►
Description
Coverage of the Joint Planning Commission/Housing Commission meeting of Tuesday, June 28, 2022 (Part 2 of 2)
A
C
D
A
B
F
E
So
I
believe
that
the
school
district
made
a
decision
to
close
Ragnar.
At
least
that
is
what
our
understanding
is
based
on
Public
Information,
and
that
the
the
attendance
area
in
Ragnar
to
split
between
Lincoln
Elementary
and
Blue
Hills
Elementary,
but
that
is-
or
at
least
they
have
the
option
of
picking
where
they
would
go
to
with
that
said
currently
based
on
the
tier
one
sites,
I
think
there's
268
units
in
the
South
De
Anza
area,
but
the
tier
two
sites,
if
included,
would
certainly
increase
that
number.
E
F
G
A
B
A
I
A
A
E
A
B
A
B
To
get
to
that
home
page
because
we're
a
hub
rather
than
the
main
page
and
until
Google
tracks
us
going
to
this
page,
often
enough,
that's
what
you
see
with
Google
so
I
want
to
make
that
clear.
But
from
this
page
you
can
still
go
to
these
other
other
pages.
So
this
is
the
part
that
I
want
you
to
see.
We
have
taken
you'll.
B
This
will
be
familiar
to
you
because
it
was
part
of
the
attachment
at
tonight's
meeting,
and
so
this
is
the
main
page
for
for
the
sites
surveys,
and
you
can
see
here
with
each
of
the
neighborhood
areas.
Just
like
we
were
describing
so
say
you
wanted
to
go
to
the
South
De
Anza
and
share
a
comment
about
a
particular
site.
This
is
sort
of
an
overview
map,
but
then
you
can
see
at
each
site
we
describe
with
the
address
the
APN.
B
B
B
B
B
B
A
B
I
appreciate
that
so,
for
instance,
if
if
there
is
a
decision
to
move
forward
with
a
tier
two
project,
this
is
where
you
can,
where
we
can
add
those
units.
So
we
have
it
described
as
a
tier
two,
so
for
11a,
11b
and
11c,
we
can
either
look
at
it
on
the
map.
Oh
thank
you.
David
I,
just
always
use
the
scroll,
so
I
realized
I.
Was
there
so
there's
11a.
A
F
K
A
C
A
L
J
F
F
F
L
A
Okay,
so
I,
like
the
suggestion.
Let's
look
at
each
area,
have
public
comment
on
each
area
and
then
bring
it
back
to
the
Commissioners
to
see
if
anything
needs
to
be
removed
or
if
any
tier
two
needs
to
be
added
Okay.
So
everyone
watching
we
are
on
South
Blaney.
These
are
the
six
tier
ones
and
the
one
tier
two
I
believe
I
believe
the
tier
2
is
the
chamber.
Commerce
building
is
that
true.
A
A
M
All
right,
I
was
gonna
talk
about
18d
and
18c
on
Dion's,
sorry,
Stevens,
Creek
and
oh
God,
by
the
high
school.
But
this
one
are
we
going
to
eliminate
the
Walgreens
I
mean
we're
already
losing
yamagami's,
which
is
just
that's
horrible.
Absolutely
awful
hcd
is
destroying
our
city.
I
I
can't
even
put
this
into
words.
It
is
making
me
so
upset,
but
we
cannot
lose
the
Walgreens
that
has
to
stay.
You
I
had
a
mother
in
the
hospital
for
a
week
and
we
had
to
go
and
get
medical
stuff
for
her
I.
M
Don't
care
what
HCG
thinks
of
the
people
in
this
city,
but
we
still
deserve
medical
and
Medicine
that
we
can't
drive
it
through
their
stupid
heads
that
we
have
to
have
amenities
in
this
city,
so
they
have
to
keep
the
Walgreens.
What
is
the
plan
for
that
and
I
can't
I?
Don't
you
know
if
we
have
to
take
this
to
the
state
level
and
vote
on
and
get
rid
of
this
dumb
Governor?
This
is
what
we're
going
to
have
to
do,
because
we
cannot
eliminate
hospitals
and
medical
complexes
and
Walgreens
in
this
city.
