
are
any
any
you
know
permit
requirements
from
pg
e
any
clearances
that
they
need
from
pg
e
those
need
to
be.
G
You
know
they
need
to
pursue
those
and
get
those
from
pg
e
with
regard
to
the
sewer
line,
as
long
as
they
meet
the
sanitary
district
standards
for
in
placing
a
sewer
line,
the
city
has
to
issue
a
building
permit
to
allow
that
to
happen,
and
then,
with
regard
to
where
the
entrance
of
the
adu
is
as
long
as
the
edu
is
set
back
four
feet,
it
could
be
as
far
you
know
it
could
be
at
the
rear
of
the
property.
It
could
be
anywhere
located
anywhere
on
the
property.
A
D
D
So
the
the
law
states
four
feet
set
back
as
a
separate
rule
and
fire
and
safety
as
a
separate
rule.
So
if
we,
if
we
want
to
interpret
the
law
reading
that
line
separately
and
having
no
correlation
with
the
other
line
below
that
which
is
mentioned
in
our
presentation,
then
whatever
you
said
holds
true.
Otherwise,
to
my
knowledge,
it
doesn't
hold
true
because
you
have
to
interpret
the
law
in
a
sense
in
as
a
whole,
not
as
one-liner.
A
G
Bring
that
up,
yes,
they
cannot
put
in
an
interior
door
and
they
also
cannot
convert
the
adu
and
incorporate
it
into
the
main
house.
So
they
would
have
to
demolish
the
adu
if
they
they're
at
43.3
percent.
Far,
I
believe
without
the
edu
and
as
a
result,
they
would
have
to
demolish
at
least
a
portion
of
a
good
portion
of
the
adu
if
they
wanted
to
keep
it
under
the
45
percent.
Max.
I
N
N
I
also
feel
for
the
fact
that
you
guys
can't
do
a
whole
lot
about
it,
but
this
is
a
reason
and
I've
been
asking
for
years
for
some
changes
to
things,
including
our
privacy,
screening
and
people,
agree.
Balconies
too.
This
doesn't
involve
the
balcony
people
agree,
planning
commissions
have
agreed
multiple
planning
commissions,
some
city
councils
have
agreed,
but
nothing
has
been
done
to
change
that
and
it
really
needs
to
be
done.
I
know
you
can
ask
for
substitutes,
but
people
the
public
needs
to
be
know
what
their
rights
are.
So
privacy
needs
to
be
considered.
N
Also.
This
is
what
I
would
add
to
that
privacy
screening
needs
to
be
considered
from
the
first
story:
windows,
not
just
second.
If
we
can
continue
to
see-
and
we
will
raise
foundations
for
tear
downs
and
rebuilds,
they
are
18
to
24
inches
different
in
the
finished
floor,
and
that
means
a
huge
difference
for
and
then
with
the
taller
ceiling
heights,
huge
difference
where
your
feet
are-
and
I
know
this
because
I
live
next
to
a
house
that
is
almost
two
feet
taller
than
mine
ground.
N
So
there
really
really
needs
to
be
something
done,
because
this
can
continue
to
be
appealed
and
it's
going
to
be
continue
to
be.
I'm
sorry,
there's
nothing
we
can
do,
and
I
want
to
note
too
that
in
several
architectural
drawings
and
elevation
sheets
recently,
and
in
fact
it
was
highlighted
in
the
appellants
drawings
or
sketches.
N
This
particular
plantings
plant
set
has
two
east
side
elevations
one
north
and
one
south,
there's
no
west
side
elevation,
which
is
actually
the
side
that
the
appellant
lives
on
the
west
side,
it's
listed
as
the
north
side,
and
you
have
them
north
it.
It
really
needs
to
be
cleaned
up.
I
mean
planning
needs
to
get
that
right,
because
when
people
are
looking
at
plans,
they
want
to
know
what's
next
to
them
and
if
they're
looking
at
the
wrong
thing,
they
don't
even
know
what
they're
trying
to
protect
themselves
from.
N
F
F
F
F
F
A
A
K
Okay
yeah,
my
name
is
david
doe,
also
known
as
dung,
but
the
reason
I
use
david
because
down
in
texas
is
like
you
know,
kaosta
anyway,
we
have
gone.
You
know,
through
all
of
the
steps
necessary
to
get
the
permit
working
with
the
city
working
with
our
attorney
working
with
the
apparent
you
know,
going
out
our
way
to
to
meet,
and
you
know
what
he
has
of
us.
K
In
the
end
staff
say
we
met
all
of
the
requirement
of
the
city,
every
single
requirement
I
met
and
with
every
change
you
need
to
be
made.
We
made
it
at
extra
cost
to
us,
and
yet
we
are
sitting
here.
You
know,
hearing
a
parent
that
is
part
of
the
city.
Commissioner,
our
planning
commission,
I
understand,
he's
not
going
to
make
a
judgment,
but
I
believe
he
he
believed,
and
he
told
us
so
many
times.
He
said
I'm
on
the
planning.
Commission.
K
A
L
L
L
A
D
I
have,
I
think,
the
sewer
line.
What
we
mentioned
there
is
taken
from
the
city
plans
detail
plan.
I
think
it
is
part
of
our
presentations,
backup,
slides.
If
you
go
on
the
book,
those
backup
slides,
you
will
see
the
silver
line
running
next
to
the
side
yard,
so
it
is
taken
from
there
only
just
to
clarify,
and
if
it
is
not
there,
it
is
a
good
thing.
