►
Description
Coverage of the May 31, 2022 Cupertino City Council Meeting.
(Live Streamed Version)
A
A
A
A
A
B
And
I'm
here,
thank
you,
madam
city
clerk.
Tonight
we
have
one
and
only
one
item.
We
don't
have
any
postponements
or
orders
of
the
day,
because
it
is
only
one
item
under
reports
by
council
and
staff.
The
subject
is
a
city
manager
report
regarding
the
rise,
formerly
the
valco
development
and
a
request
for
modification
of
an
approved
sb-35
project
pursuant
to
government
code.
Section
65913.4
is
the
impetus
of
the
project
request,
and
so
we
have
our
city
manager,
jim
troop,
to
provide.
The
report
tonight
welcome
jim.
D
D
D
Just
some
background
on
the
situation
as
background
the
project
was
initiated
by
the
applicant
in
march
of
2018
under
state
law.
The
city
had
180
days
to
process
the
application,
as
long
as
it
met
the
criteria
outlined
in
state
law.
The
city
approved
the
project
in
september
of
2018,
in
compliance
with
the
requirements
of
the
state
law.
D
D
D
D
So,
looking
at
some
of
the
modifications,
modifications
proposed
include
a
modest
increase
in
residential
square
footage,
a
reduction
in
office
square
footage
and
a
small
decrease
in
retail
square
footage.
As
you
can
look
on
the
slide,
you
can
see
the
the
differences
there
overall.
There
are
no
changes
to
the
total
number
of
units
and
there
is
no
change
to
the
total
number
of
affordable
units.
There
is
also
a
change,
though,
to
the
overall
mix
of
and
type
of
the
affordable
units
in
which
the
project
we'll
I'll
discuss
it
more.
In
just
a
minute.
D
D
should
be
noted
that,
due
to
the
location
of
the
site,
state
law
allows
the
project
to
provide
actually
no
parking
spaces.
The
following
slides
show
changes
to
the
proposed
plans
and
compares
the
original
project
to
the
modified
project.
So
staff
did
a
great
job
doing
this,
so
changes
to
the
vehicular
circulation,
so
you'll
see
the
the
red
colored
over
on
the
far
right.
That's
what
we'll
be
looking
at.
First,
the
proposed
modification
eliminates
street
one.
D
And
is
modified
to
be
an
enclosed
pedestrian
corridor
or
paseo.
It
is
eliminated
in
block
two.
A
structured
parking
entrance
entrance
has
been
added
to
block
one
underground.
Parking
structures
have
been
externalized
by
incorporating
a
four-lane
parking
entrance
at
valco
parkway,
which
is,
I
don't
know,
I
don't
hate
to
mess
it
up,
but
nope.
It's
not
doing
it
as
well
as
two
additional
underground
parking
structures
along
wolf
road.
Combining
the
two
entrances
into
a
single
entrance
in
block
11.
D
D
D
The
modified
plan
indicates
that
the
east
plaza
has
increased
to
1.88
acres.
The
increase
in
is
attributed
to
a
promenade,
which
is
not
part
of
the
plaza
itself,
since
the
dimensions
of
the
plaza
itself
have
not
changed
significantly.
It
appears
that
access
to
the
streets
surrounding
the
east
plaza
would
be
controlled
by
ballyards.
D
So
changes
to
the
unit
types
as
well
as
the
sizes,
that's
what
this
next
chart
is
showing
up
here.
As
you
can
see
it,
the
applicant
has
proposed
changes
to
the
unit
types
and
sizes
in
the
project.
Overall,
there's
an
increase
in
one
bedroom,
two-bedroom
and
five-bedroom
units
and
a
decrease
in
studio,
three-bedroom
and
four-bedroom
units.
D
Three-Bedroom
units
have
increased
in
size
by
an
average
of
400
square
feet
and
4
bedroom
units
have
increased
in
size
by
an
average
of
75
square
feet.
There
are
more
units
in
the
towers
and
above
the
green
roof
I.e.
The
terrace
units
is
what
they
were
called.
This
is
also
a
result
of
the
changes
to
the
elevation
of
the
green
roof.
The
green
roof
deck
on
average
has
lowered
by
eight
feet
on
the
west
side
and
approximately
20
feet
on
the
east
side.
D
D
The
modified
project
in
the
modified
project,
the
private
open
space
areas,
have
increased
significantly
with
the
lower
green
roof
elevation
all
of
the
buildings
pop
up
above
the
green
roof
and
several
of
the
units
above
the
green
roof,
have
large
private
decks
and
decks
located
above
the
green
roof.
These
include
significant
changes
in
the
areas
around
block
one
block
four
and
block
five.
D
D
D
One
office
building
block
17
has
reduced
in
height
by
4
feet.
Residential
buildings
have
increased
in
height
throughout
the
project
between
36
to
40
feet
due
to
the
addition
of
additional
terrace
floors.
For
example,
block
5
is
increased
in
height
by
approximately
35
feet
and
block
1
has
increased
by
closer
to
40
feet.
D
D
So
modifications
continuing
here,
the
mix
of
affordable
units
is
also
proposed
to
be
changed
with
this
modification
table
on
this
slide,
as
we
can
see,
shows
the
changes
proposed.
There's
a
reduction
in
the
studio
units,
an
increase
in
the
number
of
one-bedroom
units.
The
original
development
did
not
include
any
two
or
three
bedroom
affordable
units.
However,
with
the
modification
103,
two
and
three
bedroom
units
have
been
included.
D
Some
of
the
changes
have
also
been
proposed
in
terms
of
the
applicable
rents
and
mix
of
affordability
units
for
these
affordable
units.
These
have
been
outlined
in
this
table
here
that
we
can
see
the
overall
number
of
very
low
income
units
in
the
project
are
reduced
by
94
units
to
267
units,
while
the
number
of
low-income
units
has
correspondingly
increased
by
84
units
to
934
units.
D
D
So
eligibility
for
streamlined
review,
as
previously
mentioned,
since
the
modifications
are
limited
to
less
than
15
percent
of
the
number
units
or
floor
area,
not
including
underground
areas.
The
city's
review
is
limited
to
an
analysis
of
whether
the
project
continues
to
be
eligible
for
sb-35
streamlining
and
whether
it
meets
objective
standards
that
were
in
effect
in
march
of
2018..
D
D
D
D
The
applicant
indicated
that
they
have
more
than
two-thirds
residential
square
footage,
which
is
corroborated
by
the
independent
consultant's
review.
The
consultant
found
that
68.1
percent
of
the
project
is
residential
under
the
same
rules
that
the
project
was
evaluated
in
2018,
as
required
by
state
law.
D
E
19.,
so
this
this
this
table
just
summarizes
what
jim
discussed
on
the
last
page-
and
you
see
that
it's
68
residential.
D
So
the
objective
standards
for
the
compliance
since
the
proposed
project
includes
changes
to
the
height
of
the
buildings
etc,
which
is
usually
a
zoning
standard.
Whether
the
project
complies
with
the
city's
objective.
Zoning
standard
was
evaluated
since
there
were
no
applicable
height
limits,
even
with
the
increase
in
height.
The
project
does
not
violate
any
zoning
standards.
D
The
proposed
project
meets
the
applicable
one-to-one
slope
line
for
all
the
opposed
proposed
primary
building.
Primary
guy
can't
talk
to
me
for
all
the
proposed
primary
bulks
of
buildings.
The
image
shown
here
is
an
excerpt
from
the
exhibits
indicating
this
compliance
on
sheets
p-0508
and
point
zero
of
the
planet
set
plan
set.
D
D
In
addition
to
the
density
bonus
units,
the
project
was
eligible
for
and
continues
to
request
three
incentives
listed
on
this
slide.
As
you
can
see
here,
the
city
bmr
units
are
studios
and
one
bedroom
units.
Only
the
city,
bmr
units
are
smaller
studios
and
one
bedroom
units
compared
to
the
market
rate
units
and
an
overall
reduction
in
the
required
retail
sales
square
footage.
B
Okay,
we'll
go
on
to
comments
from
our
members
of
the
public.
I
have
a
number
of
hands
raised
in
zoom.
They
are
from
muni
matapatla,
doug,
cheshire
connie,
cunningham
brook
ezzo,
sashi,
bagor,
jenny,
susan
moore,
annie,
young
and
eugene
lin.
I
also
have
a
number
of
blue
cards
here.
B
They
are
from
peggy
griffin
and
govind,
who
are
asking
to
consolidate
their
time
together
with
mooney
and
brooke
who
are
on
zoom
and
so
we'll
do
that,
but
we'll
get
to
the
blue
cards
after
we
get
to
zoom
and
then
lisa
warren
as
well
on
the
blue
cards.
So
the
same
procedure
applies
as
has
applied
for
the
rest
of
the
year
and
that'll,
be
that
please
have
your
hand
raised
and
zoom
or
your
blue
card
in
by
the
time.
The
first
speaker
is
done.
B
F
F
F
Why
wait
help
provide
the
opportunity
for
good
paying
jobs,
jobs
that
will
not
only
invest
in
the
local
economy,
but
the
people
that
call
cupertino
home
now
is
the
time
to
build
the
housing
that
we
desperately
need
and
to
help
cupertino
advance
towards
its
arena
goals.
Please
do
not,
please
do
not
delay
this
project
any
further.
Thank
you.
B
Thank
you
doug.
Our
next
speaker
is
connie
cunningham
and
I'll
go
ahead
and
read
off
the
hands
that
are
raised
at
this
time.
In
addition
to
connie
mooney
and
brooke,
whose
timer
consolidated
with
the
first
blue
card,
we
have
sujata
venkatram
and
jenny.
Susan
moore,
annie,
young
eugene,
lynn
rose
grimes,
fariba
nahat
and
jill
halaran,
and
so
jill
will
be
our
last
hand
raised
on
zoom
and
I
don't
have
any
additional
blue
cards
since
the
first
speaker
began
speaking
and
so
our
next
speaker
is
connie.
Cunningham
welcome
connie.
G
Thank
you
mayor.
I
am
going
to
be
speaking
with
rose
grimes,
who
is
already
in
attendance
and
or
she's
seeding
her
time
to
me.
So
could
you
set
reset
my
time
for
five
minutes.
B
Okay,
thank
you.
Connie
and
the
procedure
we're
going
by
is
that
consolidating
time
gives
you
two
minutes
each.
If
you
can
find
five
people,
you
can
get
up
to
10
minutes
and
then,
of
course,
people
are
free
to
consolidate
beyond
that
as
well,
but
it
doesn't
go
beyond
10..
So
video,
if
you
could
reset
connie's
time
at
four,
we'll
go
ahead
and
provide
that
time.
Welcome
connie.
G
Okay,
thank
you
and
I'd.
Ask
him
the
city
clerk
if
she
has
my
one
page
slide
to
put
up
so
that
people
can
see
that
as
I
go
through
my
talk.
Okay,
so
good
evening
mayor
vice
mayor,
council,
members
and
city
manager,
my
name
is
connie.
Cunningham
lived
in
cupertino
34
years,
currently
serve
on
the
housing
commission.
Speaking
for
myself,
only
I'm
a
member
of
the
local
audubon
society
and
have
advocated
for
the
cupertino
bird,
safe
design
and
dark
skies
ordinance.
G
Tonight
I
am
addressing
the
council,
the
city
manager
and
all
people
who
joined
in,
but
particularly,
I
want
to
address
reid
molds
managing
director
sandhill
property
company
read
moles.
I've
met
you
in
these
chambers.
I've
shaken
your
hand
and
congratulated
you
on
the
work
that
you
were
undertaking
to
build
homes
in
our
community.
I
particularly
have
been
interested
in
the
below
market
rate
home
since
they
fill
a
niche
that
is
desperately
needed.
I've
read
the
modifications
I
like
the
changes.
G
G
Friends
and
I
realize
that
the
open
space
being
created
is
not
consistent
with
the
multi-story
glass
buildings
that
have
been
depicted
change,
one
for
bird
safety.
Bryo
diversity
will
be
served
by
open
space
with
native
plants.
Sadly,
many
of
the
birds
that
will
be
attracted
will
die
upon
impact
with
the
glass
walls
change
to
light
pollution.
G
Led
lighting
has
transformed
our
night
as
energy
efficient
and
inexpensive
lighting
became
accessible
light
pollution
became
pervasive.
The
list
of
harmful
effects
is
long
and
frightening
change.
Three,
the
lifetime
carbon
impact
and
sustainability
of
these
glass
buildings
goes
in
the
wrong
direction.
G
I
quote
david
pulley,
professor
of
zero
carbon
design
at
the
university
of
math,
who
is
a
leading
design
and
climate
expert.
He
points
to
research
showing
that
even
triple
glazed
windows,
ten
times
the
heat
of
a
well-insulated
wall
that
the
same
area
does
excuse
me.
The
link
on
my
chart
below
carbon
impact
and
sustainability
gives
you
the
whole
article.
Should
you
want
to
read
it
the
why
I
care
bird
safety?
I
love
birds
window
strikes
are
one
of
the
primary
factors
contributing
to
the
loss
of
our
birds.
G
Bird
numbers
and
populations
are
declining
by
billions
a
year.
In
48
years,
north
america
has
lost
29
of
its
birds
in
cupertino.
Many
of
the
loveliest
birds
are
frequent
victims,
tiny
anna's,
hummingbirds,
cedar,
wax
wings,
american
robins
and
others.
Even
owls
and
saving
our
birds
benefits
humans,
especially
developing
children.
G
In
recent
years,
during
copen
for
months,
people
were
restricted
to
their
homes.
More
and
more
people
realized
how
important
their
backyards
and
the
love
of
birds
was.
Why
I
care
about
light
pollution
from
led
lighting.
It
has
transformed
our
nights.
We
have
lost
our
view
of
the
stars.
Could
you
recognize
the
milky
way
if
you
saw
it
artificial
light
at
night,
especially
blue
wavelength,
that
interferes
with
biological
functions
in
all
living
beings?
It
affects
growth,
physical
and
mental
health
in
humans
and
has
been
shown
to
cause
mood
disorders
and
cancer.
G
Did
you
know
that
migratory
birds
fly
at
night?
They
are
often
attracted
by
artificial
light
to
areas
where
they
are
likely
to
polite
with
the
buildings
and
why
I
care
about
lifetime
carbon
impact
and
sustainability,
rather
than
seeing
low
energy
design
as
an
engineering
issue,
we
need
to
focus
on
the
truth.
It
is
a
moral
issue.
If
we
can
do
this,
architects
will
naturally
design
sustainable
buildings
and
developers
will
insist
on
them
in
part
to
protect
their
investment.