A
Okay,
thank
you
Jennifer.
You
know.
I
just
want
to
point
out
that
it's
up
to
the
property
owner
what
they
want
to
keep
and
what
they
want
to
get
rid
of.
We
don't
really
have
control
of
it
and
you
know
Jennifer.
You
are
right.
We
are
going
to
lose
a
lot
of
you
know
retail
and
Commercial,
and
you
know
there's
not
a
lot.
We
can
really
do
about
it,
but
go
ahead.
Peggy.
N
Thank
you.
I
wanted
politely
disagree
with
you
mayor
chairman,
sharp
11c
is
the
properties
at
De,
Anza
and
Bollinger
people
aren't
being
able
to
follow
this.
This
is
all
pretty
confusing.
11A
is
the
shopping
center
at
Bollinger
and
Blaney,
and
then
11b
is
the
Chamber
of
Commerce
building.
But
these
two
are
a
retail
and
you
can
insist
that
the
square
footage
that
currently
exists
for
retail
continue
to
be
there.
That
bottom
floor
is
strictly
retail
and
don't
say
chat.
Should
it
should
be,
shall
use
the
right
words
make
it
happen.
N
This
is
in
the
Eaton
School
District,
which
has
a
low
enrollment.
So
that
would
be
good,
but
you
should
also
look
at
if
they
exercise
density
bonus.
What
will
we
result
in
and
then
maybe
is
that
realistic
at
this
site,
but
please
put
in
the
controls
to
keep
our
retail
and
particularly
Walgreens,
we're
losing
the
pharmacies
and
in
an
emergency
will
pay
for
it.
Thank
you.
E
K
A
F
Yes,
go.
The
biggest
point
is
still
valid
because
that
strip
around
the
Walgreens
is
a
retail
strip.
So
I
think
you
know
if
you
want
to
have
any
retail
at
all
in
the
city
we
have
to.
You
know,
make
sure
that
you
know
those
that
are
getting.
You
know
up
zoned
for
residential
does.
Indeed
you
know
have
some
detail
there.
The
ground
floor.
E
We
don't
have
a
Citywide
policy
regarding
retail
on
the
bottom
and
an
extra
level,
but
I
will
say
two
things
actually
two
words
State
density
bonus.
We
can
a
certainly
place
a
restrictions
on
how
much
commercial
we
want
I
mean
with
with,
even
if
we
disregarded
retail
studies
or
what
have
you.
Let's
say
we
wanted
50
000
square
feet
of
retail
to
replace.
E
What's
there
I'm,
not
sure
how
much
is
there,
but
if
we
did
have
a
policy
that
said,
You
shall
provide
50,
000
square
feet
of
retail
at
this
location
density.
Bonus
law
will
provide
as
long
as
they're
providing
our
minimum
BMR
requirements.
It
does
give
them
a
incentives
and
those
incentives
could
be
that
they
are
going
to
save
money
by
not
providing
retail
and
that's
all
the
justification
that
they
will
potentially
need
to
not
provide
them
out
of
retail
that
we
put
into
our
policies
and
regulations.
G
C
Sorry
about
that
I
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we
protect
our
sales
tax
revenue,
so
those
retail
commercial
spaces.
We
just
have
to
be
very
careful
when
we
change
those
zones,
and
so
we
we
can,
we
can
do
we.
We
just
need
to
make
sure
we
protect
some
of
those
areas,
because
we
we
won't
have
retail
tax
revenue
and
I.
Think
that's
going
to
be
an
important
Topic
in
the
next
few
weeks.
G
So
that
was
exactly
my
suggestion
was
to
put
in
mixed
use
so
retail
on
the
bottom
and
then
housing
on
top,
so
that
you
get
the
city
gets
the
revenue.
You
don't
lose
out
on
the
revenue.
The
the
people
that
live
in
the
community
have
resources
to
use.
You
know,
restaurants,
pharmacies
stores,
you
know
neighborhood.
So
that's
that's.