D
If
it
is
there,
then
that
was
the
request
for
the
key
asks
in
that
particular
view
graph
other
than
that,
whatever
I
had
to
say.
I
have
already
said-
and
I
want
to
point
out
david-
that
I
have
never
met
david
and
I
have
never
told
anybody
that
that
I
can
influence
any
any
commissioner
or
or
anybody
else
for
that
matter.
So
I
do
not
understand
where
that
view
has
come
in
and
who
has
told
him
and
I
actually
haven't
never
met
him.
So.
Q
So
one
one
thing
that
I
would
like
to
say
that
about
the
comment
that
all
the
adjustments
have
been
done,
except
for
making
the
glass
obscure
the
other
other
asks
that
we
have
presented
were
all
rejected,
which
is
the
height
of
the
height
of
the
fence
to
be
increased
and
the
windows
to
be
made
in
october
and
the
ada
entry.
As
we
noted
recently,
we
should
be
on
the
eastern
space
station.
The
way.
Q
There
is
a
side
door
between
the
abu
and
the
main
house
that
they'll
share
kind
of
like
it
becomes.
Although
the
common
wall
that
they
share
does
not
have
a
door,
but
then
there
is
a
side
entry
to
it
and
for
us
it
is
like
a
huge
massive
structure
that
will
be
created
in
our
neighborhood
right
next
to
us.
Actually,
so
it
becomes
a
eyesore.
A
O
O
O
A
Second,
floor:
okay,
okay,
and
regarding
the
setbacks
for
fire
safety
yeah,
the
state
law,
that
is
beyond
our
control,
and
we
may
not
like
what
the
law
says,
but
we
we
of
course,
have
to
obey
the
law.
The
way
it
is.
My
only
other
concern
about
this
house
is
that
it
really
is
way
out
of
scale
for
the
neighborhood.
A
There
are
no
houses
anywhere
close
to
this
large.
Now
I
don't
know
attorney
wu.
Is
that
any
reason
to
you
know
is
that
something
that
we
have
jurisdiction
over
this
the
scale
I
mean.
I
know
it's
in
our
ordinance
that
it's
houses
are
supposed
to
not
be
out
of
scale
with
the
neighborhood,
but
I
seem
to
recall
every
time
this
happens.
We're
told
it
doesn't
matter
what
our
ordinance
says.
You
know
we
have
to
approve
it.
J
G
I
I
did
want
to
note,
sir,
that
the
majority
of
the
properties
in
this
neighborhood
are
about
six
thousand
sixty
between
six
thousand
and
six
thousand
five
hundred
square
feet.
The
city
does
have
an
fdr
limitation
of
45
percent,
so
any
of
the
properties
that
were
indicated
in
the
appellant's
presentation
could
develop
up
to.
G
G
Square
feet,
I
believe,
which
is
why
the
45
of
course
yields
a
much
larger
house
with
that
said,
I
will
also
state
that
some
of
the
numbers
that
were
presented
were
a
living
space
only.
They
did
not
include
the
garage
areas
for
this
particular
house.
Of
course,
they're
also
building
the
adu
that
is
allowed
under
state
law.
So
it
does
inflate
the
numbers
quite
a
bit
because
that
is
just
allowed
for
any
house
any
of
those
houses
that
are
constructed
they
can
build
45
percent
of.
G
J
I
I
I
think
to
me
the
big
concern
is
that
the
adu
law
was
about
hey.
You
have
backyard,
you
could
put
a
cottage
there
at
800
feet
so
that
you
can
create
a
second
home
unit
and
so
on,
but
instead
what
we
are
seeing
are
tear
downs
where
the
main
home
is
almost
hitting
the
floor
area
limitations
and
an
attached
adu
to
act
to
it.
I
Quite
honestly,
this
is
this
seems
to
be
against
the
spirit
of
the
law
itself
in
terms
of
what
was
intended
for
it,
and
I
think
I
would
encourage
the
city
and
the
city
attorney
to
go
back
and
get
some
more
legal
opinion
upon
this,
because
you
know,
essentially
what
we're
saying
is
we're
putting
a
new
house
which
is
just
at
the
limit
of
the
four
area
and
attaching
another
unit
which
is
800
from
the
outside.
It
almost
looks
like
it's
one
giant
house.
I
The
only
redeeming
factor
is
that
there
is
no
door
connecting
them
inside
and
the
fact
of
the
matter
is
when
the
construction
is
there,
if
somebody
clears
the
door
nobody's
going
to
go
and
do
core
enforcement
on
that
inside
door.
Okay,
so
that's
also
the
reality
of
it.
So
to
me
this
almost
looks
like
a
way
of
sacramenting
the
far
house
regarding
what
leeway
we
have.
I
I
think
we
still
a
while
the
the
adu
approval
is
ministerial.
We
still
have
control
over
approving
the
the
main
house
and
treating
them
separately
when
their
brand
new
construction
are
going
to
be
built
together.
That
interpretation,
I
think
it
needs
to
be
revisited,
and
I
would
actually
encourage
the
city
and
the
city
attorneys
to
actually
go
back
and
look
very
carefully
on
that
and
see
if
that
interpretation
can
be
the
only
interpretation
of
of
of
the
current
law.
You
know
I'm
very
supportive
of
adus.
I
You
know
we
pass
a
lot
of
laws
supporting
them,
making
it
easy,
but
this
to
me
seems
like
an
abuse
of
the
system.
Now,
whether
the
abuse
is
legal
or
not,
you
know
we
don't
know,
you
know,
there's
only
so
much
we
can
do,
but
we
could
definitely
get
a
second
opening
of
this.