G
A
G
On
the
birds,
the
insects,
the
plants
and
the
internal
harm
done
to
human
bodies,
we
change
what
we
see
as
beautiful,
not
too
far
in
the
future.
We
will
wonder
why
glass
buildings
that
harmless
were
ever
before.
Seen
as
beautiful.
To
close,
I
urge
you
to
take
another
creative
leap,
build
far
less
glass
into
your
design,
that
will
save
birds,
lives,
reduce
pollution
and
save
energy.
It
will
burnish
your
international
reputation
and
create
your
legacy.
Connie.
B
Thank
you
very
much
and
thank
you
as
well
to
rose,
and
our
next
speaker
is
sujatha.
Venkatraman
welcome,
sujatha.
H
H
So
with
that
said,
we
support
the
staff
report
of
the
changes
made
in
the
unit
as
they
are
both
inclusive
and
affordable.
Thank
you.
I
Thank
you,
mayor
darcy.
This
is
jennifer
griffin
and
I'm
just
going
to
start
out.
Thank
you,
mr
troop,
for
going
bravely
where
no
city
manager
has
gone
before
oh
man
anyway,
I'm
a
little
bit
astounded
that
state
law
said
this
project
did
not
require
any
parking
where
the
heck
are
you
going
to
put
10
000
or
7
000
parking
spaces?
I
mean
give
me
I'm
pardon
my
english.
I
I
I
There
are
other
bills
that
are
coming
out.
It
makes
sb
35
that
the
zombie
bill
that
never
dies.
It
just
keeps
coming
out.
How
do
we
know
that
sb9
and
sb10
are
not
going
to
be
used
at
velco?
How
do
we
know
that,
if
current
laws
that
are
passed
next
year
and
the
housing
dollars
they're
going
to
be
popped
into
this
too?
I
I
have
zero
faith
in
this
process
anyway,
the
260
feet
high.
Are
we
making
a
mini
mount
hamilton?
I
I
I
I
think
at
this
point
with
the
amount
of
time
and
money
that
cupertino
has
spent
trying
to
process
and
deal
with
valco
that
they
should
be
bmr
forever
and
ever
and
ever
I
mean
either
that
or
we
should
just
buy
them
and
provide
low-income
housing,
and
I
I
firmly
believe
that
sb
this
project
will
still
be
taken
along
with
sp
35
changes
10
years
from
now
anyway.
I
I'm
really
really
dubious
about
anything
going
on
with
this
project
and
we
need
parkland.
I
I
I
really
think
we
need
to
have
public
access
into
the
parkland
park
land
on
the
ground.
There
are
earthquakes,
so
at
this
point,
I'm
very
very
concerned
about
bit
like
buffy
wicks
great,
like
build
housing
all
in
every
single
shopping
center
commercial
zone
tech
park.
I
mean
that
has
her
her
bozat.
I
don't
forgot
what
number
it
is
that
has
got
to
be
the
lamest
bill
that
anybody
has
come
up
with
and
I'm
sure
valpo
will
use
it.
Okay.
Thank
you
good
night.
J
J
Yes,
hi.
Thank
you.
Okay,
yes,
well.
265
67,
affordable
units
in
this
huge
project,
but
at
least
it's
some
that's
good,
but
my
whole
point
is
parts,
and
I
really
I
am
I'm
kind
of
happy
that
they
don't
say
well.
This
is
a
public
park,
this
ramp
and
this
this
garden
in
front
of
other
homes,
and
this
it's
not
public,
because
I'm
hoping
we're
going
to
get
some
resources
from
this
project
for
parks
for
our
city,
for
our
families,
for
the
residents
of
this
project.
So
they
can
go
to
too.
Also.
J
The
other
issue
which
I'm
really
concerned
about
is
water.
How
is
all
this
green
space
gonna
be
watered?
What's
gonna
happen
in
the
years
to
come?
It's
a
real
concern
and
I
think
they
need
to
think
about
that.
It's
it's
something
that
we
are
going
to
have
to
live
with,
and
you
can
say
it's
green
space,
but
I'm
not
sure
it's
going
to
be
green
space.
It
may
be
desert.
Okay,
thank
you.
K
Although
I'm
personally
looking
forward
to
this
project,
adding
much
needed
housing
to
our
city,
I'm
disappointed
to
see
the
rendering
of
the
complex
include
so
much
floor-to-ceiling,
glass
facades,
the
city
council,
members
of
the
public
and
environmental
experts
have
all
discussed
here
previously.
The
dangers
of
glass,
facades
and
artificial
light
at
night
to
birds,
insects
and
the
ecosystem
and
cupertino
is
a
leader
in
the
bay
area
being
the
first
to
pass
a
bird,
safe
design
and
dark
sky
ordinance.
K
Sandhill
property
company
had
previously
committed
publicly
to
bird
safe
design,
and
I
would
like
to
see
them
uphold
that
commitment
and
build
a
project
that
follows
our
city's
bird,
safe
design
and
dark
sky
ordinance.
I
would
also
strongly
encourage
them
to
make
sustainability
and
ecological
integration
core
values
of
the
design.
Not
only
to
meet
our
city's
climate
goals,
but
also
to
support
natural
landscapes
that
set
us
apart
from
urban
concrete
jungles.
K
Will
the
rise,
use
only
carbon
free
energy
and
include
on-site
energy
generation?
Will
the
rise
have
high
efficiency,
thermal
management
to
minimize
energy
expenditure?
Will
the
rise
use,
recycled,
water
and
gray
water
for
all
non-potable
uses?
Will
the
rises
facade,
be
safe
for
birds
and
not
create
external
microclimates
that
harm
the
ecosystem
through
reflected
heat
and
light?
Will
the
rise
use
all
native
plants
and
trees
to
support
local
biodiversity?
K
L
Thank
you,
council
members,
I've
been
a
resident
of
cupertino
for
over
30
years
and
I'm
also
a
member
of
the
audubon
society.
I
look
forward
to
seeing
the
rise
become
a
vibrant
place
in
our
community,
but
I
wanted
to
just
highlight
a
few
environmental
considerations
that
I
hope
folks
can
consider
as
their
designing
and
building
rise.
So
the
first
is,
you
know
I
hope
we
can
make
the
buildings
as
bird
safe
as
possible.
L
L
So
I
think
it's
especially
important
with
this
development
in
light
of
the
green
roof,
which
I
think
is
great
by
the
way,
but
will
tr
attract
a
lot
of
birds
and
and
and
I
I
hope
that
we
can-
you
know,
hope
we
can
protect
them
and
I
I
hate
to
see
you
know
dead
birds
outside
the
buildings.
The
second
is
to
reduce
artificial
light
at
night.
L
You
know
the
combination
of
glass
and
lights
at
night
are
deadly
for
birds
which
can
disorient
disorient
migrating
birds
and
lure
them
to
these
buildings,
and,
and
also
you
know,
artificial
light
has
at
night
has
a
whole
host
of
negative
effects
on
various
animals
and
ecosystems,
including
for
us
humans
as
well,
and-
and
the
last
point
would
be
that
you
know
buildings
are
the
largest
emitters
of
carbon
emissions.
It's
actually
not
from
transportation,
or
you
know,
industry
like
most
people,
think
and
and
most
of
that
most
of
those
carbon
emissions
come
from.
L
You
know
cooling
and
heating,
and
so,
if
you
have
sort
of
poor
insulator
like
glass,
it
can
cause
a
lot
of
wasteful
carbon
emissions.
So,
in
summary,
I'd,
like
you
know,
for
you
to
consider
three
things
as
you're
building
and
designing
the
rise
with
one
which
is
bird
safety,
two
reducing
artificial
light
at
night
and
three
making
the
buildings
more
energy
efficient.
Thank
you.
M
Hello,
my
name
is
paripan
negot.
Thank
you,
mayor,
paul
for
letting
me
speak
about
the
race,
the
project
I'm
watching
this
project
since
developed
from
the
day
one
and
it's
so
exciting,
to
see
that
all
the
scientists,
all
the
people
in
cupertino,
are
getting
involved
and
giving
feedback.
I'm
just
listening
to
all
the
nicest
speakers
tonight.
Just
giving
more.
You
know
care
about
showing
more
care
about
the
city
and
environment.
M
B
N
Yes,
thank
you
thank
you,
mayor
paul
and
council
members,
city
manager
and
so
on.
I
just
pretty
much
like
to
echo
what
many
others
have
been
saying.
I
have
been
a
cupertino
resident
for
well
over
30
years
and
as
far
as
the
dark
skies
ordinance,
the
dark
skies
concern.
N
N
I
I
don't
like
bright
lights
at
night
anyhow
and
I
do
care
about
wildlife
and
birds,
and
that
is
definitely
disturbing
to
them,
as
well
as
the
humans
and
then
just
the
about
the
amount
of
glass
and
the
planned
construction.
I
echo
the
sentiments
of
others.
They
definitely
there's
no
question
that
they
do
cause
bird
kills
and
birds.
We
don't
need
to
be
reminded
birds,
eat
bugs
and
I'd.
N
Much
rather
have
birds
eat
bugs
and
have
more
and
more
pesticides
being
used,
and
that's
all
that
I
have
to
say,
but
thank
you
very
much.
B
B
We
do
have
a
couple
of
hands
raised
on
zoom,
however,
that
are
consolidated
by
requests
beforehand
with
two
of
the
blue
cards.
They
are
again
griffin
and
govind
on
the
blue
cards
and
from
zoom
muni,
matpatla
and
brook
ezzotte,
and
so
video,
if
you
could
reset
to
eight
minutes,
to
remind
everyone,
two
minutes
for
each
person
consolidating
and
that'll
be
up
to
10
minutes,
and
so
these
four
will
consolidate
up
to
eight
minutes
and
peggy
griffin
will
be
providing
the
comments.
Welcome
peggy,.
B
Oh
no
peggy!
Actually
from
last
time
I
did
allowed
two
minutes
per
person,
and
so
I
had.
B
Last
time
I
gave
you
if
I
gave
you
nine
minutes,
I
gave
you
extra
time
because
it
was.
It
was
two
minutes
per
person,
five
people
after
10
minutes,
and
so
I
apologize
if
I'm
misremembering,
that
there
are
a
lot
of
moving
parts,
but
that
that's
that's
how
I
remember
the
the
time
allocation
being
made.
O
B
B
Video,
if
you
can
pause
the
time
for
roughly
15
seconds
as
peggy
continues,
please
continue
thanks.
B
O
This
must
include
surrounding
properties.
It
will
help
cupertino
residents
to
fully
grasp
the
new
project
proposal.
It
can
be
used
as
a
marketing
tool
for
both
the
city
and
the
developer.
Marketing
drawings
do
not
provide
a
true
perspective,
a
shadow
study
showing
the
impacts
of
these
to
these
neighboring
properties.
People
are
considering
solar.
They
need
to
know
if
it's
worthwhile,
no
reduction
in
required
fees.
The
impacts
to
our
city
are
significant.
O
O
Additional
resources
to
cater
to
increases
in
people
count
the
need
for
more
open
space
parks,
requisite
recreational
facilities
and
city
services,
more
height
density
in
buildings,
reduced
parking.
Where
will
the
new
residents
and
office
workers
park
their
vehicles,
summary
of
usable
floor
space
over
500
000
square
feet,
increase
in
total
usable
floor
space,
total
usable
office
space
increased
by
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
square
feet
residential
unit
space
increased,
almost
665,
000
square
feet?
O
O
This
would
impact
schools
and
possibly
boundaries.
This
diagram
explains
what
I'm
talking
about
on
the
left.
What
happened
is
the
2018
valco
sp35
had
significant
amount
of
double
counting.
That
means
area
over
15
feet.
High
rooms
that
have
ceilings
over
15
feet
high
were
counted
twice.
So
if
you
had
a
room
that
was
10
feet
wide
by
10
feet
long,
but
had
a
17
foot
ceiling,
you
would
have
10
by
10
or
100
square
feet,
but
then
because
it
was
over
15
feet,
it
would
be
counted
again.
O
O
The
2018
project
over
counted
the
usable
floor
space
by
using
the
allowance
for
ceilings
in
excess
of
15
feet.
The
rise
project
doubles
the
usable
floor
space
by
lowering
the
ceilings
and
adding
another
floor,
the
ceiling
the
whether
this
is
good
or
bad.
I
mean
I
don't
understand
the
double
counting.
It
doesn't
make
sense
to
me,
but
the
impact
it
means
that
it.
O
O
The
summary
of
tower
buildings
change.
All
seven
towers
are
now
the
260
feet.
Five
tower
lower
towers
were
increased.
All
seven
towers
now
are
seventy
percent
wider.
There
is
less
visibility
between
the
towers
and
the
majority
of
the
building
heights
have
increased
several
levels.
Now
that
the
city
manager
has
presented
an
example
of
the
towers
on
the
top
row
in
yellow
is
2018
on
the
bottom,
in
gray
is
2022..
O
O
In
summary,
the
increase
in
retail
it
was
it's
an
increase
of
eight
thousand
eight
hundred
and
thirty
three
feet
of
floor
space.
There
is
no
retail
on
the
east
side
of
wolf.
So
all
the
residents
and
office
building
workers
will
have
to
cross
the
street
to
access
coffee
sandwich
shop,
et
cetera,
all
employees
again
to
help
us
all
comprehend
the
true
impacts
of
this
project.
Please
provide
a
3d
model
of
the
entire
rise
project
to
scale
a
shadow
study,
no
reduction
in
required
fees
and
independent
physical
impact
analysis.
O
The
city
selected
velco,
as
one
of
the
sites
for
the
current
2015
2022
reena
cycle
and
made
the
corresponding
general
plan
amendments.
It
is
unclear
if
the
housing
units
being
developed
under
the
valco
proposal
will
be
counted
against
the
current
or
the
next
arena
cycle,
but
either
way
the
city
needs
to
prepare
itself
for
this
change.
O
Q
Thank
you,
I'm
seeing
a
lot
of
stone
faces
up
there.
It
says
a
lot
moving
forward,
I'm
hoping
to
hear
from
staff-
and
perhaps
someone
can
ask
this
question
this
evening-
what
the
recommendation,
what
the
requirements
are
for
vertical
construction
of
this
new
project
application?
Does
the
formal
okay
on
the
modifications
begin
on
or
before
june
3rd?
Q
Q
Q
The
staff
report
repeats
a
theme
and
when
it
answers
several
of
the
application
questions,
the
theme
is
basically
it's
not
applicable
to
the
modification
request.
Since
there's
no
modifications
proposed
which
impact
this
criterion.