A
A
O
A
L
So
this
is
I
I
wanted
to
get
a
clarification,
is
the
whole
Tintin
Market
construct
one
parcel
or
multiple
parcels,
and
if
there's
one
owner
or
multiple
owners-
and
would
he
be
interested
in
kind
of
you
know,
using
the
passes
in
a
different
way.
So
you
know,
there's
always
a
creative
way
to
solve
the
problem,
because
you
know
he
can.
He
can
have
two
parsers
still
having
the
you
know,
retail
the
other
password
he
can
use
completely
for
extension.
So
that's
what
I
wanted.
Q
Hi
there,
a
quick
question:
has
anybody
looked
at
the
property
that
is
directly
to
the
west
of
the
tin
tin
shopping
center?
It
is
a
two
and
a
half
acre
small
Church,
that's
made
up
of
in
essence.
Probably
95
of
it
is
raw
land,
I,
don't
know
if
anybody's
reached
out
to
them.
That's
a
question
number
two
I
think
it's
a
very
important
discussion
relative
to
that
commercial.
The
city
wants
to
retain
and
what
they're
willing
to
give
up
to
get
housing.
I
think
that
the
more.
Q
The
city
can
be
on
this
interaction
for
landowners.
The
better
you
know,
I
know,
State
density
law
does
give
a
lot
of
benefits
to
developers.
It
also
comes
with
some
some
inherent
costs
associated
with
it.
So
it's
not
just
simply
a
lever
that
market
rate
developers
will
pull.
There's
there's
certain
challenges
as
well
with
that,
but
I
would
say
in
respect
to
the
property
owner
questionnaires.
I'm
curious.
If
Taco,
the
Taco
Bell
sites
have
gotten
that,
because
I
think
it's
it's
one
thing
to
ask
a
property
owner
in
Cupertino:
hey.
Q
Would
you
like
to
have
housing?
It's
probably
one
of
the
best
areas
in
the
country
to
build
housing.
The
likely
answer
is
yes,
but
in
the
context
of,
is
there
anything
on
the
property
now
that
precludes
housing
from
being
developed
in
the
next
eight
years,
such
as
leases
or
options
on
those
leases
for
tenants,
I'm
curious
visit
that
question
to
the
property
owners
is
being
asked
in
that
specific
context
relative
to
just
hey.
Do
you
want
to
build
house?
Thank
you
very
much.
O
R
So
that's
another
economic
issue,
I
have
concerned
about
so
like
to
get
some
visibility
on
that,
and
the
last
thing
is
one
of
the
things
I
did
not
see
on.
This
was
the
Lehigh
property,
because
there's
been
talk
about
developing
a
portion
of
Lehigh
property
for
years.
In
fact,
even
ever
since
1992
for
housing
and
it's
becoming
more
of
a
reality,
the
county
has
has
talked
about
that
property,
potentially
being
devotional
property
being
developed
for
housing
and
I.
A
R
It
would
be
I
mean,
ostensibly
it
would
be
annexed.
I
mean
it's
so
surprised,
maybe
I
guess
Preston
did
wind
up
getting
annexed
into
when
it
was
Los
Altos.
At
one
time,
questions
well
I'm
hearing
a
shaking
head
seeing
a
shaking
hand
because
I
remember
the
question:
neighborhood
was
going
to
be
annexed
from
Los
Altos
to
City.
A
Oh
so
I
would
like
City
attorney
Wu.
If
you
could
comment,
is
there
any
way
to
require
a
site
to
include
commercial
if
it's
they,
if
it's
a
housing
element
site
or
if
it
isn't,
if
the
tntn,
if
Pacific
Rim
Plaza
wanted
to
do
the
15
units
per
acre
I
mean,
could
we
require
that
they
can
continue
to
include
commercial.
I
And
share
for
me,
I,
think
I
think
that's
noted
and
discussed
here.
You
know
it's
it's
first,
we
start
with
our
current
zoning
laws
and
it
gets
complicated
because
the
various
benefits
that
they
might
get
from
density
bonuses
and
so
I.
My
my
thought
here
is:
you
know
we
focus
on
the
site,
selections
and,
to
the
extent
that
you
have
interest
in
these
various
policies.