The
other
aspect
about
fire
safety
and
so
on
with
the
tge
thing
and
putting
the
screening
trees
within
those
five
feet
sit
back
and
so
on.
I
I
So
legally,
who
is
the
authority
which
will
approve
plantation
of
trees
within
that
five
feet
along
with
the
and
whose
liability
would
it
be
if
something
goes
wrong
there
and
the
last
thing
just
for
the
record.
I
had
no
idea
this
was
commissioner
kapils.
Oh,
he
never
talked
to
us
he
never
reached
out
to
us.
I
I
only
got
about
got
to
know
about
it
when
I
read
the
agenda
minutes
an
hour
before
the
planning
commission,
so
I
was
a
bit
taken
aback
by
all
the
incinerations
about
the
planning
commission
being
misused.
For
that.
I
think
commissioner,
couple
or
mr
kapilan
typical
couple
have
raised
objections
which
do
pass
the
common
sense
of
a
spell
test
quickly.
But
the
question
is:
how
do
we
go
about
interpreting
the
system
and
impeding
the
laws
to
do
something
which
makes
sense?
I
E
E
H
E
Okay,
because
in
the
staff
report
it
says
you
know
the
front
side
requirement
for
the
adu
and
the
main
house
is
20
feet
right.
So
I'm
assuming
you
know
that
would
be
the
the
east
side.
You
know.
That's
you
know
to
the
left,
where
you
have
the
text
on
the
rectangle
right
in
the
middle,
so
that
would
be
considered.
You
know
the
the
front
side
of
the
ada
right.
If
that's
the
front
side,
why
is
the
entry
on
the
north
side
or
our
west
side.
G
So
I
can
try
answering
that
you're
looking
at
the
front,
setbacks,
etc.
However,
the
front
setbacks
only
applies
to
the
entire
property.
In
this
case,
east
estates,
I
believe,
is
the
legal
front
of
the
property
and
therefore
the
setback
would
be
measured
from
the
property
line.
That's
a
long
east
state,
not
east
distance,
clifford,
pardon
me,
and
so
it
doesn't
matter
where
your
front
setback
is
or
your
rear
setback
is.
G
G
Yeah,
so
for
a
for
a
a
home,
a
residence,
the
front
entry
feature
must
a
front
entry
feature
or
a
porch
must
front
a
public
street
which
this
does.
This
has
a
front
entry
feature
that
fronts
clifford,
however,
and
the
code
also
requires
that
adu's
entrance
be
on
a
different
plane,
which
they
have
done,
which
is
they've
placed
it
on
the
west
elevation.
E
E
Okay,
so
so
there
was
a
question
so
to
me
you
know
after
listening
to
another
applicant
and
you
know,
and
the
opponent
you
know-
certainly
you
know,
based
on
the
data
that's
been
presented.
Certainly
you
know
the
the
development
seems.
You
know
pretty
big
big
in
scale,
but
I
understand
you
know
it's
still
within
the
municipal
court,
so
I
don't
see
anything
wrong
with
that
so
long
as
it
meets
all
the
requirements
you
know
said
by
the
staff
report,
so
I
mean
based
on
the
staff
report.
E
It
seems,
like
you
know
the
the
built
area
and
you
know
the
ratio
and
everything
and
the
setbacks.
You
know
they're
all
being
met.
So
I
don't
see
anything
any
issue
with
that,
even
though
it
appears
no
pretty
big,
you
know
anybody,
that's
building
new.
Certainly
you
know
want
to
maximize.
You
know
the
value
you
know.
I
understand
you
know
back
40,
50
years
ago
they
were
building
smaller
homes.
Now
every
everybody
wants.
E
You
know
bigger
homes
and
maximize
so
nothing
wrong
with
that,
and
so
I
can
see
that
the
biggest
issue
that
you
know
after
listening
to
all
of
this
is
a
privacy
to
me.
You
know
privacy
is
a
big
deal
and
you
know
I
lived
in
a
house
in
san
jose
right
where
I
lived
on
a
hill.
You
know
where
my
backside
house
wasn't
on
a
hill
higher
than
you
know
my
space
and
I
could
never
open.
E
You
know
my
master
bedroom
windows,
never
never
the
curtains
and
the
windows
right,
because
those
people
can
look
into
my
house
directly
and
similarly,
you
know
the
backyard
backyard
usage
was
pretty
limited
because
they
could
see,
there's
no
privacy
planting
and
none
of
that
stuff
right.
So
I
spent
more
time
on
the
front
yard
than
the
backyard.
That's
just
you
know
my
experience
right.
So
to
me
you
know.
Privacy
is
a
big
deal,
so
anything
that
we
can
do
to
address
the
privacy
concerns.
I
would
encourage
that.
R
Hi
everybody,
I
think
my
only
concerns
here
are
really
with
the
not
with
the
adu
but
with
the
actual
second
story
permit
and
making
sure
the
privacy
areas
are
there.
You
know
given
the
way
the
law
is
written
given
where
we
are.
You
know,
with
these
abusive
housing
laws
that
are
going
on.
You
know,
there's
not
much.
We
can
do
on
that
front,
but
the
privacy
aspect
for
both
the
appellant
and
the
applicant.
You
know
we're
all
good
citizens,
we
all
live
here.
R
I
have
a
neighbor
that
decided
to
put
an
adu
and
a
second
story-
and
you
know
explained
to
him
like
had
sat
down,
said:
hey
look,
you
know
if
you
move
your
window
to
different
place
and
yeah,
we
resolved
it
very
quickly,
and
so
I
hope
I
hope
those
conversations
are
happening
in
the
background
and
you
know,
but
with
the
areas
around
privacy.