Well,
I
would
disagree
with
a
lot
of
those
and
I
think
a
lot
of
the
issues
brought
up
tonight
show
that
maybe
on
paper
and
per
whatever
that's
what
you
have
to
say.
But
realistically
we
all
know.
Q
It
should
be
noted
that
there
has
been
no
appropriate
soil
assessment
for
the
east
side
of
the
wolf
road
that
portion
of
the
property
we
don't
know
anything
site.
Cleanup
is
stalled,
but
required
to
move
forward
with
any
and
all
project
that
has
been
presented
for
this
project
site
in
nearly
a
decade.
Every
project
would
have
needed
to
clean
things
up,
and
yet
it's
still
not
done.
Q
I
was
told
and
then
shown
that
representatives
for
the
applicant
claimed
in
writing
to
the
public
that
they
will
begin
construction
this
year.
This
year
concludes
in
seven
months.
There
is
nothing
being
done
about
the
soil
cleanup
that
in
itself
is
a
huge
problem.
I
appreciate
connie
cunningham's
and
other
comments
about
the
importance
of
bird,
safe
and
dark
sky
regulations,
and
I
echo
the
concerns
and
disappointment
of
sandhill
property
company.
Q
It's
a
little
ironic
that
peter
powell
himself
considers
birds
basically
as
his
children,
he
loves
birds,
yet
it
doesn't
seem
to
matter
if
it's
going
to
dip
into
his
profits
or
whatever.
The
reason
for
this
kind
of
construction
is
and
connie.
I
just
want
you
to
know
that
the
green
roof
award
was
for
either
the
2018
design
or
the
hills
design
it.
It
is
not
at
all
applicable
to
what
is
here
now,
because
it's
really
not
any
open
space
for
the
public.
Q
C
Paul,
yes,
I
did
receive
two
emails
when
you
announced
the
com.
B
C
Okay,
so
the
first
email
is
just
not
request
to
read
just
that
it's
from
jfrone,
and
you
wish
to
note
that
the
council
that
to
the
he
wished
me
to
note
to
the
council
that
he
sent
the
email,
but
he
does
not
wish
it
to
be
read.
The
second
email
is
from
leanna
crabtree
and
I
will
begin
reading.
C
If
so
ask
one
is
if
land
and
cupertino
independent
of
special
district
entitlements
is
valued
by
investors
at
10
million
dollars
per
acre,
then
the
52
acre,
stevens,
creek,
wolf
site
would
be
valued
at
approximately
500
million
development
under
the
2022
project,
submission
would
be
would
include
underground
parking,
7.5
million
square
feet
of
above
office
above
ground
office,
residential
and
retail
use
construction
and
a
complex,
interconnected
roof
canopy
through
an
independent
study
conducted
by
the
city
of
nationwide,
projects
of
comparable
size
and
scale
to
the
stephens
creek
wolf
project
approximately.
C
How
many
years
would
it
be
before
the
site
is
25
complete
and
occupied
50
complete
and
occupied
75
percent
complete
and
occupied
95,
complete
and
occupied.
Ask
2.
The
financial
analysis
provided
by
the
property
owner
is
part
of
the
2022
submission
for
the
stevens
creek
wolf
project
estimates
net
annual
general
fund
revenue
of
4.3
million
from
the
site
through
independent
financial
analysis
conducted
by
the
city.
C
What
are
the
estimate,
estimated
revenues
and
costs
received
and
borne
by
the
city
when
the
site
is
25
percent
complete
and
occupied
50
complete
and
occupied
75
percent
complete
and
occupied
95
percent
complete
and
occupied.
Ask
three
local
residents
have
been
consistent
in
their
skepticism
of
the
narrative
that
adding
high
density
office,
development
and
market
rate
homes
to
a
region
with
insufficient,
safe,
affordable
housing
would
improve
long-term
housing
outcomes
for
residents
with
moderate
and
low
incomes.
C
If
the
results
of
asks,
one
and
two
above
indicate,
the
greater
good
of
the
region
comes
at
costs
that
are
unreasonable
for
a
city
of
57
000
people
to
bear
alone
for
ask
three:
a
request:
the
city
to
consider
detachment
where
the
stevens
creek
wolf
project
moves
forward
as
now
protected
by
state
law,
but
under
the
jurisdiction
of
the
county
of
santa
clara,
where
the
entire
county
shares
in
the
costs
and
benefits
of
the
stevens
creek
wolf
project.
Sincerely
liana
crabbe
tree
cupertino
resident.
B
Thank
you,
madam
city
clerk,
all
right,
so
this
is
what
I'm
going
to
do,
I'm
going
to
refer
to
staff
a
number
of
the
questions
raised
by
members
of
the
public
before
we
go
to
follow
up
questions
and
comments
from
our
city,
council,
and
so
I'll
just
start
with
what
I
have
in
my
notes
and
if
other
members
of
the
city
council
have
additional
items
that
they
heard
from
members
of
the
public,
please
feel
free
to
follow
on.
B
Although
I
I
do
have
a
number
of
items
that
are
earmarked
in
my
notes
here
from
our
first
speaker,
we
have-
I
I
I
put
this
down
as
a
comment
with
regard
to
asking
to
dispel
a
misconception
with
regard
to
delayed
approvals.
B
B
Right
and
so
any
addressing
of
this
body,
the
city
council,
with
regard
to
delaying
approvals,
is
inapplicable.
Is
that
correct.
E
Yeah
so
yeah,
so
this
this
modification
request
was
initiated
by
the
applicant.
So
so
and
it's
been
pri,
it
is
being
processed
within
60
days,
which
is
the
statutory
timeline.
B
E
Absolutely
correct
all
approvals
for
this
project
are
at
a
staff
level
that
included
the
original
approval.
That
includes
this
modification
request,
and
it
includes
subsequent
permits
that
are
necessary
for
the
development
such
as
building
permits,
for
example,.
B
Okay,
thank
you,
city
attorney,
jensen.
So
the
question
the
next
follow-up
point.
I
have
comes
from
a
question
posed
by
jennifer
griffin.
How
many
years
are
these
bmr
units
designated
as
such
for
this
project.
E
So
the
the
city
bmr
units
which
are
total
267
of
the
bmr
units,
the
90,
those
are
designated
as
affordable
for
99
years.
The
remaining
bmr
units,
which
are
either
exclusively
density,
bonus
units
or
are
additional
units
that
are
required
to
satisfy
the
50
requirement
in
sb
35.
Those
were
affordable
for
55
years.
B
B
Units
are
all
units
got
it
got
it
okay,
so
I
was
just
trying
to
fill
in
that
gap
there.
All
right.
So
great
susan
moore,
made
a
comment
about
water
infrastructure.
Is
there
any
feedback
to
that.
E
So
so
the
private,
so
so,
if
if
the
the
original
project-
and
the
modification
request,
if
approved
are
both
conditioned
on
receiving
you
know,
will
serve
letter
from
cal
water
that
there's
adequate
water
to
serve
the
project,
we
have
had
some
discussions
at
the
staff
level
about
landscaping
other
features
of
the
project.
You
know
just
to
help
us
understand
the
project
and-
and
I'm
sure
we'll
continue
to
have
those
discussions
with
with
the
applicant.
You
know,
as
the
project
proceeds.
B
Okay
and
with
regard
to
bird,
safe
and
dark
skies,
perhaps
we
parse
those
two
out
in
the
design.
This
is
going
to
be
susceptible
to
a
fairly
significant
number
of
bird
strikes,
given
the
the
height
and
the
amount
of
glass
being
used,
and
so
are
there
any
comments.
With
regard
to
those
concerns
raised
by
a
fair
number
of
members
of
the
public.
E
Yeah,
no,
I
think
it's
great
that
the
members
of
the
public
raise
those
concerns.
I
think,
as
you
know,
the
council
understands
you
know,
because
those
ordinances
were
adopted
in
2021
after
the
original
approval,
we
can't
impose
the
requirements
of
those
ordinances
as
conditions
of
approval.
You
know,
however,
I
think
you
know
it's
it's
important
for
you
to
count
both
council
and
and
the
the
applicant
team
to
hear
those
comments
of
public
concern,
and
it's
something
that
just
it's
a
discussion
that
we
can
continue
with
the
applicant.
You
know
that
said
I
should
be.
B
E
I
would
have
to
look
at
that
if,
but,
of
course
you
know
these,
the
structures
that
are
being
built
here
won't
be
exist
at
the
time
we
passed
the
ordinance,
but
I
would
have
to
look
at
that
more
closely.
A
B
But
isn't
that
a
build
standard
rather
than
a
regulatory
standard,
with
regard
to
how
the
lighting
would
work
inside
of
a
building?
So
so
that's
that's
a
follow-up
question
that
I
have
with
regard
to
your
office
chris,
because
I
I
think
that
there
is
a
distinction
between
the
bird,
safe,
design-oriented
aspects
of
that
legislation
and
the
dark
skies
element
of
it.
So
if
you
could
look
into
it,
I
don't
think
that
there
is
a
ready
answer
available
right
now.
B
Great
next
on
my
my
list
here,
so
a
number
of
yeah
comments
on
the
bird
safe,
dark
skies
and
I'll
go
next
to
some
of
the
comments
from
peggy
griffin,
peggy
requests
several
things
I'll
start
with
the
3d
model.
Has
there
been
any
discussion
between
staff
and
the
applicant
regarding
generating
a
3d
model
of
the
project.
E
My
understanding
is
that
the
applicant,
you
know,
does
work
with
a
three-day
3d
model.
I
think
it
would
be
a
discussion
with
the
applicant.
You
know
how
that
could
be
useful
for
the
public
to
understand
the
project.
It's
it's
not
again,
not
a
requirement
of
the
application
process,
but
my
understanding
is
that
it's
common
for
the
developer
team
to
work
with
you
know
a
3d
model
on
projects
at
this
scale.
Okay,.
B
D
R
D
A
B
Interesting
well,
I
didn't
actually
see
that
model,
so
that
would
be
nice
to
as
an
older
model.
Okay,
okay,
well,
second
item
raised
by
peggy
was
a
shadow
study.
Is
that
something
that
can
be
encouraged
with
regard
to
the
applicant,
providing
a
sense
of
where
you
know
the
light
will
be
heading
at
any
given
point
in
time.
E
B
E
You
know
only
only
that
that
that
issue
isn't
before
council.
At
this
time
we
do
have
a
request
for
a
a
a
waiver
of
bmr
fees.
That's
pending
that
per
the
bmr
manual.
That
decision
won't
be
made
at
this
time,
but
will
be
evaluated
in
due
time,
but
but
that
issue
is
not
presently
before
council
or
or
before
staff.
Okay,.
B
I
have
a
couple
of
requests,
one
from
peggy,
as
well
as
from
leanna,
with
regard
to
what
I'll
couch
under
peggy's
description
as
an
independent
fiscal
impact
fee
or
I'm
sorry,
an
independent
fiscal
impact
study
with
regard
to
the
various
financial
impacts,
as
well
as
revenue
generation
from
this
project.
Is
that
something
that
has
been
broached
and
or
could
be
encouraged
or
something
that
we
ourselves
could
go
forward
with?
Based
upon
what
we
know
and
if
not
what
else
would
we
need
to
know
in
order
to
proceed
with
a
study
like
that.
D
I'll
jump
in
there
mayor
sure.
E
D
Something
you
know,
I
guess,
as
chris
said
on
other
ones,
you
know
that's
something
we
could
talk
to
the
applicant
about,
or
the
city
could
undertake
that
too.
There
are
consultants
out
there
that
can
help
us
with
that
type
of
situation,
to
look
at
the
costs,
as
well
as
the
revenue
potential
that
could
come
in.
D
D
B
All
right:
well,
let's
go
on
to
a
comment
from
lisa
warren
lisa
made
note
of
some
of
the
soil
cleanup
issues,
and
so
I'd
like
to
ask
staff
if
you'd
like
to
speak
to
any
of
that.
She
also
specifically
noted
that
the
east
side
of
wolf
road
has
not
begun
a
soil
cleanup
process
yet,
and
can
you
provide
updates
to
the
city
with
regard
to
those
points.
E
Yes,
yes,
yes,
thank
you
thank
and
thank
thanks.
I
think
it's
important
to
raise
those
issues.
So,
yes,
so
the
site
you
know.
As
was
pointed
out,
there
are
several
environmental
issues
with
the
site.
The
major
issues
are
solvent
contamination,
primarily
pce
in
soil,
vapor
and
pcb
contamination
in
certain
areas
of
shallow
soil
at
the
site.
E
The
developer
has
entered
into
an
oversight
agreement
with
the
santa
clara
county
department
of
environmental
health
that
gives
the
department
of
environmental
health
the
ability
to
oversee
investigation
remediation
and
then
ultimately,
management
of
soils
during
construction
to
approve
the
plan.
For
that
at
this
point,
earth-moving
construction
is
on
hold.
E
The
deadline
for
submitting
those
materials
is
in
july
of
this
year.
My
understanding
is
that
the
the
development
team
would
like
to
submit
those
materials
sooner
than
that
to
move
the
process
forward.
So
that's
that's
where
we
are
at
with
respect
to
the
west
side.
The
the
commenter
was
correct
that
at
this
point
there
is
no
oversight
agreement
with
respect
to
the
east
side.
E
E
Go
through
a
similar
process
there
to
identify
any
potential
health
risks,
investigate
them
and
develop
a
plan,
for
you
know
mitigating
them
or
remediating
them,
which
is
which
is
the
end
point
of
the
dh
process.
Okay,.
B
So
so
so
nobody
on
council
fabricated,
these
contaminants
is
that
correct.
B
E
B
E
E
E
That's
my
understanding.
Yes,.
B
Okay
and
jim,
did
you
want
to
speak
to
that
point.
B
So
going
back
to
this
issue
of
soil
contamination,
because
I
I
want
to
be
really
clear
about
this-
we
have
had
a
lot
of
allegations
and
insinuations
thrown
towards
this
particular
city
council,
and
I
think
that
when
people
are
throwing
away
those
insinuations,
they
should
try
to
do
so
in
a
responsible
manner.
B
E
Yeah,
so
so
again
again
the
process.
It's
it's
it's
under
dh
oversight.
We
are
relying
on
dh's
professional
expertise.
They,
the
the
applicant,
will
investigate
the
site
until
deh
is
confident
that
it
understands
the
extent
of
contamination
enough
to
make
an
informed
decision
about
risk
and
then
we'll
will
designate
you
know
either
remediation.