S
A
S
Well,
the
reason
I
needed
to
know
that
is
because
someone
asked
the
hype
and
and
I
think
someone
answered
three
or
four
it's
four,
according
to
this
page
13..
But
if
you
it's
really
hard
to
to
remember
what
your
comments
are
going
to
be
and
the
questions
when
you
don't
have
all
the
information
in
one
place
it
it's
really
hard,
but
anyway,
I
I,
appreciate
I,
won't
hardly
the
comments
about
walkability
and
the
loss
of
retail,
which
we
already
don't
have
any
of,
and
the
loss
of
yamagami
is
a
bit
disappointing.
A
B
T
T
I,
just
a
quick
minute
I
had
a
suggestion
to
keep
the
retail
and
since
the
owners
are
going
to
likely,
lose
it
and
to
get
the
bonus
we,
this
is
I,
think
where
we
can
add
and
change
policy
to
get
what
we
want,
and
so
what?
If
we
change
the
policy
to
incentivize
heavily
discount
the
fees
so
that
the
they
will
not
consider
re
losing
the
retail
and
the
city
could
consider
how
much
money
they're
going
to
make
in
the
future
so
I'm
proposing.
T
The
either
the
bonus
or
that
they
can
have
the
bonus,
and
still
we
can
still
keep
the
beat
retail
I,
don't
know
if
that's
possible,
but
I'm
saying
this
is
where
we
can
apply
or
change
policy
or
to
something
like
this
to
incentivize
them.
The
attorney
suggested
that,
and
he
also
suggested
that
that
we
could
do
something
to
and
keep
make
it
more
favorable
for
them
to
keep
it.
T
O
I
Yeah
I
just
finally
re-emphasize
that
same
point,
which
is
we're
it's
we're
agenda,
is
to
select
sites
here
tonight
and
you
know
there's.
This
is
a
a
great
discussion,
but
discussions
about
policies,
I
think,
is
probably
abruptly
made
at
some
other
meeting
and
maybe
with
the
council's
input
as
well
or
for
you
to
provide
that
input.
That
guidance
and
that
recommendation
to
the
council,
but
for
here
tonight
is
to
select
sites
on
which
two
to
to
to
to
develop.
A
A
while
I
know
how
crazy
the
residents
behind
that
shopping
center
went
just
when
there
was
a
proposal
for
a
cellular
tower
on
top
of
the
tntn
market,
and
you
know
I,
don't
think
it's
a
good
idea
to
allow
no
four
stories
here.
Plus
you
know
the
density
bonus,
I,
think
I
think
it's
appropriate
at
the
15
units
per
acre
and
the
town
homes
would
be
appropriate
for
that
parcel.
A
F
Yeah
so
right,
yeah
I,
like
you
know,
chair
sharp
suggestion.
So
let's
go
with
that.
You
know
we
need
to
be
sensitive
to
the
the
neighbors
like,
even
though
they're
not
here
right,
so
we
live
in
the
city
like
so
we
are
here
to
serve
the
community
as
well,
as
you
know,
meet
the
the
needs
of
you
know.
What's
being
asked
of
us
right.
A
A
A
A
A
F
K
C
Why
you
guys
are
doing
that?
I
do
have
a
question
right
so
so
we
make
it
a
housing
element
site,
but
it's
it's
not.
We
haven't
changed
the
zoning
on
that
as
all
at
all
right
or
does
that
does?
Does
it
making
it
a
housing
element
site
change?
The
zoning
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
those
two
are
no.
C
O
C
O
O
A
C
C
A
A
J
Okay,
I
just
want
to
point
out
that
that
whatever
the
property
tax
is
that
that
doesn't
outweigh
the
taxes
you
get
from
the
retail
I
mean
I
I'm,
not
saying
you
should
not
keep
the
retail.
The
retail
is
very
important
at
this
site.
I
I
agree
with
all
the
comments
there,
but
from
the
perspective
of
a
sales
tax
and
what
not
I
mean
the
amount
of
the
money
you
will
get
from
the
property
tax
on
by
making
this
residential
is
that
Equitable
to
what
the
retail
taxes
you
will
get?