On
the
second
story,
you
know,
I
think
it's
gonna
be
important
to
figure
out
a
way
to
address
that.
So
that's
my
only
comments,
though,
back
to
you
chair.
A
So
I
just
wonder
if
the
property
owner,
I
think
the
only
one
I
see
that
is
kind
of
impossible-
is
the
adu
setback
which
we
don't
have
any
control
over.
They
can
do
five
feet
if
they
wish,
but
the
other
ones,
and
then
oh
and
then
the
sewer
line
is
not
actually
a
sewer
line.
It's
a
storm
drain,
so
that's
not
an
issue,
but
I
mean
even
so
a
sewer
line's
underground.
A
You
don't
actually
smell
it,
but
so
I'm
looking
at
the
kiosks,
the
side
yard
second
story,
windows,
inoperable
and
use
obscure
glass,
and
it
sounds
like
they're
willing
to
do
these
tilted
windows
with
the
bottom
part
of
it
not
opening,
and
then
the
angle
use
angled
facing
left.
I
believe
yeah
windows
towards
east
estate
and
increase
the
height
of
the
side
fence.
I
I
thought
eight
foot
fences
are
legal
in
cupertino.
It's
not
isn't
that
the
case
pew.
G
G
A
G
If
I
meet
the
deals,
go
ahead,
sorry
with
regard
to
the
window
changes,
you
know,
I
I
think
if
you
did
one,
you
wouldn't
necessarily
have
to
do
the
other
with
if
they're,
if
they're,
both
obscure
and
unopenable,
then
they
don't
necessarily
have
to
be
also
angled.
Besides,
you
know,
with
with
the
windows
being
angled,
they
would
also
bring
in
a
certain
level
of
design
difficulties.
A
Q
So,
regarding
the
windows,
we
want
the
windows
to
be
inoperable
and
secure
on
the
side
and
on
the
back
rear
side
of
the
window
to
be
angled
towards
the
left
side.
One
point
that
I
mentioned
during
the
presentation
was
to
change
the
adu
entry
from
the
side
yard
to
the
main
street.
That
is
already
there,
and
there
is
a
big
door
in
the
floor.
Q
Pan
as
you
could,
as
when
nuni
was
asking
the
questions
in
that
float,
then
they
have
the
main
kind
of
entrance,
so
it
should
not
be
from
the
side
yard.
It
should
be
from
the
main
street,
which
is
like
a
easter
stage.
Drive
that
that's
gone
a
lot
this
one
so
that
that
was
not
mentioned
in
the
kiosks.
But
I
did
mention
during
the
presentation
about.
A
L
Okay,
yeah,
so
just
cover
a
little
bit
more.
We
did
talk
to
the
appealing
with
a
zoom
meeting
and
again
initially
the
side
window
doesn't
need
to
be
flustered
and
we
make
that
change
and
and
then,
as
as
some
as
regard
to
the
windows
that
face
in
the
back,
you
know
I
I
am
responsible
for
good
architectural
design.
If
we
till
that
window,
basically,
the
mediterranean
style
is
gone.
We
have
a
mixture
of
modern,
you
know
with
mediterranean
and
it
just
doesn't
look
good
from
the
architectural
standpoint.
L
So
yeah,
but,
but
I
mean
bottom
line-
is
that
we
we
are
willing
to
work,
and
we
did
that
before
they
filed
the
appeal
and
we
we
thought
I
mean
me
and
the
homeless
only
for
that
we
try
our
best.
You
know
to
have
the
floss,
the
glass
but
the
air
ventilation.
Is
you
know
it's
one
of
the
thing
that
is
very
important
for
them
and
that's
why
we
would
like
the
windows
to
be
operable,
but
we
are
willing
to
make
it.
L
You
know
from
a
regular
placement
to
what
we
call
a
hopeful
window,
so
it's
open
from
the
top
down
and
because
it's
obscure
and
because
it's
open
from
the
top
down
there
is
virtually
no
way
that
we
can
see
unless
we
are
spying
just
to
see
this
little
secret
of
of
size
side
view
it,
which
is,
you
know,
not
not
reasonable.
You
know
if
you
consider
that
windows
to
be
six
feet
to
eight
feet,
I
mean
I
mean
I
am
seven,
I
I
am
five
or
seven
I.
A
Yeah,
you
know,
and
I
should
point
out
you
know
we
lit.
We
live
in
a
suburb
and
I
can
look
out
my
second
story
window
and
I
can
see
into
several
people's
yards
and
they
still
use
their
yards
and
I
don't
sit
there
and
look
at
them,
but
it
is
true
that
you
know
there
are
privacy
issues
that
you
give
up
when
you
live
in
a
suburb
with
the
houses
close
together.
K
Ahead.
Okay,
I
hear
you
oh
okay,
now
kai
already
mentioned
what
I
was
going
to
say
that
we
did
work
with
a
homeowner.
We
didn't
make
change
at
the
window,
like
you
say,
we're
all
asian
and
we
all
short.
You
know,
none
of
us
are
over
six
foot,
so
you
know
I
mean
even
with
the
six
foot
fence.
The
only
way
we
can
look
over
the
front
is
to
put
something
under
on
the
ground
to
climb
on
top.
But
what's
the
point?
What
do
I
want
to
look
at
his
backyard?
K
For
I
mean
I
don't
understand
that
and
then
the
window
you
know
it's
only
like
car
size
only
open
from
the
top.
You
know,
and
we
again
you
want
to
look
at
his
backyard.