E
You
know,
which
you
know
the
applicant
does
intend
to
remove
significant
amounts
of
soil
from
the
site,
which
you
know
you
know,
may
or
may
not
completely
eliminate
the
problem
or
there
are
possible.
Possibly
you
know,
mitigation
measures
that
could
be
incorporated
into
construction
if
that
were
necessary
as
well.
B
B
Also
under
liana,
crabtree
was
a
question
regarding
times
to
completion,
and
I
believe
that
the
points
were
50
75
and
95.
Do
we
have
estimations
of
those
times
to
completion
that
we
can
provide
to
members
of
the
public
at
this
time?.
B
Okay,
financial
study
numbers
were
requested
by
leanne.
I
I
covered
that
with
peggy.
B
B
You
know
I
you
know,
forgive
me
lyanna.
If
I'm
getting
this
incorrect,
I
believe
that
her
basic
premise
was
if
there
are
particular
problems
that
are
being
identified
here
and
we're
looking
at,
for
instance
with
regard
to
the
office
impact
and
the
need
for
further
housing
created
by
the
project
itself.
B
If
if
this
then
becomes
more
of
a
regional
issue,
then
should
we
then
d
d
d
localize
it
and
make
it
more
of
a
regional
jurisdiction
such
that
it
becomes
part
of
the
county's
or
even
the
state's
responsibility,
to
go
ahead
and
and
usher
through
and
for
me
you
know,
I
heard
this
and
the
concept
of
detachment.
B
I
would
require
more
research,
but
for
me,
there's
a
certain
parallelism
in
the
requirement,
much
like
unfunded
mandates.
If
you're
going
to
impose
those
requirements
and
then
as
applied
the
putative
problem
being
addressed
actually
gets
worse,
it
probably
does
make
some
sense
to
place
the
responsibility
for
ushering
in
the
ultimate
burdens,
such
as
on
infrastructure
with
the
so-called
larger
jurisdiction.
E
Yeah,
I
I
so
it's
an
interesting
idea
and
my
immediate
reaction
is,
I'm
not
sure
how
it
could
be
accomplished
without
state
legislation.
I.
B
D
A
D
To
be
have
the
city
be
reimbursed,
if
you
will
for
any
costs
that
are
involved,
I
don't
think
they
would
look
at
that
plus
you
have
the
loss,
they
would
probably
say
in
that
term,
then
we
get
the
property
tax.
We
get
the
retail
tax.
We
get
all
of
these
things
and
we'll
give
you
something
in
return
for
it.
B
Well,
I
think
on
first
impression
there
are
certainly
a
whole
skeleton
of
you
know
frameworks
that
we
would
need
to
understand
before
speaking
to
the
specifics
of
the
idea,
but
the
notion
is
interesting.
So
so
jim
are
you
familiar
with
any
detachment
projects?
You
you
speak
as
if
you
have
some?
No
I'm.
D
D
No,
no
there's
been,
you
know,
there's
very
few
cities
that
went
at
de-annex,
it's
usually
the
other
way
around,
but
typically
when
you
get
to
a
position
where
it
is
so
costly
that
the
city
goes,
I
don't
want
this
anymore
and
then
it
becomes
a
very
tough
discussion
with
the
county
who
sits
in
there,
because
that
falls
back
to
the
county.
To
then
be
the
provider
of
whatever
services.
D
B
Mechanism
here
you
know,
I
didn't
hear
dean
annexation
per
se,
but
with
regard
to
being
able
to
shoulder
some
of
the
collective
burdens
imposed
with
regard
to
infrastructure
such
as
transportation,
further
housing
requirements,
you
know-
I
I
think,
maybe
that's
something
worth
looking
into.
So
that's
that's
really.
Ultimately,
I
think
the
the
value
of
the
comment
and
referral.
So
that's
the
end
of
my
list
I'll
refer
to
my
colleagues
for
any
follow-ups
from
members
of
the
public
from
your
respective
notes.
P
Yeah
first,
it's
a
request
that
I
I
think
this
is
a
continued
confusion
of
whether
the
city
did
anything
to
delay
the
project.
The
applicant
up
until
last
week,
in
their
very
successful
open
house,
still
telling
visitors
that
somehow
the
city
and
the
lawsuits
delayed
the
project
when
I
think
the
lawsuit
had
no
impact
on
the
project,
because
the
project
as
approved
was
going
forward
as
a
lawsuit
was
being
determined
on
the
site
and
also
the
involvement
of
the
age.
P
Now
I
I
had
thought
they,
they
would
submit
a
plan
back
in
may
and
then
that
plan
would
be
approved
but
turns
out.
Dh
wants
more
assessment
done
and
that
this
is
all
beyond
our
control.
I
think
we,
I
hope,
I'd
like
to
request
the
city
attorney's
office,
write
up
a
letter
to
clearly
describe
the
timeline
of
the
different
steps
the
city
did
and
then
the
different
steps
is
now
required
of
the
applicant
to
proceed
forward
so
that
it's
clear,
because
this
this
question
comes
up
now
and
then
I
wish
there
is
a
letter
posted.
P
I
can
point
to
here.
All
the
details
is
in
that
lecture,
and
this
is
what
what's
on
the
record,
could
we
have
a
letter
to
that
effect?.
E
So
so
I
mean
I,
I
can't
speak
it
probably
as
clearly
to
the
entire
history
of
the
project
as
some
of
the
members
of
council,
because
you
know
I've
joined
the
city
relatively
recently.
I
I
can
say
that
from
the
time
that
I've
joined
the
city,
it's
been,
it's
been
really
clear
that
the
timeline
for
this
project
would
be
will
be
driven
by.
You
know
the
developers
development
needs
and
then
also
by
the
dh
process,
which
the
city
doesn't
control.
E
I
think
that's
been
communicated
effectively
to
the
the
developer
and
I
think
they
they
understand
that
and
and.
P
Yes,
so
I
think
we
need
a
letter
from
the
city
attorney's
office
so
that
on
all
the
number
states
there
is
on
the
record,
because,
yes,
some
people
in
in
their
office
probably
understand
that,
but
the
messages
they
communicate
to
the
public
through
their
email
list
newsletter
and
through
other
public
meetings
are
very
different.
P
And
then
our
public
is
has
come
to
the
council
and
speak
and
have
is
under
the
impression
somehow.
The
city
is
delaying
the
project
when
we
are
not.
So
I
think
we
need
something
written
that
is
easy
for
any
council
member
or
even
commissioner
or
public,
that
can
easily
access.
And
here
is
the
correct
information.
E
P
Okay,
I
think
I'm
just
looking
for
whatever
is
already
on
the
record
on
this
date.
They
submitted
this
permit
and
then
the
city
communicated.
P
There
are
these
issues
and
we
need
this
document
and
then
eventually
they
provide
the
document
and
then
eventually
we
approve
the
permit
on
what
date
and
then
the
environmental
issue,
and
it
was
discovered
and
then
on
this
date
we
referred
to
dh
and
then
just
a
list
of
dates.
That
of
things
actually
happened,
then
I
think
that's
easier
to
see
the
city
is
to
is
just
processing
it
as
what
we
have
due
diligence
to
do
right.
P
And
I
think
a
letter
to
clearly
describe
here
is
we
are
processing
this
application
according
to
the
legislative
requirement
or
the
city
process,
yeah
everything
we're
requesting
or
are
just
normal
process
of
of
processing,
any
application.
E
Right
so
so,
as
I
said,
I
think
you
know
I
that
the
information
I
think
is
important.
I
think
you
know
I
I
think
I
you
know
I
need
to
discuss
with
the
city
manager
and
his
staff
as
to
you
know
whether
a
letter
from
the
city's
attorney's
office
would
be
the
best
way
to
convey
that
information.
At
this
time.
P
Okay
yeah
another
question:.
P
Okay,
so
another
question
I'd
like
to
clarify
is
this:
thank
you
in
the
staff
report
that
you
pointed
out,
this
site
has
no
objective
standard,
because
there
is
no
vocal
specific
plan
and
this
side
has
no
height
limit
for
a
50
acre
site
in
a
city
like
earth
with
no
height
limit.
Is
that
normal.
E
P
E
P
Yeah,
okay,
so
yeah
I'll
stop
now.
S
Okay,
so
I
want
to
ask
a
few
questions
on
the
one
of
the
residents
concerned
about
the
parkland
on
the
ground
versus
parkland
on
the
rooftop
versus
probably
the
inglou
parkland
delegations.
Is
there
any
parkland
on
the
ground
in
this
project?.
E
So
I
mean,
I
think,
just
to
clarify
that
that
you
know
neither
the
original,
neither
in
the
original
application
or
in
the
the
proposed
modification.
Is
there
any
park
land
that
has
been
accepted
for
dedication
by
the
city
or
will
be
accepted
for
the
dedication
by
the
city
based
on
sort
of
current
current
policies?
The
the
applicant,
you
know,
you
know
you
know-
will
be
required
based
on
the
current
approval.
You
know,
which
you
know
won't
be
modified
by
this
request
to
pay
a
parkland
dedication
fee.
E
E
S
Okay,
so
so,
as
far
as
I
understand,
I
think
some
residents
are
very
disappointed
that
the
parkland
rooftop
parkland
is
not
parkland
for
the
public,
but
when
I
read
it,
it
looks
like
it
is
privately
owned
by
this
development,
but
they
do
open
up
some
places
for
public
access,
but
that's
at
their
discretion
am
I
describe
it
clearly.
E
Yeah
that
that's
that's
correct.
One
of
the
significant
changes
in
the
modification
request
is
that
public
access,
easements
over
significant
portions
of
the
site
have
been
removed.
That
doesn't
necessarily
mean
that
the
applicant
won't
open
up
parts
of
the
property
for
some
kind
of
public
access,
but
it
means
that
they
control
the
access.
E
The
applicant
has,
you
know,
signaled
an
interest
to
continue
to
continue
continue
to
have
discussion
about.
You
know,
abilities
to
guarantee
public
access,
but
you
know
it's
it's
it's
their
position,
that
they
shouldn't
pay
the
parkland
dedication
fee
and,
and
also
you
know,
offer
those
guarantees
at
least
that's
their
position.
Now.
S
E
S
Okay,
I
would
think
for
any
development.
If
they
have
restaurants
stores
bars,
they
would
want
welcome
public
to
access
those
amenities.
So
they
can,
you
know
they're,
they
can
have
you
know
the
tenants
can
thrive.
So
so
this
is
not
negotiated,
but
we
think
be.
It
would
be
good
for
for
the
developer
too,
or
for
the
restaurants
bars
to
have
that
open
access
so
that
our
residents
can
go
and
consume.
E
S
Okay,
so
actually
how
I
see
this
is
yes,
we,
it
looks
like
we've
lost
some
access
to
public
space,
but
there
will
be
some
amenities
for
our
residents
because
we
really
want
to
go
there
and
enjoy
it.
I
think
that's
one
of
the
residents
main
point,
so
is
this:
just
not
negotiable
is
like
a
good
whale
thing
or
can
is:
can
there
be
a
business
arrangement,
a
develop,
not
develop
a
sort
of
other
arrangement
chamber
arrangement,
or
something
like
that,
so
our
residents
can
feel
that
they
have
access
to
this.
S
Okay,
one
more
question
is,
since
this
is
their
parkland
or
their
rooftop,
all
the
maintenance
fees.
You
know,
repairs
whatever
comes
in
the
next
10
20
30
50
years.
It
would
not
be
the
city's
liability
or
responsibility
to
repair,
it
will
be
up
to
the
develop
or
whoever
owns
that
development.
I
guess.
E
S
B
Okay,
thank
you
councilmember
way,
you're
at
5
15..
Let's
go
on
to
someone
else.
Is
there
councilmember
willie?
Did
you
want
to
that's
riley
so.
T
Kind
of
a
pretty
complex
topic
you
know:
where
do
you
start?
Maybe
the
city
manager
can
put
up
the
park?
The
rooftop
park
pictures
the
old
and
the
new
one
at
a
time,
we'll
start
try
and
start
there.
T
The
sb
35
is
taking
a
lot
of
control
that
the
city
would
normally
be
able
to
negotiate
to,
to
ensure
a
project
is
good
for
the
community,
not
just
the
developers
profit,
and
so
the
developer
really
conveyed,
in
my
view,
really
conveyed
that
this
rooftop
park
was
going
to
fulfill
the
general
plans
requirement
for
three
acres
of
park:
space,
not
public
space
park
space.
T
Look
it
I'm
giving
you
30
acres
of
park
space
and
it's
disappointing
to
me
when
it
gets
changed
or
whittled
away.
Now
the
developer
invited
each
of
us
to
on
the
council
to
meet
with
him
and
look
at
his
pictures,
and
we
did-
and
he
said
well,
I'm
now
removing
the
public
access
to
this
park
space,
and
I
told
him
I
said
wow
what
you're
doing
is
you're
telling
the
community
they
don't
matter.
T
T
But
beyond
what
I
might
be
disappointed
with,
I
want
to
be
sure
the
community
understands.
What's
going
on,
transparency,
don't
be
surprised
when
it
doesn't
look
like
what
they
were
told
or
what
was
conveyed
to
them.
The
developer.
Had
lots
of
open
houses
showed
the
community?
Oh,
but
now
we're
going
to
change
it.
T
So
now,
if
you
can
go
to
the
other
picture
of
what
it
is
now
where
the
buildings
are
now
popping
through,
where
did
those
grassy
areas
that
would
suffice
for
doing
lots
of
things
throwing
frisbees
for
your
dog
looking
being
able
to
look
and
not
see
buildings,
you
know
being
able
to
look
and
and
see
a
horizon
to
me.
This
is
dramatically
different,
but
it
goes
beyond
that.
T
T
I
really
see
that
as
being
disappointing.
Just
how.
How
can
somebody
intentionally
do
that?
Well,
I'm
mystified
we're
on
the
city
council.
We're
not
allowed
to
be
in
this
process,
but
we
can
be
looking
with
our
eyes
and
telling
the
community
what
it
looks
like
how
many
people
in
the
community
are
sitting
at
home.
T
T
But
now
not
only
is
there
not
the
area
to
throw
frisbees,
they
can't
even
get
up
there
disappointing
so
again
the
access.
If
this,
if
you
could
go
back
to
the
other
picture,
you
know,
I
think
we
have
to
be
truthful
when
we
talk,
and
that
means
the
developer
has
to
be
truthful
too.
When
you
show
this
to
the
community
and
then
we
community
said
well,
it's
going
to
be
up
at
seven
stories
in
the
air,
but
okay,
okay,
you
claim
that
this
has
been
done
elsewhere
and
you
know
it's.
It's
doable
and
workable.