C
C
A
D
A
A
C
K
A
A
C
P
O
C
H
P
F
Yeah
so
chat
sharp,
so
I
I
want
to
make
a
recommendation.
So
for
each
section,
let's,
you
know,
put
up
the
spreadsheet
and
you
know
open
up
for
residents.
You
know,
let's,
let's
take
the
time
for
residents,
yeah
right
and
then
come
back
to
the
all
of
us,
and
you
know
one
minute,
each
or
whatever.
Then.
A
A
A
A
P
A
O
K
U
O
A
A
A
A
M
Yeah,
okay,
that's
okay!
Go
ahead!
Jennifer!
Oh
my
God,
I'm
gonna
lose
my
mind.
Yeah
these.
You
know
I'm
glad
the
apartments
are
tier
two
because
they
just
remodeled
those
apartments.
Like
a
couple
of
years
ago,
I
had
to
sit
through
the
whole
thing,
and
you
know:
I
I'd
be
really
concerned
that
if
you'd
have
to
kick
all
those
people
out
to
just
add
50
Apartments
there
I
I
I'm,
really
really.
M
This
whole
thing
is
like
let's
do
everything
possible
to
uproot
every
single
person
and
destroy
the
way
of
life
in
Cupertino
and
I,
really
if
you've
got
people
with
children,
these
are
large
units
with
children
in
there
and
you're
gonna
like
kick
them
all
out
and
just
add
50
extra
Apartments.
Where
are
these
people
gonna
go
I,
mean
and
believe
me,
those
are
market
rate
Apartments,
they're,
probably
putting
in
2500
dollars
a
month
to
lease
those
places.
So
we
have
to
remember
that
these
are
not
low-income
people.
M
They
are
struggling
very
hard
to
stay
there
and
they
want
to
keep
their
kids
in
the
school
and
I
really
I.
Don't
think
hcd
gives
a
quiz
about
anybody
in
California.
They
just
want
to
make
their
little
money,
but
they
don't
care
that
they're
kicking
families
and
children's
out
of
schools,
but
I,
don't
you
know
believe
me
if
I
was
renting
there
and
paying
twenty
five
hundred
dollars
a
month
or
three
thousand
I
sure
wouldn't
want
to
have
my
lease
broken
to
build
some
stupid,
hcd
apartment
complex.
Thank
you.
N
9B
108
that
you
would
displace
I,
am
with
Jennifer
I'm
with
Connie
Cunningham,
don't
displace
people.
When
you
do
that,
you
end
up
with
more
expensive
units,
you
don't
help
anybody
and
so
I
would
just
leave
it
off.
The
other
thing
is
that
the
proposed
number
of
units,
if
you
increased
it,
would
be
162..
N
N
Unless
you
have
confirmation
from
her
that
she
wants
to
be
there.
Also,
the
the
storage
site
is
a
very
long
site
with
one
driveway
at
a
corner
where
the
juniperacera
trail
is
going
to
come
at
a
corner
where
all
the
neighborhood
goes
during
school.
This
is
a
very
busy
corner
during
school
opening
and
closing
and
you're
going
to
dump
a
total
of
440
243
units.
N
N
And
the
9A
has
two
parcels
and
one
shouldn't
be
on
this
list
to
begin
with,
there
are
two
part
of
it
which
has
10
units
and
the
storage
unit.
I'm,
not
sure
you
can
put
51
units
on
that
long
strip,
it's
right
by
the
sound
wall.
They
have
one
driveway,
but
maybe
you
can
okay
anyway.
That's
that's
my
comment.
A
P
O
O
H
A
P
O
O
E
O
A
And
I
kind
of
I
kind
of
agree
that
you
know
for
a
lot
of
these
sites.
The
person
may
not,
you
know,
even
realize
the
advantage
they
would
have
by
being
a
housing
element
site
and
if
they
don't
want
to
do
anything
well,
they're
free
to
not
do
anything
but
yeah
I.
In
that
case,
given
what
our
planning
person
said,
I
would
just
keep
on
I
would
just
keep
both
of
those
lines
on
9A
there.
D
F
I
this
sounds.