We
have
to
really
do
some
exercise,
which
I
think
we
all
do
all
for
that,
but
we
did.
We
tried
to
work
with
him
very
hard
to
get
to
that
point.
K
A
A
I
Yes,
I
had
a
question
about
what
do
we
mean
by
consistency
in
discussions
attorney
like
when
you
say,
consistency
and
discussion?
What
does
it
mean
because
each
property
is
different,
the
the
concerns
are
different.
The
appeal
points
are
different,
so
when
you
say
consistency
like
what
does
it,
what
should
we
not
be
doing
will
be
the
classroom.
J
Well,
you
should
be
doing
commissioners
texting
through
the
chair.
Is
you
know,
as
you're
deliberating
to
to
evaluate
each
property
as
they
come
to
you,
and
you
know
if
whatever
decisions
you
make
it
be
applied
specifically
to
to
to
that
property?
Of
course,
you
should
do
that,
but,
but
just
to
be
mindful
of
views
that
were
expressed
on
prior
appeals
and
and
to
you
know,
be
consistent
with
with
those
views.
I
I
I
still
have
my
hands
up,
so
I
want
to
just
follow
up
on
that.
So
actually
you
know
this
is
the
question
for
the
city
attorney
specifically,
and
I
wanted
to
reiterate
the
and
go
deeper
into
the
question.
I
asked
earlier
that
who
is
the
legal
authority
who
determines
the
minimum
required
separation
between
trees,
dwelling
and
pge
power
lines?
I
On
the
other
hand,
what
we're
talking
about
now
is
approving
something
where
trees
are
required
to
we
put,
and
I
think,
get
to
the
second
floor
level
for
providing
the
screening.
Now
these
two
look
mutually
incompatible
to
me.
On
one
side,
we
have
pg
e
coming
and
pruning
the
trees
in
that
easement
and
one
side
we're
talking
the
other
side
we're
talking
about
putting
trees
in
that
easement.
I
J
So
if
I
made
chair
sharp,
I
I've
been
correctly
my
wrong
plane
manager,
but
I
believe
that,
with
respect
to
the
easement
error
for
pg
e,
that
the
homeowner
applicant
will
have
to
work
with
them
with
respect
to
the
trees
that
are
planted
within
that
easement
and
with
respect
to
the
code,
there
are
provisions
regarding
you
know
when
privacy
trees
must
be
planted-
and
you
know
that
provides
for
for
certain
heights.
But
I
don't
I'm
not
aware
that
the
code
provides
for
distance
between
trees.
G
I
G
So
when
we
evaluate
you
know,
when
we
first
put
the
list
together,
we
did
evaluate
the
the
possibility
that
these
trees
would
go
under
pg,
easement
lines
and
things
like
that,
and
so
those
trees
can
be
planted
in
those
areas
and-
and
yes,
certainly,
if
pg
e
believes
the
trees
are
getting
too
tall,
they
do
have
the
ability
to
to
prune
trees
as
necessary,
and
so
that
is
something
that
may
certainly
happen
during
the
over
the
lifetime
of
those
trees.
Yeah.
I
G
I
I
G
I
In
this
case,
I
would
want
the
staff
to
do
some
more
research
on
this
and
come
back
to
us
with
some
clear
guidelines
that
yes,
it's
okay
to
have
this
tree,
go
up
to
15
feet
or
20
feet
or
whatever
it's
supposed
to
go
up
and
pg
e
would
be
fine
with
that,
and
that's
my
recommendation
to
the
staff
and
of
course,
other
other
commissioners
may
have
a
different
view.
But
to
me
these
things
are
mutually
incompatible.
G
Yeah,
when
we
do
approve
plans,
pg
e
does
have
the
ability
to
review
the
plans
and
they
do
see
that
the
trees
are
planted.
There,
they're
provided
with
the
full
set
of
plants,
and
they
are
aware
that
these
trees
are
being
planted
in
that
area
and
they
do
have
the
ability
to.
Let
us
know
in
the
event
that
they
have
concerns.
I
Okay,
so
what
you're
saying
is
that
will
pg
e
give
a
guarantee
that
they
don't
come
into
those
trees?
If
they
go
okay,
so
then
the
privacy
screening
we
approve
is
going
to
be
essentially
not
serving
its
purpose
then.
So
we
should
probably
assume
that
there's
no
trees
cannot
be
planted
because
I'm
pretty
sure
pg
e
is
going
to
come
and
cut
down
these
trees.
I
I
So
I
mean,
of
course,
there
can
be
other
ways
of
addressing
the
privacy
concerns,
altering
the
windows
and
so
on,
and
you
know
I'll
be
more
than
happy
to
do
it
to
consider
those.
But
I
do
feel
that
what
we
are
proving
here
in
terms
of
requiring
trees
as
a
condition
for
approval
and
then
allowing
pg
to
cut
them
down
that
doesn't
make
sense.
J
I
Yeah
see
the
city
attorney
the
approval,
we're
not
just
talking
about
medistrial
approval
of
the
adu,
we're
talking
about
the
entire
design.
It's
a
brand
new
building
being
built.
So
just
because
we
are
required
to
approve
an
adu
doesn't
mean
that
we
have
to
approve
the
main
house
also.
Well
they
can
you
know
you
can
keep
the
current
housing
build
and
aid
you.
Nobody
will
have
a
problem,
but
we
are
rebuilding.