T
T
And
this
is
now
what
it's
going
to
be
and
there's
going
to
be
fences
everywhere,
and
you
can't
can't
enjoy
this.
I
I
find
that
really
disappointing
and
we're
here
for
the
residents
we're
here
for
the
residents
to
make
sure
that
they
are
respected
in
this
community,
that,
if
a
developer
wants
to
buy
a
parcel
of
land
and
do
something
he
adheres
to
the
the
general
plan,
the
municipal
code,
but,
more
importantly,
the
intent,
the
intent
of
being
respectful
to
people,
the
intent
of
democracy.
T
T
He
didn't
do
that
without
a
strong
sense
of
obligation,
an
obligation
to
this
country,
an
obligation
to
the
state
and
an
obligation
to
the
community
and
the
greatest
generation,
never
sat
there
and
and
minced
words
and
cut
away
at
things.
They
were
truthful
and
moral
people,
and
I
I
have
a
real
tough
time.
T
We
have
no
choice
but
to
allow
this
to
move
along
in
the
city
process,
because
we
have
no
choice
and
so
be
it,
but
I
sure
hope
the
word
gets
out
to
the
community.
Don't
expect
what
you
were
originally
promised.
It
doesn't
look
like
that
at
least
not
from
this.
The
3d
model
might
help.
Let
me
also
go
on
to
one
more
thing:
let
me
go
ahead
and
share
my
screen
at
about.
T
T
Is
it
up
there
yet?
Okay,
you
know
this
is
the
picture
that
the
resident
gave
us
and
in
the
top
view
you
do
have
the
towers
protruding
through
it's
not
circling
there.
Maybe
my
my
mouse
will
circle,
so
you
do
have
the
buildings
protruding
through
the
green
roof,
but
basically
you've
got
pretty
pretty
unobstructed
view
to
the
skies
and
the
horizon
the
new
one
that
park
space
now
is
underneath
buildings,
at
least
that's.
What
it
sure
appears
here
is
that
park
space.
T
T
B
20
and
councilman
moore:
do
you
want
to
make
comments
or
ask
questions
next.
U
Okay,
so
so
first,
I
want
to
have
the
city
verify
that
the
one-to-one
slope
line
drawn
from
wolf
road
is
being
followed.
U
My
concern
is
that
we're
actually
using
or
ignoring
the
frontage
roads
and
I'm
counting
somewhere
around
10
to
11
lanes
on
on
wolf
road,
and
so
it
makes
a
considerable
difference
if
you
ignore
the
two
lanes
of
frontage
road,
a
long
wolf
for
where
the
setback
is
going
to
be
now
this.
What
I'm
pointing
to
here
is
the
original
90-day
approval
letter
from
the
city
to
the
valco
developer
and
here
they're
saying
hazardous
waste
site.
U
And
there
was
a
sears
automotive
case
and
a
the
jcpenney
automotive
case
and
that
those
cases
were
closed.
But
if
we
go
to
geotracker
today,
we'll
see
that
it's
open
and
there's
open
case
for
for
valco
and
also
what
we
see
and
these
documents
started
to
become
available
to
the
public.
After
the
developer
apparently
agreed
to
santa
clara
county
department
of
environmental
health
regulatory
oversight.
U
That's
happened
and
for
me,
what
was
pretty
interesting
was
the
2021
soil
report
indicating
that
there
was
pce
on
the
site
and
then
it
comes
out
that
there
were
three
possibly
four
dry
cleaners
surrounding
the
property,
so
also
the
the
developer,
provided
a
document
and
email
to
the
public
back
in
2019,
saying
that
the
site
was
all
clean
and,
as
we've
found
out
that
that
was
not
the
case.
So
if
you
give
me
a
minute,
I'm
going
to
reset
over
it
at
the
dice
and
continue.
U
Actually,
I've
changed
my
mind.
There
was
a
little
something
about
those
sections
that
I
think
might
be
helpful,
so
along
stevens
creek
boulevard.
I
would
like
to
make
sure
that
there's
been
a
section
cut
at
this
location
because
of
its
proximity
of
the
overhang
to
the
curb
line.
I
want
the
public
to
be
aware
that
we're
looking
at
10
and
11
and
possibly
12
lanes
along
wolf
road
and
that's
my
question
here
about
the
setback
from
the
frontage
road
as
opposed
to
using
the
outer
through
lanes.
E
V
Do
you
think,
council?
I
hope
you
can
hear
me.
I
do
want
to
confirm
that
there
is
a
cross
section
provided
at
stage
location
that
council
member
pointed
to
it
is
hp
0508.01,
and
it
does
indicate
that
the
building
is
behind
the
slope
line
boulevard
with
regard
to
the
changes
to
the
overcrossing,
that
is
now
just
a
pedestrian
like
a
green
roof
crossing
earlier
in
the
2018
apostles.
There
used
to
be
some
residential
amenities
in
that
space.
That
is
no
longer
the
case.
U
Thank
you,
mayor
paul.
I
I
would
like
to
understand
when
projects
like
this
come
to
the
city
and
that
the
developer
is
claiming
a
frontage
road,
as
they
are
on
this
one,
that
I
think
the
city
should
have
a
policy
which
would
be
fairly
logical,
that
you
can't
add
in
extra
frontage,
roads
widening
the
street
and
then
claim
that
your
curb
line
is
the
one
out
in
the
through
lanes,
even
though
you've
you're
adding
two
lanes
of
extra
traffic,
which
is
what
they're
claiming
here.
U
So
the
setback
in
in
my
opinion
should
actually
be
quite
a
bit
more
than
what
what
they
are
claiming
to
have.
If,
if.
B
You're
following
me,
I
I
am
following
you
and
that's
the
first
time.
I've
I've
heard
the
the
point
made.
It
seems
like
a
pretty
good
one
I
mean
so
so
so
so
chris
or
someone
from
staff.
If
I
can
paraphrase
what
councilmember
moore
is
saying,
how
can
a
developer
make
their
own
road
and
then
redraw
the
setback
line?
I
think
it's
essentially
what
you're
saying
right.
E
So
we
we
could
revisit
that
policy
for
future
projects.
That
was
a
decision
that
was
made
and
the
way
that
this,
the
setback
slope
was
calculated,
was
a
decision
that
was
made
in
2018,
and
so
you
know,
because
we're
lim
we
are
with
that's
not
effect,
that
we
are
required
to
use
the
same
procedures
and
methodologies
for
evaluating
the
project
that
we
did
in
2018.
So
that's
the
way
we're
not
in
a
position
that
we
could
revisit
that
question
at
this
time
with
with
respect
to
this
project
at
least.
U
Okay,
so
a
question
about
that
is
that
if
we
take
that
to
its-
maybe
not
logical
conclusion,
but
if
we
take
that
that
idea
to
its
logical
conclusion
that
we
are
essentially
stuck
with
whatever
decision
was
made
in
2018,
regardless
of
how
that
decision
was
arrived
at,
if
if
it
was
perhaps
even
absolutely
wrong,
it
seems
that
we
are
absolutely
stuck
with
that
from
what
what
I'm
hearing-
and
I
think
that
that's
a
very,
I
think-
that's
a
very
odd
situation,
so
I'll
bring
it
to
the
notion
of
health
and
safety
impacts,
because,
while
we're
hearing
about
the
the
bird
safe
design,
bird,
safe,
dark
sky
design
and
we're
being
informed
of
actual
belief
of
there
being
health
and
safety
impacts.
U
If
we
look
at
a
similarly
sized
project,
the
valco
specific
plan,
there
were
identified
health
and
safety
impacts
with
regards
to
air
quality
and
noise.
So
I
I
don't
understand
how
it
is
how
the
city
did
not
make
any
determination
that
there
were
would
be
adverse
impacts
to
health
and
safety
in
the
original
project
and
again
for
this
one,
since
they
have
essentially
made
it
larger.
I
don't
understand
why
there
are
no
health
and
safety
impacts.
I
identified
in
in
either
case.
E
So
so
I
speak
primarily
to
this
case
that
you
know
there.
There
are
are
narrow
circumstances
where
you
could
apply,
for
example,
building
standards,
building
code
standards
that
that
you
know
due
to
health
and
safety
impacts
with
certain
modified
projects.
Those
circumstances
don't
apply
here.
U
Okay,
now
there
have
been
changes
to
density
bonus
law
in
the
interim.
So
is
it
true
that
the
15,
I
think
it
is
very
low
income?
That's
being
offered
now
qualifies
the
developer
for
a
50
density
bonus.
Is
that
correct.
U
Okay,
so
that
that
had
that
addition
happened
in
the
interim.
So
what
I
don't
quite
understand
is
why
this
this
the
law
as
it
stands,
it's
like
the
developer
can
take
the
modification
part,
but
they
don't
have
to
qualify
for
for
things
like
tribal
resources,
I'm
understanding
correctly.
U
E
U
That's
odd,
okay,
so
I'm
I'm
looking
at
it
like
a
2000
parking
space
deficit
for
the
office
component.
To
me,
that
sounds
like
about
a
hundred
bus
trips
per
day
coming
and
going
morning
and
night
does
that?
Has
anyone
looked
into
that
I'll,
just
pepper
a
couple
of
questions
all
at
once
here
councilmember.
B
U
I'm
nearly
done
with
the
last
part
here.
I
think
we
do
need
to
know
what
the
school
impacts
are.
We
were
seeing
about
750
students,
potentially
in
a
much
smaller
project
years
ago,
so
we
need
to
have
that
information
provided,
especially
if
it
means
redrawing
of
district
school
district
boundaries,
and
I'm
four
leaf
is
being
mentioned-
is
providing
this
data.
U
I
would
like
to
see
the
work
and
with
that
work,
what
I
would
want
to
see
is
with
regards
to
their
residential
totals
how
much
of
those
totals
are
actually
parking
garages,
because
previously
they
had
1.4
million
square
feet
which
were
parking
garages
and
about
500
000
square
feet
of
amenity
spaces.
In
order
to
reach
this
calculation,
which
arguably
is
a
they
certainly
used
the
the
cupertino
floor
area
ratio
definitions
to
their
advantage,
where
they
didn't
have
to
count
several
million
square
feet
of
underground
parking.
U
U
And
I
think
this
is
something
that
pew
could
probably
provide
some
information
about,
because
they're
saying
I
believe
it's
a
55
percent
lot
coverage.
But
when
you
look
at
the
actual
lot,
here's
wolf,
stevens,
creek,
here's
the
east
side
property,
so
they
they're
essentially
doing
you
know
full
excavation
here
for
underground
parking
garage,
two
layers
of
underground
parking
on
the
east
side
and
then
on
the
west
side.
U
B
E
Yeah,
so
with
respect
to
the
the
55
percent
lot
coverage,
I
mean
that
she
is
correct.
That's
what
the
applicant
stated
in
their
application.
We
did
not
verify
that
because
it's
not
there's
not
an
objective
standard
to
compare
it
to.
I
don't
know
if
pugh
has
anything
to
add
about,
but
you
know
in
response
to
councilman's
comments.
V
I
just
wanted
to
add.
I
hope
you
can
hear
me,
but
I
just
don't
want
to
add
a
lot
of
coverage
of
the
definition
that
does
not
include
projections,
ground
level,
paving
landscape
filters
and
open
recreational
facilities
per
the
city's
definition.
But
chris
is
absolutely
right.
We
did
not
evaluate
what
the
coverage
limitations
are,
because
that's
not
required
for
this
project.
B
Okay,
well,
thank
you
very
much
and
so
I'll
go
ahead
and
and
stop
the
clock
there.
It's
roughly
12
minutes
50
seconds
so
I'll
go
ahead
and
start
my
clock
here
and
you
know
and
again
I
was
allocating
approximately
10
minutes
to
everyone.
I
think
that's
a
fair
amount
of
time
with
rega
and
I've
seen
it
over
a
few
minutes
to
council
member
moore.
B
I
can
say
that
I
was
the
lone
dissenting
vote
on
that
allocation.
I
thought
not
having
objective
standards
was
not
a
really
great
idea.
We
were
told
by
our
then
planning
director
that
we
would
revisit
that
in
the
in
the
spring
and
fix
that,
of
course,
the
spring
came
around
that
didn't
happen,
but
we
did
end
up.
B
You
know
in
seven
years
of
of
of
this,
and
so
I
I
always
came
to
the
to
the
basic
fact
of
of
of
having
workers
in
your
office
space
or
in
your
retail
space
and
taking
that
against
number
of
residencies
that
were
being
offered
up
so
at
first.
B
It
was
something
along
the
lines
of
two
million
square
feet
of
office:
half
a
well
actually
half
the
mall
size,
which
is
600,
000
square
feet
of
retail
and
400
units
of
residential,
and
you
know
at
the
time
this
is
almost
eight
years
ago.
Now
there
wasn't
that
much
of
a
cognition
about
the
balance
between
the
amount
of
space
that
you
put
in
for
jobs
and
the
number
of
housing
units
you
put
in
now.
I
think,
as
a
result,
partially
of
our
work
on
this
over
the
last
seven
years.
B
There
is
a
much
greater
awareness
and
it
has
been
absolutely
true,
the
entire
time,
whether
you
politicize
it
or
whether
you
look
at
it
rationally
if
you
over,
develop
with
regard
to
the
number
of
jobs
and
you
under
deliver
with
regard
to
the
number
of
housing
units
you're
going
to
end
up
with
congestion,
and
that's
just
a
that's
just
a
fact.
Palo
alto
has
recognized
it
in
the
interim
and
placed
a
cap
on
their
their
office.
B
But
in
our
area
that
that's
just
very
obvious,
I
used
to
work
in
palo
alto,
and
so
I
know
what
the
traffic
is
like
going
there
in
the
morning.
I
know
what
the
traffic
is
like
coming
out
of
there
in
the
evening
when
the
economic
vibrancy,
you
know,
is
pre-pandemic
and
normal.
B
Now,
if
you're,
looking
at
the
current
plans
for
the
sb-35
project
at
the
former
site
of
the
falcon
mall
you're,
looking
at
1.94
million
and
some
change
of
office,
as
well
as
some
500
000
square
feet
of
retail,
and
even
in
the
most
optimistic
of
projections
when
you're
talking
about
the
number
of
jobs,
even
if
you
take
at
face
value
the
assertion
that
you
can
find
a
tenant
for
all
the
near
two
million
square
feet
of
office
at
a
a
much
more
spaced
out,
400
square
feet
per
worker
as
opposed
to
250
square
feet.
B
And
you
know
I
will
say
that
sometimes
they
drive
it
down
to
150
square
feet
pre
pandemic.