I
Now,
I'm
perfectly
fine
if
something
else
can
be
done
to
mitigate
those
or
if,
if
that's
not
a
factor,
that's
a
planning
department's
thing
there,
but
we
should
not
be
assuming
and
saying
we
put
these
trees,
which
are
sort
of
implied
by
the
approval
and
then
pgn
is
going
to
cut
them
down
because
that
doesn't
serve
the
purpose.
Then
so.
J
I
J
Here
absolutely
it's
just
that
you,
you
brought
out
adus
and
privacy.
That's
what
make
that
clear,
and
so
my
point
here,
commissioner
saxena
is-
is
that
you
raise
issues
regarding
the
trees
and
the
pg
easement
and
how
that
may
or
may
not
conflict
with
the
utility
line.
So
I
I
just
I
just
want
to
present
as
an
option
to
approve
this
project.
The
condition
on
you
know
successful
working
with
pg
e
to
obtain
a
permit
to
plant
trees,
privacy,
trees.
Pursuant
to
the
code.
I
Yeah
and
the
privacy,
please
should
meet
the
guidelines
the
city
has
for
screening
or,
if,
if
that's
not
possible,
let's
try
something
else
with
the
window
or
just
something
or
whatever
else
can
be
done,
but
let's
do
something
which
makes
sense,
but
not
do
some
not
approve
the
thing.
The
main
unit,
I'm
not
talking
about
the
adu
under
assumptions
which
we
know
are
not
valid
or
cannot
be
realized
in
real
life.
Thank
you.
R
Yeah
two
quick
questions
and
if
they
were
answered
just
ignore
me,
I
wanted
to
know
if
the
schools
are
charging
an
impact
fee.
I
know
given
it's
over
500
feet,
so
they'll
be
turning
impact
paid
for
having
the
adu
there
and
then
the
second
piece.
I
have
a
question
about
really
is
about
water
and
sewer
connection
fees,
given
that
this
is
a
brand
new
one.
Are
they
separate
connections
just
just
trying
to
be
mindful
about
that?.
G
R
A
A
A
K
Q
K
I
just
addressed
the
last
commissioner,
I
don't
know
his
name.
Her
privacy
concern
the
wind,
the
two.
I
don't
know
if
you
remember
the
two
window
on
top,
you
know,
as
what
you
call
covered
is
not
clear
and
it's
only
open
from
the
top
it's
frosted
and
not
only
open
from
the
top.
You
cannot
the
top
and
even
not
even
all
the
way
from
the
top,
only
just
like
what
a
45.
A
K
A
I
Yeah
yeah,
I
would
just
like
to
respond,
but
yes,
as
long
as
the
staff
and
the
planning
department
is
perfectly
fine
or
we
make
some
adjustments
that
the
city
ordinance
are
honored
in
spirit,
even
without
the
trees.
That
would
be
fine,
but
we
don't
know
I
I
was
just
uncomfortable
with
approving
something
which
we
know
cannot
happen
because
of
the
pg
guidelines,
so
the
trees
are
not
planted
and
we
make
adjustments
which
are
compliant
with
the
standard
processes
and
standard
recommendations
with
the
planning
department
used.
That
would
be
fine
with
me
also.
L
L
So
as
a
design
committee,
we
know
how
to
avoid
it,
because
I
understand
the
concern,
but
at
the
same
time
we
are
responsible
to
the
client
and
we
want
to
build
our
beautiful
house.
So
you
know
in
this
case
I
mean
at
this
time
I
have
two
other
projects
already
approved
in
construction,
both
for
four
thousand
square
feet
in
cupertino
and
they
all
have
privacy,
five
privacy
trees
all
the
way
to
the
back.
So
thank
you.
A
G
I
wanted
to
add
so
that
the
minimum
height
of
a
tree
of
a
privacy
tree
would
be
15
feet
that
would
be
considered
adequate
for
purposes
of
screening
and
it's
a
requirement
to
have
partial
screening
within
three
years.
It's
not
like
a
full-on
screening
of
the
of
the
of
the
yard
space
and
15
feet
is
the
wire
clearance
easement
that
pg
e
requires.
Basically,
what
they're
saying
is
that
there
should
be
no
structures
taller
than
15
feet
in
that
area.
A
A
I
A
Right
so
ray,
if,
if
you
want
to
make
the
motion,
it's
basically
number
the
recommended
action
in
item
eight
and
sorry
item
five,
five
yeah-
and
I
will
say
you
know
I
don't
you
know,
there's
issues
here
that
all
of
us
are
not
appreciative
of.
But
you
know
this
is
state
law
that
we
are
bound
by,
and
I
know
that
you
know
the
appellant
will
not
be
happy,
but
we,
you
know
we
have
very,
very
little
choice
here.
R
A
R
R
A
A
C
I
R
A
A
A
H
A
R
Oh,
no,
no,
I
think
a
number
of
commissioners
attended
the
parks
and
rec
joint
bike
and
ped
and
planning
commission
meeting.
I
thought
it
was
nice
for
different
communities
commissions
to
get
together.
It
was
a
good
chance
to
share
different
ideas
and
actually
get
onto
the
same
page.
I
think
there
are
some
questions
really
about
access
on
the
north
end
of
that
for
the
lawrence
mini
park.
I'm
glad
we
have
the
land.
I
hope
we
do
something
useful
to
it.
R
I,
after
the
meeting,
had
a
number
of
interactions
with
residents
about
whether
that
was
more
of
a
bike
in
pedro
or
more
of
a
park,
land
or
a
combination
of
both,
but
I
think
it's
going
to
be
a
healthy
discussion.
I
was
really
excited
about
the
way
the
process
was
done.
I
thought
it
was
very
professional.
I
thought
those
consultants
knew
what
they
were
doing
and
I
hope
that
in
the
future
we
hire
consultants
that
are
similar,
like
that.
I
thought
the
process
for
outreach
you
know
was
was
pretty
active.
R
They
did
do
a
good
job
of
getting
outreach
and
I
think,
there's
something
to
be
learned
from
that.
Especially
start
talking
about
other
elements
like
housing,
so
I'll
leave
it
at
that
so
and
then
yeah
I
was
just
in
orlando.
I
had
a
chance
to
attend
the
real
com
event,
which
had
a
lot
of
very
interesting
designs
on
energy
savings
and
green
initiatives
for
esg
and
improving
building
design.
It's
a
lot
of
cool,
interesting
technologies
that
are
coming
on
the
way.
So
that's
about
it
online.
A
Okay,
thank
you
so
yeah.
I
also
was
on
the
meeting
last
night
and
yeah.
You
know
we
do
have
committees
that
have
members
of
multiple
commissions,
like
the
one
we're
doing
on
the
housing
element
between
housing,
planning
and
city
council,
and
we
are
planning
for
the
next
planning
commission
meeting
and
hopefully
it
will
come
to
pass.
I
talked
to
the
attorney
today
that
we
will
have
a
joint
meeting
with
the
housing
commission
on
june
28th,
and
I
was
spoken
to
by
the
chair
of
the
housing
commission.
A
They
say
hey,
you
know
this
is
our
housing
element.
Why
are
we
not
more
involved
with
that,
and
I
did
agree
that
it
did
sound
like
a
good
idea
to
have
a
joint
meeting,
so
we
are
planning
that
and
that
will
be
bringing
back
site
selection
yet
again,
but
now
actually
really
drilling
down
and
figuring
out
what
we
will
present
to
the
city
council-
and
you
know
I
think
someone
mentioned
it
earlier.
A
You
know
the
meeting
we
had
two
weeks
ago
that
did
not
delay
anything
in
the
hot
in
the
housing
element
or
the
size
selection.
That
was
just
to
give
people
further
opportunity
to
speak.
While
we
are
waiting
for
our
consultant
to
be
ready
with
their
proposal
precisely
election
and
like
ray,
I
was
very
impressed
last
night
with
the
I
guess:
it's
mig
the
the
park
consultant.
They
really
did
amazing
outreach.
A
I
was
like
wow.
This
is
just
going
on
and
on
and
on
I
was
like,
but
wow
that's
the
kind
of
thing
we
really
want
to
see
when
it
comes
to
outreach,
so
they
said
a
really
good
example
of
how
to
do
things.
The
mayor's
meeting
with
commissioners
was
postponed
last
wednesday.
I
believe
the
mayor
was
not
feeling
well
so
that
will,
I
believe,
happened
tomorrow.
A
A
I
don't
see
any
hands
raised
so
future
agenda
setting.
Would
anyone
like
to
propose
anything
to
put
on
the
agenda?
I
was
told
by
the
city
attorney
that
it's
necessary
to
do
this
at
our
meetings
now.
One
thing
I
would
like-
and
it
was
proposed
to
me
by
a
member
of
the
city
council
and
it's
related
to
the
legislative
review
committee.
A
They
were
interested
in
having
a
member
of
the
planning
commission
be
on
that
committee,
so
that
would
have
to
go
to
city
council
for
discussion,
but
considering
so
many
of
the
things
considered
by
the
lrc
are
related
to
planning.
I
thought
it
was
a
good
idea,
but
ultimately
it's
up
to
the
city
council
to
decide
if
that's
that
will
be
appropriate,
but
we
can
put
it
on
our
agenda
for
our
discussion
as
well.
E
Yeah,
so,
in
the
context
of
you
know
all
the
discussions
we
had
with
the
applicant
inductant
on
the
approving
the
project,
I
would
like
to
see
something
on
our
future
agenda.
Where
the
staff
comes
back,
and
you
know
reports
on
is
here
are
the
gaps
and
you
hear
the
areas
that
know
we
can
tighten
the
stop
right
up
in
the
context
of
you
know
addressing
the
major
concerns
you
know,
residents
have
right,
you
know
yeah,
we
all
want
to
build.
E
E
You
know,
as
the
architect
was
asking
like,
you
know,
lay
down
these
rules,
so
they
know
we
can
plan
accordingly
right,
it's
not
their
fault.
You
know
for
planning
whatever
plan
that
they
put
in
front
of
us,
because
they've
followed
every
guideline
and
you
know
they
put
together
a
plan.
You
know
that
makes
sense
and
the
city
staff
is
saying
you
know
yeah,
they
met
all
the
requirements,
but
still
you
know
we
have
this
issue
and
we
spent
you
know
so
much
time
discussing
it.
So
I
think
you
know
we.
E
A
Okay,
yeah
fair
enough,
and
I
would
also
like
to
have
clarification
when
our
city
says
you
know
that
buildings
have
to
be
within
the
scale
of
the
neighborhood
and
then
we're
told
no.
You
can't
even
consider
that
you
know.
Maybe
we
need
to
take
that
out
of
our
municipal
code,
say
no.
You
can't
consider
whether
it's
out
of
scale,
because
this
comes
up
every
time
when
we
have
these
massive
buildings,
you
know.
Well,
yes,
you
know
it
really
is
out
of
scale,
but
we're
told
the
housing
accountability
act
actually
doesn't
allow
us
to
consider.
A
R
Have
two
items?
One
item
is
you
know,
I
feel
we
have
done
nothing
with
the
architectural
standards
for
cell
towers.