But
even
if
we
can
accept
the
assertion
that
you
can
drive
that
up
to
400.
For
you
know
certain
types
of
tenants,
you're
still
at
approximately
two
thousand
you're
you're,
still
at
a
lot
of
units.
So
two
million
broken
down
to
four
hundred
is
five
thousand
you're
at
a
little
less
than
five
thousand
jobs.
B
But
then,
of
course,
you
still
have
500,
000,
plus
squares
of
retail.
That's
another
thousand
jobs
at
500
square
feet
per
job.
So
so
you're
you're
left
with
a
deficit,
even
if
it's
very
optimistic-
and
I
calculate
it
out
after
I
take
two
thirds
of
those
jobs,
because
it's
a
three
to
two
ratio.
I
calculated
out
at
a
little
bit
over
3
900
jobs,
now
2
400
and
2
housing
units
3
900
jobs.
B
Is
it
a
better
ratio?
Is
it
a
better
deficit
than
it
used
to
be?
Yes,
it
is
absolutely
a
better
deficit.
Is
the
applicant
obligated
to
tie
to
400
square
feet
a
job?
No,
absolutely
not!
So
that's
something
to
keep
in
mind,
but
at
the
same
time
you
know
the
the
political
response
was
essentially
jobs,
housing
fit
jobs,
housing
ratio
is
still
a
real
thing.
You
know
if
we,
if
we
deliver
some
5
000
jobs
at
least
and
we're
delivering
some
2
400
units
of
housing.
B
We
still
have
to
worry
about
this
minimum
number
of
1500.
You
know
units
of
housing
and
then,
when
you
laden
on
top
of
that,
the
fact
that
this
was
essentially
constructed
and
conceived
of
as
putatively
a
way
to
help
alleviate
the
housing
crisis.
What
you
realize
is
that
it
is
absolutely
fair
to
say
that
this
is
ultimately
an
economically
driven
engine.
Now,
from
the
perspective
of
a
jurisdiction,
it's
very
hard
to
explain
to
people.
B
You
know
why,
as
a
city,
you're,
basically
saying
all
right
well,
you've
got
a
developer,
who
spent
300
350
million
or
so
piecing
together,
the
various
parts
of
the
mall,
and
they
have
some
billions
of
dollars
to
invest
into
the
city
and
and
make
a
project.
You
know
it's.
It's
basically
a
conversation
that
you
can't
have
with
any
other
jurisdiction,
because
I
I
think
on
some
level,
it
doesn't
register
at
all
as
to
why
that
would
be.
B
You
know
necessarily
a
bad
thing,
but
I
think
in
our
city
we're
looking
very
carefully
at
the
fact
that
we
want
to
be
responsible
in
terms
of
all
the
problems
that
we
approach
and
the
way
I
look
at
it.
You
know
I've
been
on
council
for
seven
and
a
half
years
now.
I've
seen
all
these
various
you
know
issues.
I
have
a
lot
of
respect
for
people
that
do
the
work
and
you
know
push
on
on
issues
like
transportation,
on
issues
like
health
on
on
pollution,
because
it's
not
easy.
B
It's
truly
not
easy
to
do
this
with
regard
to
the
amount
of
overwhelming
economic
pressures
that
are
out
there,
so
so
just
incredible
amounts
of
respect
for
my
colleagues
on
council
for
doing
that,
but
at
the
same
time
we're
looking
at
a
situation
where
the
the
financial
pressures
are
quite
overwhelming
and
we
have
a
seven
and
a
half
year
history
of
of
dealing
with
this
particular
project.
B
So
at
this
time
it's
it's
clear.
You
know,
we've,
you
know
exhausted
the
point.
This
is
a
ministerial
process.
B
The
whole
idea
of
putting
so
much
density
in
our
city,
without
necessarily
a
very
thorough
conversation
about
transit,
is
something
I
think
that
is
advisable
to
have
as
much
conversation
as
and
as
many
plans
as
possible
right
now
to
try
to
alleviate
what
will
inevitably
be
a
very
severe
increase
in
congestion.
B
Assuming
this
project
does
get
built
successfully
and
assuming
that
the
that
the
economy
picks
back
up
again,
and
so
I
I
think
that
when
we
look
at
the
various
tensions
that
are
being
created
as
a
result
of
this
project,
it's
also
fair
to
say
that
we
have
to
be
continuing
to
do
this
work
and
if
that
work
is
created
because
we
get
so
much
pressure.
Okay
from
people
that
have
economic
incentives,
then
I
say
so
be
it
it's
not
pleasant.
B
I
don't
think
it's
fair,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day,
what
I've
tried
to
work
for
is
a
better
conversation,
a
better
way
of
doing
things.
I
appreciate
my
colleagues
on
on
council
for
also
putting
in
that
work,
but
at
the
same
time
we
we
just
have
to
be
really
clear-headed
about
the
fact
that
this
is
actually
going
to
make
the
housing
crisis
a
bit
a
bit
more
challenging.
We.
B
We
have
to
be
really
clear-headed
about
the
fact
that
infrastructure
for
san
jose
trying
to
build
a
five-mile
bart
extension
underground,
has
gone
from
a
seven
billion
dollar
estimate
to
a
nine
billion
dollar
estimate,
and
I'm
not
exaggerating.
That's
that's
the
federal
government
actually
adding
a
couple
billion
dollars,
it's
10
miles
to
deardon
station
from
de
anza
college,
and
so
if
we
really
want
to
be
part
of
that
equation-
and
you
know
build
out
a
transit
system,
I
think
we
should.
B
B
I
think
we
should
be
asking
for
10.,
you
know
so
so
so
that's
that's
where
I
look
at
this
and-
and
I
know
that
there's
just
so
much
work
to
be
done
in
order
to
make
sure
that
this
is,
you
know
ultimately
successful.
B
I
I
really
you
know
with
the
limitation
of
the
amount
of
time
that
you
know
I've
basically
imposed
on
this.
We
don't
have.
We
don't
have
time
to
really
get
into
any
any
any
measure
of
the
details
of
the
challenges
that
face
us,
but
that's
where
we
stand
right
now
and
with
regard
to
trying
to
move
forward
on
this,
I
you
know
commend
staff
for
their
work.
I
wish
you
the
best
of
luck.
I
think
that
deh
is
doing
a
good
job.
B
I
think
that
the
applicant
is
understanding
where
we're
coming
from
with
regard
to
making
sure
that
we
want
to
make
we
want
to.
We
want
to
keep
everyone
safe
and
healthy.
You
know,
I,
I
think,
we're
all
very
sincere
about
that,
and
so
I'll
go
ahead
and
and
wrap
that,
but
I
think
the
the
final
word
of
caution
here
is:
there
are
no
shortcuts.
There
are
no
easy
way
outs.
B
You
know
you
can
think
you
can
buy
your
way
out
of
problems,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day
we
have
to
do
the
work
and
the
work
here
is
actually
compounded
severely
with
regard
to
trying
to
do
an
end
run
around
our
local
local
process,
and
I
said
this-
I
said
this
to
the
applicant.
He
repeated
it.
The
the
project
manager
repeated
it
back
to
me
during
this
last
seven
or
eight
months
when
I've
been
trying
to
connect
counsel
with
the
applicant.
B
You
know,
because
I
just
don't
think
we
should
be
fighting
each
other
by
proxy.
You
know
we
can
disagree.
Let's
just
disagree
directly.
The
applicant
said
to
me.
You
told
me
a
couple
of
years
ago
that
you
can
go
ministerial,
but
I
I
control
the
ministers.
B
I
I
choose
the
ministers
and
you
know:
that's
not
that's
not
anything
I
ever
set
out
to
do.
I
never
set
out
to
you
know
as
gene
bador
likes
to
say
hire
six
or
seven
city
managers
or
whatever
your
account
is
gene.
I
never
set
out
to
do
that,
but
with
regard
to
being
able
to
make
sure
that
this
project
and
our
city
gets
this
right,
I
think
that
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we
have
a
very
clear-eyed
view
of
precisely
what
we're
doing,
and
you
know
how
we're
trying
to
tackle
these
problems.
B
So
you
know
I
look
at
it
and
I
apologize.
I
have
gone
over,
so
you
know
councilmember
moore
I've
taken
those.
You
know
minutes
back
I'll,
go
ahead
and
add
them
to
you
know
whoever
wants
to
expound
here,
and
you
know
councilmember,
moore
and
vice
mayor
ciao.
I
do
see
your
hands
raised,
but
I
think
that
it
is.
It
is
a
cautionary
tale
in
one
sense,
but
it
is
also
something
that
if
we,
if
we
draw
upon
what
has
made
us
successful,
we
can
also
continue
that
success.
B
It's
just
the
fact
that
you
know.
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
have
these
these
direct
dialogues
and
that
we're
honest
with
each
other
and
we're
very
clear-headed
about
what
our
challenges
are,
that
we
face
as
a
result
not
just
of
this
project
but
of
a
lot
of
the
various
pressures
as
a
result
of
our
our
economic
success.
B
So
so
so,
in
closing,
I
would
say:
let's,
let's
celebrate
what
we've
done
well,
but
let's
just
be
very
careful
about
the
repercussions
of
that
and
there
are
really
no
easy
ways
out
to
you
know:
creating
a
truly
cohesive
and
effective
community
thanks.
B
B
Okay,
so
I
I
timed
myself
out
at
11
30..
I
took
three
minutes
and
gave
it
to
councilmember
more
so
right,
around
15
and
so
we'll
go
ahead
and
reset
that
council
member
count.
Let
me
go
backwards,
and
here
council,
member
willie,
you
have
another
five
minutes
and
a
half
council
member
moore.
That
would
give
you
another
couple
minutes
and
vice
mayor
ciao.
That
would
give
you
approximately
eight
more
minutes,
and
so
why
don't
we
start
with
you.
Vice
merchant.
P
Okay,
so
I
think
we
found
out
a
lot
more
about
environmental
pollutants
after
the
project
has
been
approved
and
we
found
out
the
the
2016
report
that
was
not
made
available
to
the
city,
so
I
would
like
to
know
if
the
project
is
submitted
today
as
a
brand
new
project.
Given
what
we
know
on
the
environmental
issues
on
this
project,
would
this
project
still
qualify
under
sb35.
E
E
Yes,
so
so
clearly
right
so
clearly,
there
are
pollutants
present
on
the
site.
You
know,
there's
no
arguing
that,
but
they're
the
the
the
the
criteria
for
inclusion
or
exclusion
as
an
sp35
site
depends
on
specific
listings
under
different
regulatory
programs
and
sites
identified
by
state
agencies
and
and
this
site
was
not
on
those
lists
in
2018
and
is
not
on
those
lists.
Now.
P
So
for
a
normal
project,
let's
say
waste
port,
the
project
is
approved,
but
the
city
would
adopt,
say,
dark
sky
and
bird
safe
ordinance.
Maybe
after
the
project
is
approved,
I
don't
remember
the
specific
timeline,
assuming
that's
adopted
after
a
normal
property.
Usually
it's
when
I
think
they
pull
the
permits.
They
need
to
comply
with
our
city
standard
when
they
pull
the
permits,
rather
than
when
we
approved
the
project.
E
So
so
so
generally,
in
permitting
you
know
the
city,
will
you
know
apply
that
the
standards
that
are
in
place
at
the
time
the
permit
is
issued
if
a
project
you
know
in
a
normal
project
that
doesn't
have
anything
like
sb35
that
you
know
is
effectively.
You
know,
allows
the
developers
rights
to
vest
early.
You
know
the
city
could,
could
you
know,
apply
new
standards
up
until
the
time
until
a
building
permit
is
pulled
and
substantial
costs
are
incurred
in
reliance
on
that
building.
E
P
E
P
So
those
projects
also
would
lock
in
the
design
standard
at
the
time
of
submission.
P
Only
a
premium
preliminary
application
yeah
so
that
okay
and
with
the
about
three
thousand
something
parking
spaces.
How
many
spaces
are
for
each
use?
Do
you
have
the
breakdown.
E
V
Since
that
was
not
part
of
the
review
of
the
project,
I
don't
have
that,
but
I
can.
I
don't
have
the
numbers
off
the
top
of
my
head,
but
I
could
pull
the
plans
up
to
take
a
quick
look
at
that.
P
Okay,
I
think
you
if
it
takes
a
few
time
I'll,
ask
the
next
question.
So,
can
we
bring
up
that
modified
the
green
roof
plan?
The
the
one
that's
shown
earlier.
B
R
P
P
P
So
for
this
green
roof,
I
believe
they
are
claiming
most
of
the
green
roof
to
be
private,
open
space
if
the
city
waives
the
impact
fee,
even
if
we
waive
the
impact
fee
of,
I
don't
know
how
many
million
dollars
this
is
the
part
that
could
be
open.
This
is
a
part
that
they
would
consider
to
be
open.
That's
about
four
to
five
acres
and
it
goes
from
ground
level
to
about.
P
P
So
it's
a
sloped
area
and
so
basically
you
are
have
to
climb
up
to
that
height
right
and
those.
R
B
Let
me
call
on
pugh
here
who
has
a
hand
raised
pew,
yeah.
V
V
But
the
vice
mayor
was
growing
on.
B
V
V
It
is
about
four
acres,
I
believe
continues
to
be
about
four
acres,
but
the
the
area
the
vice
mirror
was
drawing.
It
was
a
little
it
extended
a
little
bit
further
south
than
where
the
red
marks
were
on
the
vice
mirrors.
Drawing
further.
V
P
Yeah
so
this
is,
you
could
probably
have
a
really
fun
slide,
but
you
can
really
straw
a
frisbee
or
kick
a
ball.
That's
the
kind
of
park
space
and.
B
V
B
B
B
All
right,
okay,
so
councilmember
moore
you
have.
Actually
I
realize
I
seeded
over
a
few
of
my
minutes,
so
you
actually
have
five
minutes
more.
B
Oh
sure,
as
a
councilman
remorse,
transitioning
to
the
overhead,
projector
sure
and
p,
what
are
those
numbers.
V
So
they
are
up
on
the
screen
right
now
for
residential
parking.
There's
about
2350
stalls
for
office
parking.
There
is
on
the
east
side
close
to
2925
2927,
really,
there's
shared
commercial
parking
on
the
west
side,
which
is
about
2155
and
then
there's
some
street
parking
limited
in
number
at
about
151
dollars.
U
Okay
and
thank
you
pew,
and
I
was
wondering
if
you
could
also,
if
you're
aware
of
how
many
million
square
feet
of
above
ground
residential
parking
space
and
amenity
space
was
counted
for
the
residential
side
in
the
in
the
new
plan.