I
feel
that
you
know
the
we
have
not
heard
back
from
staff
about
that.
We
have
not
gotten
some
clarity
from
city
council
as
to
where
that's
a
go
and
I'd
like
to
get
that
back
on
the
agenda.
I
think
it's
a
very
important
issue.
R
Residents
are
still
very
upset
about
that
and
we
should
reflect
that
and
then.
The
second
item
is,
I
think,
it'd
be
nice
to
either
get
someone
from
livable,
california
or
the
california
policy
center
to
come
in
and
speak
at
some
point.
When
we
have
time
for
a
study
session
we've
been,
you
know,
it's
important
to
get
multiple
views,
diversity
of
thought,
diversity.
Abuse
is
important,
and
I
think
you
know
there's
something
really
nice
by
edward
ring
about
state
legislatures
continues
its
assault
and
local
zoning
decisions.
I
I
wanted
to
revisit
the
discussion
we
had
on
the
work
program
on
school
generation
ratios
for
different
properties.
So
I
know
a
few
quarters
ago
we
had
taken
the
water.
We
wanted
to
get
more
information
about
that.
I
think
it's
absolutely
critical.
We
talk
about
that
since
we
are
doing
the
housing
element
and
understanding
those
things.
I
We
know
that
kupatana
school
district
right
now
is
in
the
process
of
trying
to
figure
out
what
to
do
with
certain
schools
or
certain
campuses,
which
they
very
controversially
decided
to
close
and
getting
that
information
and
getting
that
input
from
the
city
staff
will
really
help
us
plan
in
a
manner
where
we,
you
know,
don't
have
like
fifty
percent
of
classes
being
held
in
temporary
classrooms
as
they
are
right
now.
So
you
know
a
chair
shaft.
A
A
J
You
guys
don't
do
anything
at
all.
It's
just
across.
This
is
a
procedural
point
I
want
to
just
raise
to
share
with
the
with
the
commissioner.
So,
pursuant
to
the
commissioner's
handbook,
you
know
any
two
commissioners
can
suggest
an
item
for
a
future
agenda
and
and
I'm
hearing
a
lot
of
various
different
items
to
to
to
consider,
and
so
what
the
next
step
after
that,
after
two
have
decided
to
support
such
a
banner.
J
You
know,
coordination
of
various
things,
including
what
the
chair
just
mentioned
in
terms
of
staff
capacity,
with
what
things
on
the
plate
now
and
also
in
addition
to
the
common
definition
wong's
point
about
about
wireless
towers,
and
that
is
something
that
this
commission
several
months
back,
discussed
and
prioritized,
and
that
was
brought
to
the
city
council
and
they
actually
put
it
on
this
fiscal
year's
work
plan,
and
so
I
mean
so
it
that
process.
It's
it's.
You
know,
that's
that's
the
process,
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
raise
that
with
you.
A
J
A
A
J
So
I
I
would,
I
would
frame
it
just
as
slightly
a
different
slant
chair
right,
it's
it's
there.
There
are
particular
guidelines
that
the
planning
department
reviews
then
apply.
That's
the
code
and
provisions
and
state
law,
and
then,
when
they
get
a
project
they
apply
all
of
those
and
then
they
make
a
determination
whether
for
instance,
when
the
scale
of
the
neighborhood
and
that's
to
this-
that's
the
discretion
of
the
of
the
director
to
make
and
make
that
decision,
then,
after
that,
if
they
decide
that
based
on
objective
standards,
it's
consistent.
J
A
R
A
And
I
will
back
commissioner
wong's
suggestion
that
we
get
some
outside
organizations
like
liverpool,
california,
to
or-
and
I
was
thinking
housing
is
a
human
right
if
they
would
like
to
make
a
presentation
to
the
city
to
the
planning
commission
and
I
can
reach
out
to
both
of
those
the
school
generation
for
different
properties.
I
would
back
that
and
was
there.
I
don't
think
there
was
anything
else
there.
Those
were
the
ones
that
I
so
I
think
attorney
wu.
We
have.
A
We
have
two
two
commissioners
for
each
of
those
and
I
think
the
school
generation
is
very
important
to
look
at
very
quickly
absent
the
staff
ability
to
do
that.
We
will
just
have
to
wing
it
based
on
previous
previous
data
that
we've
had
presented
to
the
city
in
the
past,
and
I
would
point
out
the
school
my
recollection
is
the
schools
actually
didn't
have
the
data
for
that,
that
more
came
from
developers
and
how
what
types
of
families
rented
and
for
how
long
and
what
the
ages
of
the
school
kids
were.
I
Although
it's
been
four
years,
we
still
haven't
made
much
progress
and
I'm
hoping
that
before
my
term
ends,
we
at
least
have
an
understanding
of
how
things
impact,
so
that
can
actually
guide
our
policy
decisions
and
leave
a
legacy
for
the
future
generations
who
want
to
come
here
that
you
know
as
a
city,
we
will
provide
our
future
children
and
residents
within
an
environment
which
I
think
people
come
to
expect
and
sort
of
take
for
granted
and
most
parts
of
the
country.
Thank
you.
J
Great,
thank
you.
Thank
you,
commissioner.
So
you
know
it
sounds
like
all
the
commissioners
have
comply
with
the
requirements
of
the
commission's
handbook
in
terms
of
identifying
issues
for
future
agendas,
and
then
you
know
I
look
forward
to
discussing
these
matters
with
you
and
coordinating
and
discussing
these
further
and
coordinating
scheduling
at
the
culprit.
Great
thanks.
Everyone.