I'd
be
interested
in
seeing
that
so
in
this,
in
this
section,
you
can
see
where
they
they
started.
U
Their
one-to-one
setback
line
at
the
the
through
lane
curb
line
as
opposed
to
and
then
added
in
the
two
frontage
lanes
and
didn't
start
the
the
one-to-one
setback
line
there,
which
would
have
made
the
the
whole
the
whole
building
not
comply
and
then
and
that's
and
from
what.
My
understanding
is
that
that's
that's
that's
how
they
did
it
back
in
in
2018
and
and
we
are
subject
to
that
decision
now.
What
what
bothers
me
with
this
with
this
image
that
the
public
has
given?
U
Is
that
if
I
were
to
look
at
this,
I
would
wonder
why
anybody
was
was
having
a
problem
with
this
project,
because
it
looks
like
it's
one,
two,
three,
four:
it's
only
six
stories
high.
What
are
people
complaining
about
and
then
there
was
a
the
previous
picture.
Well,
I
won't
pull
it
up,
but
you
don't
need
to
see
it
again
with
the
green
roof.
Is
that
it
because
they
shaded
to
the
balconies
and
in
concrete
areas
in
from
what
it
looks
like
the
same
or
very
similar
to
the
green
roof?
U
It's
deceptively
looking
as,
though
there's
a
lot
more
green
grass
area
and
then
there's
we
don't
exactly
know
what
the
green
roof
is
going
to
be
when
it
in
its
final
edition.
So
I
think
even
this
image
and
I
really
appreciate
peggy
griffin
for
bringing
this
up.
It
doesn't
show
us
the
full
picture
because
of
the
it's
so
small.
But
these
are
267
foot
towers
and
this
is
showing
us
two,
but
there's
actually
seven
of
these.
U
And
then
I
drew
a
little
image
of
approximately
what
1900
wolf
would
look
like
across
the
street
from
it
so
you're.
Seeing
this
there's
a
huge
difference
in
in
height
and
and
then
you
have
to
consider
the
the
impact
to
the
the
sewage
system,
storm
drain
system
and
the
the
water
system
that
this
this
project
is
is
going
to
have,
which
is
going
to
be
pretty
formidable
and-
and
I
have
to
say,
since
they
did
qualify
for
the
50
density
bonus,
I'm
almost
wishing
they.
U
B
T
Half
I'd
kind
of
like
to
to
preface
that
I
think
we
all
share
the
concerns
on
the
many
aspects.
The
job
housing
balance
the
contamination
getting
the
project
built
as
soon
as
possible,
but
making
sure
all
the
issues
are
are
looked
at
with
respect
to
the
community.
T
That
kind
of
being
said,
let's
go
back
to
the
particular
topic
that
I
thought
was
needing
to
be
addressed
and
that's
with
the
park
space.
Maybe
the
city
manager
can
bring
back
the
two
plaza
pictures.
That's
our
park
space
and
my
recollection
is
and
again
it's
recollection
because
we're
not
allowed
to
be
a
part
of
the
process.
The
recollection
is
that
their
on
the
ground
park
space
was
supposed
to
be.
I
think
six
acres
now.
D
E
Yeah,
I
think
I
think,
similar
to
the
response
to
council
member
way's
question
earlier
that
you
know
that
their
access
would
be
at
the
discretion
of
of
the
property
owner.
In
the
absence
of
some
kind.
T
Of
public
access,
it's
a
little
bit
better
than
what
I
originally
thought.
Now,
when
I
look
at
that
east
side,
one,
you
know
it's
supposed
to
be
a
total
of
about
six
acres
on
the
ground
per
my
recollection,
and
yet
I
see
what
looks
like
multiple
buildings
within
that
plaza
and
so
it
how
much
park
space
or
space
that
would
qualify
as
park
space
is
in
the
east
plaza.
That
would
be
a
question
for
city
staff
that
I'd
like
to
have
them
measure
and
ultimately
put
in
a
package
on
the
website.
T
So
our
community
knows
I'd
like
to
have
them
do
the
same
thing
for
the
west
side,
plaza,
which
I
guess
is
accessible.
If
somebody
comes
and
gets
a
hamburger
and
an
ice
cream
at
one
of
the
stores
can
then
walk
out
in
this
plaza.
But
again,
it
sure
looks
like
it's
mostly
occupied
by
buildings
again,
how
much
of
that
is
truly
park
space?
T
Not
necessarily,
you
know
concrete
barriers
and
things
of
that
nature,
but
but
park
space,
because
it
really
doesn't
look
like
there's
any
place
there
to
to
simply
have
your
dogs
run
around
and
throw
frisbees
and
stuff.
So
I
think
both
of
those
I
would
ask
that
the
city
staff
get
out
their
calipers
measure
the
amount
of
park
space
and
make
that
available
to
the
community.
T
T
And
so
I'd
like
city
staff
to
now
also
use
their
calipers
on
this.
How
much
park
space
is
now
left
in
this
rendering
and
I'd
like
it
differentiated
if
it's
fenced
off
so-called
yards
per
unit,
you
know
residential
unit
and
that's
his
little
yard
and
it's
fenced
off
then
it
in
my
view.
It
does
not
count
as
what
the
intent
of
the
general
plan
said
park
space
so
how
much
park
space
is
left
with
a
divider
between
accessible
park
space
versus
unacceptable
park
space.
T
If
a
lot
of
this
is
truly
going
to
be
fenced
so
that
nobody
can
go
across,
I'm
not
talking
about
yard
fences,
because
that
that
is
unique
to
the
unit.
We've
got.
You
know
22
stories
of
apartments,
and
yet
only
one
of
them
is
going
to
have
the
the
yard
so
to
speak
on
the
on
the
30
acre
green
roof
area
that
is
now
unaccessible
to
all
those
other
units
that
don't
have
access
to
it.
T
So
how
many
acres
are
park
space
whether
and
put
a
dividing
line
between
accessible
to
the
community,
not
accessible
to
the
community
about
a
minute
or
so
john?
And
then,
when
I
showed
the
side
view
with
the
towers
now
extending
out
over
the
park
space,
so
once
you
have
those
previous
numbers,
I
talked
about
now
the
next
level
of
computation.
T
T
T
T
How
many
workers
are
now
occupying
all
those
units,
how
many
people
are
living
in
all
those
units
and
how
much
park
space
is
there,
so
that
we
preserve
the
integrity
of
future
projects
to
make
truthful
assumptions
and
presentations
and
and
make
sure
the
community
gets
a
fair
shake.
Thank
you
for
the
extra
time
all.
B
Right,
thank
you
councilmember
wooley,
and
that
basically
concludes
our
round
and
councilmember
way.
You
did
not
use
many
of
your
minutes
actually,
so
you
still
have
a
little
under
10
minutes
remaining
of
your
15.
yeah.
So
let's
go
to
councilman
way
and
I'll
I'll.
Let
you
know
everyone
just
wrap
up
briefly
after
that
councilman.
Can
I
share
the
screen.
S
E
So
yeah,
so
the
city
has
has
never
accepted
the
the
green
roof
for
dedication
as
parkland.
That's
correct.
S
Okay,
so
when
we
met
councilman
willie
and
I
we
met
with
big
thanks
for
mayor
for
wenjit,
we
did
ask
him
about
the
park
space
and,
as
vice
mayor
circled,
the
the
place.
I
believe
that
is
going
to
be
open
to
the
public,
whether
we
accept
that
as
park
space
or
not.
That
is
my
understanding.
B
I
think
pugh
does
have
a
microphone
up.
Vice
versa.
I
know
you
wanted
to
say
something
but
you're.
This
is.
This
is.
V
Rather,
I
should
say
on
what
they
call
the
west
perimeter
park
and
that's
identified
on
sheet
e070507,
but
there
is
controlled
access
points
along
street,
a
which
the
perimeter
road
is
is
labeled
as
street.
A
on
this
map.
Okay,.
S
It
looks
like
if
we
look
carefully
as
described
below,
because
the
city
has
elected
not
to
provide
park
fee
credit
for
public
access,
easement
dedication
that
has
been
offered
over
the
open
space
areas,
including
the
plazas.
The
tentative
map
is
being
amended
to
remove
the
easement,
so
that
means
the
easement
that
the
city
has
so
that
we
have
the
right
for
our
residents
to
go
and
enjoy
the
park
space
as
we
see
it.
S
So,
given
the
applicant's
interest
in
providing
a
parkland
solution
for
the
product
deficit
east
side
of
cupertino,
these
areas
will
continue
to
provide
community
gathering
space,
collect
connectivity
and
opportunities
for
community
events.
I'm
going
to
skip
all
this
and
go
back
to
the
last
sentence.
The
public
access
easement
and
the
property
rights
such
as
easement
would
afford.
The
public
could
be
restored
if
the
city
agrees
to
provide
park
fee
credit
as
originally
envisioned,
I'm
not
going
to
back
to
the
original
envision,
because
I
don't
know
what
that
was.
S
I
wasn't
there
when
it's
approved,
but
I
have
it
gives
me
hope
that
if
we
really
like
park
space
can,
can
you
put
up
the
map
the
new
map,
because
I
love
when
I
go
to
new
york.
I
I
love
to
walk
the
highland.
It's
a
great
long,
walk.
You
can
walk
across
stores,
of
course
across
you
know,
companies
and
overseeing
streets,
and
I
had
a
lot
of
high
hope
that
this
could
provide
that,
and
I
know
councilman
really
really
likes
it.
S
Yes,
so
it
I
really
I
if
I
understand
correctly
they
according
to
our
conversation
with
them,
they
will
make
this
part
open
for
the
public,
whether
we
give
them
a
credit
or
not.
But
what
I
really
love
is
a
walkway
that
we
can
walk
around
like
the
highland.
You
know
we
can
walk
around
walk
back
and
it's
just
really
nice.
A
long
walk
overseeing
companies
streets,
but
it
looks
like
we're
not
getting
that
because
they
are,
they
got
rid
of
the
eastman
because
we're
not
ready
to
negotiate.
S
So
what
I'm
saying
is,
I
do
believe
this
project
is
ministerially
approved.
There
are
a
lot
of
things.
We
cannot
change
and
a
lot
of
them.
A
lot
of
us
don't
like
certain
features
of
the
project,
especially
the
height,
and
I
don't
like
that
either.
But
I
do
think
there
are
quite
a
few
things
we
might
be
able
to
negotiate
or
collaborate
and
get
the
community
input
so
that
we
could
get
something
that
we
love.
So
I
have
hopeful,
I
hope.
Maybe
we
could
do
that.
S
I
don't
know
if
that's
possible
with
under
mayor's
leadership
or
you
know,
because
you
did
open
up
conversations
with
us
to
them
individually.
So
I
wonder
if
there
is
room
we
can
make
this
project
a
little
bit
better
for
our
residents,
so
we
get
something
we
want
right
and
as
for
dark
sky
and
the
bird
safety
environmental
issues,
what
I
would
like
to
say
to
send
to
sandhill
and
to
read
more,
is
you
know?
S
Let's
make
this:
if
san
hill
is
a
proud
and
reputable
international
developer,
it
would
want
to
advance
climate
actions,
it
would
want
to
be
environmental
stewardship
and
it
would
want
to
be
us
not
just
cupertino
residents,
maybe
worldwide,
say
wow.
They
didn't
have
to
do
this,
but
they
are
environmental
stewardship.
They
understand
the
importance
of
climate
actions
that
they
would
do
this,
because
it's
the
right
thing
to
do
so:
I'm
hoping
that
with
community
input
with
everyone's,
you
know
input
to
them
that
they
would
be
that
developer.
S
That
has
that
environmental
stewardship
that
they'll
do
it
on
their
own,
and
I'm
hoping
that
that
could
happen
and
for
other
things
I
think
we
might
be
able
to
still
negotiate
something
in
there.
Even
though
there
are
a
lot
of
things,
we
cannot
control.
There
are
things
we
don't
like,
but
it
is
things
we
cannot
change.
I'm
reading
a
lot
of
things
online.
S
If
we
can
accept
things
that
we
cannot
change
but
move
forward
with
something
that
we
can
change,
then
we
can
make
a
project
better
for
our
residents
and
I
think
it's
our
responsibility
as
city
council
members
to
think
about
what
our
residents
want
and
for
things
we
cannot
change.
How
can
we
make
it
better?
How
can
we
open
up
our
partnerships
collaborations
and
and
make
it
better
for
our
residents.
B
So,
okay,
thank
you
very
much.
Councilmember
way,
you
know
I'll
go
ahead
and
you
know
go
first
on
unwrapping.
I
I
I
want
to
make
it
clear.
You
know
the
rhetoric
about
my
leadership.
B
Basically,
you
know
driven
largely
by
financial
interests
and
and
going
to
say
you
know,
I
I
think
at
the
end
of
the
day,
this
is
great
when
in
fact
that's
kind
of
the
easy
way
out.
So
you
know
to
to
to
the
points
you
know
that
have
been
made
tonight.
I
think
we
all
contribute
to
that.
You
know
process
of
trying
to
make
something
better,
but
I
think
some
of
us
contribute
in
sort
of
this
fashion
that
drives
other
people
to
actually
do
the
work.
B
You
know
and
the
work
really
is
if,
if
it's,
if
it's
not
clear
that
there
are
aspects
to
a
particular
project
that
are
extremely
challenging
and
the
financial
interests
are
there
to
go
ahead,
and
you
know
kind
of
obscure
those
those
those
challenges,
then
we
really
need
to
go
to
the
drawing
board
and
we
we
need
to.
We
need
to
be
very
firm
and
when
it
comes
to
toxic
contamination,
you
know
the
true
pressures
upon
housing,
the
pressures
upon
infrastructure.
Those
are
those
are
the
hard
climbs
here,
and
so
I
I
don't.
B
I
don't
think
we
should
be
like
pollyanna
and
you
know
think
that
we
can.
Ultimately,
you
know,
get
quoted
and
and
not
actually
you
know
call
out
the
people
that
are
really
doing
the
the
tough
climbs.
So
so
I
think
at
the
end
of
all
of
this,
what
I
can
say
is
that,
in
terms
of
trying
to
make
sure
that
you
know
we,
we
get
the
maximum
types
of
alleviations
of
some
of
these
pressures.
B
I
I
I
think
there
are
a
lot
of
different
ways
of
looking
at
you
know
a
complicated
equation.
This
this
project
probably
gives
us
at
least
a
dozen
really
complicated.
You
know
issues,
housing
and
transit,
and
you
know
infrastructure,
there's
only
a
few
of
them
but
like
if
you
look
at
the
park
dedication,
I
think
it's
probably
right
that
you
know
the
space
is
gonna,
be
there,
you
know,
and
there
are
a
lot
of
things
that
we
can
be
doing
with
park
fees.
We
should
be
fighting
for
park
fees.
B
We
should
optimize
the
park,
the
transportation,
even
even
the
affordable
housing
fees.
I
I
think
they're
they're
quite
justified
because
of
the
original
analysis
that
got
us
to
this
point.
You
know,
but,
but
I
I
do
want
to
be
really
clear.
We
need
to
have
a
community
conversation
that
is
a
bit
less
snarky
at
the
end
of
the
day.
I
I
mean
this
to
everyone,
but
let's
not
perpetuate
this.
I
mean
this
is
not
necessary
to
create
a
situation
where
we
can
play
this.
You
know
now
260
foot
game
of
gotcha.
B
You
know
this
is
one
of
these
things
where
you
know
we
we've
we've
gone
a
few
bridges
too
far
in
the
in
this
conversation.
So
you
know
thank
you,
for
you
know
everyone
in
their
work,
and
this
is
a
cohesive
whole
at
the
end
of
the
day.
But
you
know
we,
we
have
had
a
long,
a
long
journey
to
get
to
this
point
and
there's
going
to
be.
You
know,
I
think,
probably
much
longer
by
three
or
even
four
or
fivefold
to
get
get
to
resolution
here.
B
So
thanks
for
entertaining
that
I'll
go
ahead
and
open
this
up
to
anyone
else.
Who
has
some
closing
comments
for
this
study
session?
Vice
mayor
chow,
then
councilman
moore.
P
So,
regarding
the
rooftop
access,
I
specifically
had
discussed
discussion
with
read
mode:
the
trail
that
you
are
envisioning
council
member
way.
They
are
all
private
open
space.
P
P
P
P
P
And
then
I
think
there
was
invading
the
bike
trail
going
underground
to
the
other
side
of
the
wolf.
So
that's
also
no
no
easement
proper
easement,
so
they
can
close
that
too.
P
P
V
At
this
point,
there
are
no,
there
is
no
fencing
proposed
along
around
the
plazas
to
keep
people
out.
Presumably
they
wish
for
this
project
to
be
a
success
which
would
you
know
imagine
that
these
spaces
would
be
open
to
the
public
before
use.
V
The
other
open
space
is
a
pretty
much
private
open
space,
except
for
potentially
the
commercial,
balconies
and
terraces,
but
even
that
is
possibly
the
ones
for
the
office
space,
so
that
would
all
be
private,
open
space
for
the
users
of
that
space.
The
community
open
space
may
or
may
not
be
open
depending
on
how
they
envision
the
project
work.
P
So
we
don't
currently
have
any
objective
standard
on
the
amount
of
open
public
open
space.
A
project
has
to
provide
right.
V
Well,
for
this
one,
there
was
a
specific
plan
that
was
envisioned
and
not
in
the
specific
plan.
It
did
talk
about
six
secrets
of
open
space.
B
And
did
you
want
to
wrap
you
have
another
half
a
minute
or
so.
P
Yeah,
I
think
I
would
just
want
on.
I
think
another
thing
is
with
the
ash
tree
along
stephen's
creek:
are
they
all
going
to
be
cut
down
the.
V
I
believe
there
are
12
additional
trees
that
are
proposed
to
be
cut
down
along
wolf
road,
some
of
which
are
the
ash
trees.
V
I
don't
believe,
there's
anything
impacted
along
stephen's
creek.
At
this
point,
however,
the
the
the
curbs
and
that
such
are
fairly
close
to
some
of
these
ash
trees.
They
are
trying
to
keep
as
many
as
possible,
so
unless
they're
in
direct
conflict,
they
aren't
supposed
to
be
removed.
At
this
time,.
P
Okay,
that's
good
to
know
yeah.
Thank
you.
I
think
the
main
point
is
we
need.
We.
People
should
know
that
with
sp
35,
it
undercuts
a
lot
of
existing
process
that
we
use
for
any
other
regular
projects,
and
then
this
part,
this
version
of
the
amendment
actually
reduced
a
lot
of
public
benefits
that
they
had
even
in
the
last
one,
and
there
is
nothing
the
city
can
do,
and
they
can
do
another
amendment
and
two
and
make
it
even
worse.
U
Thank
you.
I
have
a
question
about
the
the
roadway
easements
which
we
have
around
tji
fridays
and
the
former
alexanders
those.
How
much
is
the
city
being
paid
for
those
easements
since
easements
are
worth
money
and
they
do
provide
really
good
access
to
the
simeon
property
on
the
west
side
and
to
the
hyatt
house
on
the
east
side?
U
So
I
would
think
that
both
of
those
property
owners
would
want
to
ensure
that
those
roadway
easements
were
maintained
in
place,
and
when
we
went
back
to
the
original
tentative
subdivision
map,
there
was
an
option
that
if
the
city
did
not
choose
to,
let
those
easements
go
that
there
was
going
to
be
an
alternative
plan
and
when
they
got
to
the
final
approved
set
from
the
city.
That
plan
was
not
included
in
it,
but
it
was
referenced.
U
How
much
money
have
you
negotiated
for
us
for
the
city
to
receive
for
them,
and
then
I
want
to
mention
also
that
the
first,
the
parkland
I'm
coming
up
with
130
million
dollars
for
using
the
the
13.08
cmc
calculation
using
1.8
times
the
2402
times,
10
million
per
acre
divided
by
a
thousand,
so
the
actual
value
of
the
park
land
they
should
be
providing
is
about
130
million
dollars,
and
I
think
the
public
should
be
aware
of
that
that
it's
a
it's.
U
U
Don't
we
don't
even
have
an
image
of
what
it
would
be
like
to
drive
down
wolf
road
when
this
project
is
completed,
I'm
disappointed
with
the
low
turnout
that
we
have
here
and
I
I
just
simply
don't
know
that
the
people
are
totally
informed
about
what
what's
going
to
be
happening
in
the
future.
So
going
back
to
the
the
easements.
If
I
could
have
some
information
about
that
for
how
much
money
the
city
has
negotiated
for
them,.
E
So
the
city
isn't
giving
away
the
easements
the
easements
are
being
relocated.
Pursuant
to
the
the
tentative
map
process
that's
outlined
in
sb-35
and
that
the
you
know
the
easements
will
be
formally
vacated
and
dedicated
at
the
new
location
when
the
final
map
is
approved.
U
B
Customer
board
are
you?
Are
you
completed?
Oh
yeah,
I'm
done
okay.
Vice
mayor
ciao.
Before
we
go
back
to
you,
I'm
gonna
check
in
with
council
member
willie
and
councilmember
way
did
either
of
you
have
any
closing
comments.
T
Yeah
so,
and
how
long
do
we
get
for
the
closing
comments?
Four
and
a
half
minutes?
Oh
wow,
great.
Thank
you,
mayor
yeah.
To
me
this.
This
presentation
tonight
was
really
long
overdue
per
the
staff
report.
T
You
know
the
revised
plan
you
know
was
put
in
march
24th,
and
this
is
the
first
that
we
in
the
community
have
been
able
to
discuss
it
together
and
the
deadline
is
friday,
so
long
overdue,
and
so,
in
my
view,
so
important
to
the
community
that
they
know
we're
looking
over
everything
trying
to
do
whatever
we
can
for
them
I'll
sidestep
for
a
couple
minutes-
and
you
know
for
a
couple
minutes-
and
that
is,
I
truly
believe
this
city
council
wants
the
project
to
move
along.
T
Is
there
is
there?
You
know
some
thinking
that
we
don't
want
that?
Well,
westport
came
to
the
city
council
and
the
first
time
back
in
whatever
was
2016
and
the
previous
city
council
looked
at
it
from
the
outside.
I
looked
at
it
and
it
looked
exactly
like
what
the
developer
was
doing
in
valco.
T
The
westport
developer
was
copying
that
we
can
make
this
dense
this
tall
office
buildings
and,
of
course,
the
city
council,
had
a
huge
problem
with
it.
The
community
had
a
huge
problem
with
it.
It
was
office,
it
was
office.
We
already
have
a
a
a
lot
of
traffic
during
traffic
hours.
We
have
residents
telling
us
that
they
come
off
of
out
of
their
house
on
foothill
expressway
and
come
down
through
cupertino
in
what
should
be
a
10
minute
drive.
Is
you
know,
40
minutes?
T
Westport
got
approved
by
this
city
council
with
a
five
zero
vote
and
it's
a
housing
project.
He
brought
it
to
us
as
the
housing
project
and
we
made
our
comments.
He
met
with
each
one
of
us.
I
made
my
comments
about
access
to
the
the
inner
park
area
and
he
brought
it
to
us
and
we
gave
him
the
feedback
and
he
had
said
that
he
wanted
to
reduce
the
the
retail
from
twenty
thousand
square
feet
down
to
eight
thousand
square
feet.
T
He
only
had
five
bmr
units,
but
he
wanted
all
the
waivers
and
wanted
to
take
the
height
up
to
90
feet
rather
than
the
allowed
45,
and
we
we
talked.
We
told
him
what
we
felt
the
concerns
of
the
residents
would
be
and
he
went
off
and
made
adjustments
and
when
he
brought
it
back,
the
three
developers
that
were
then
going
to
be
purchasing
each
one
con.
One
portion
of
that
project
said
wow
we're
happy
with
the
improvements
one
more
minute.
T
Yeah,
the
the
number
of
units
for
the
bmr
and
for
the
senior
got
increased,
something
on
the
order
of
like
27
memory
care
units,
the
8,
000
square
feet
of
retail
got
put
back
and
the
access
to
the
inner
green
was
was
increased
and
those
three
developers
that
then
bought
those
sections
in
my
memory
all
said,
wow
we
really
like
this
project,
so
the
the
job
that
we
do
up
here
is
intended
to
to
help
foster
that
had
we
that
night
first
night
that
it
came
to
us
and
we
made
those
those
comments
and
he
went
back
had
we
approved
it
that
night
there
would
there
would
not
be
those
additional
benefits.
T
I
think
the
the
memory
care
units
have
been
already
put
in
by
that
night,
but
the
retail
got
put
back
in
the
access
to
the
inner
green
got
got
installed
and
he
ultimately
sold
all
three
of
those
proportions.
Please
wrap
kills
made
his
large
profit
and
we
would
be
happy
happy
to
do
that
same
type
of
process
here
yeah,
it's
not
a
slam.
Dunk
we're
going
to
look
at
how
it
fits
with
the
community
and
then
approve
a
project
and
then
help
it
get
moved
along
as
fast
as
possible.
Thank
you.
Councilman.
B
I'm
going
to
ask
that
we
conclude
the
wraps,
so
we've
all
had
a
chance
to
speak
a
step.
Counselor
way,
did
you
okay,
counsel,
my
way
and.
A
B
I'll
bring
it
back
vice
mayor
ciao,
you
you
seem
to
have
you
know
and
pressing
urge
to
speak
and
so
we'll
bring
it
back
after
council
member
way
makes
her
wrapping
up.
S
Yeah,
so
I'm
just
listening
to
council
member
willie
and
I
totally
agree-
you
know-
have
our
council
and
our
residents
work
with
developers.
That's
the
ideal
thing
to
do
so.
I
still
consider
myself
pretty
new,
even
almost
two
years
on
the
job.
So
what
I
vowed-
and
I
think
every
council
should
do-
is
avoid
another
sb
35
project.
S
And
I
understand
this
velco
project
is
not
an
idea
project.
If
we
have
a
current.
Our
current
general
plan
allows
for
1.2
million
square
footage
of
retail
plus
389
units
of
housing
up
to
600
with
density
bonus.
That's
also
going
to
bring
jobs
and
and
and
so
not
what
I'm
trying
to
say
is
not
pro.
Every
project
is
not
an
ideal
project
and
I
still
have
hope
that
our
council
and
residents
can
work
with
the
rights
and
make
a
better
programming
within
the
project.
That's
there
to
represent
our
residents
to
the
best
we
can.
S
B
Well,
thank
you
very
much
customer
way
and
then
I
can
vice
mayor.
What
is
it
that
you
wanted
to
go
over
as
we've
had.
A
P
B
To
five
minutes
you
know,
I
think,
to
be
fair
to
everyone,
since
you
already
had
that
opportunity
to
wrap.
Let's
just
go
ahead,
if
everyone's
okay
with
it
to
provide
you
three
minutes.
A
P
Is
that
workable
all
right
go
ahead?
So,
okay,
I
guess
I'll
skip
my
question.
I
think
the
problem
here
we
have
is
not
sb35
problem
is
we
have
a
site?
We
have
given
them
two
million
square
feet
of
office
without
building
height
and
objective
standards.
What
we
need
is
to
strengthen
objective
standards
across
our
municipal
code
so
that,
whatever
project
that
comes
along,
we
can
control
whether
there
will
be
sb
certified
project
or
not,
and
I
have
a
good
good
friend
who
supports
pr
falco
and
he
told
me
he's
profoundly
housing.
P
There
should
be
comparable
amount
of
affordable
and
market
rate
housing.
That's
what
made
the
therefore,
this
kind
of
ministry
sp
35
project
is
supposed
to
build
up,
but
we
don't
have
that
we
have
a
mini,
a
very
small
amount
of
affordable
housing
in
terms
of
units.
Yes,
but
in
terms
of
square
footage,
it's
minimal,
so
one
minute
housing
for
affordable
housing
you
have
to
as
council
members.
We
need
to
continue
to
push
like
westport
because
of
we
pushed
eventually.
P
We
have
a
better
project
with
more
units
and
then
we
maintain
the
retail
retail
space
we
have.
If
we
don't
push.
If
we
keep
saying:
okay,
okay,
okay,
we
are
not
going
to
get
a
better
project,
so
it's
our
obligation
to
push
to
get
a
better
project
and
I
think
that's
the
application
of
this
council.
Thank
you.
B
All
right,
well,
thanks
very
much
everyone
for
really
quite
an
excellent
meeting
tonight.
It
was
a
good
check
in
this
was
a
special
meeting,
and
so
we
don't
have
any
further
items
on
our
agenda.
I
will
remind
everyone
that
we
have
a
regularly
scheduled
council
meeting
one
week
from
tonight.
That
starts
at
6
45
pm.
Unless
we
have
a
study
session.
Actually
I
think
that
it
might
start
at
either
5
or
5
30.,
so
check
your
agenda
that
should
come
out
tomorrow
or
the
next
day.
Thank
you
very
much.
Everyone
and
meeting
adjourned.