You
know
right
recommendation,
because
the
surrounding
homes
are
all
like
high
density
homes.
There
so
I
think
I
would
leave
it
there
right
looking
for
confirmation
from
every
property
owner
I.
Don't
think
you
know
we're
going
to
have
that
on
for
every
line
item
we
have
here
right.
So
we
just
unless
you
know
the
property
you
want
to
explicitly
said
you
know
they
don't
want
to
be
I,
think
you
know
we
should
leave
it
on
the
on
the
list.
Yeah.
C
A
A
A
T
A
O
D
T
U
H
H
L
A
P
A
K
E
A
E
Application
or
an
interest
that
there
is,
you
know
that
there's
an
imminent
application,
and
things
like
that
included
so
6A
is,
is
there
is
an
application?
P8
is
an
interest
in
an
application
for
four
units,
but
they
have
also
indicated
an
interest
in
developing
it
with
up
to
19
town
homes.
On
that
side,.
E
Yeah,
a
single
family
home
when
the
city
went
from
gross
density,
calculations
to
net
density
calculations.
This
home
lost
its
ability
to
subdivide
into
two
single-family
homes
which
it
could
have
similar
to
what's
across
the
street.
But
at
this
point,
I
think
the
recommendation
is
to
have
it
be
developed
at
a
slightly
higher
density.
To
allow
any
remind
me
is
it
four
units
or
five
units?
B
C
M
Yes,
I'm
having
a
real
problem
with
this
church
thing.
You
know:
I
I,
I
really
was
freaked
out
when
we
found
out
that
the
family
church
was
on
me,
X
cities,
development
site,
nobody
knew
about
it
I.
You
know
this
hcd
I
am
sure,
does
not
intend.
You
know
they
may
be
doing
other
things
like
putting
housing
all
over
the
city,
but
I
cannot
Harden
My
Heart
believe
that
they
would
be
wanting
to
destroy
churches
and
I
I.
Don't
understand
why
the
church
is
on
here.
M
It's
not
it
I,
don't
know
what
they're
trying
to
do,
but
it
doesn't
set
a
good
precedent.
It
means
that
that
churches
I
mean
what
are
they
going
to
do?
Take
over
cemeteries,
I
mean
it's
not
it.
It
doesn't
set
a
good
precedent
and
I.
Don't
think
that
churches
should
be
on
this
list
now
if
they
want
to
sell
the
property
and
subdivide
it
with
a
developer.
M
Okay,
that's
one
thing,
but
to
start
taking
churches
apart
and
and
and
doing
things
to
them
to
me
is
like
Civilization,
has
really
gone
down
the
toilet
and
also
that
the
the
one
that's
a
pipeline
project,
I,
don't
understand,
I.
Think
Ray
was
concerned
about
I'm,
sorry
planning.
Commissioner
Ray
was
concerned
about
that
one.
How
can
you
be
a
pipeline
and
then
you're
also
trying
to
do
something
with
the
housing
element?
Give
me
a
break.
I
mean
I'm.
Sorry,
everybody
is
having
a
hard
time
dealing
with
this
stuff.
M
N
Thank
you,
I
agree
with
Jennifer
I,
don't
understand,
I'm.
Looking
at
page,
one
of
the
spreadsheet
and
Pa
says
it's
a
pipeline
project
which
I
interpreted
as
already
has
approval
to
build,
and
it
shows
it
as
existing
has
won,
and
it's
going
to
create
three
housing
units.
Instead,
if
it
hasn't
been
approved,
then
shouldn't
it
be
part
of
the
other
group
so
that
we
can
see
the
current
density
and
everything
if,
if
there
are
other
pipeline
projects
that
haven't
been
approved,
then
why
are
they
considered
pipeline
because
the
number
isn't
fixed?
Thank
you.
E
So
there
is
an
imminent
interest
from
the
applicant
to
so
divide
the
property
and
have
for
we've
been
looking
at
plans
to
have
for
Lots
on
that,
which
is
why
it's
just
included
in
the
pipeline.
However,
there's
also
owner
interest
in
developing,
like
I,
said
up
to
20
dwelling
units
to
the
acre
on
that
particular
site.
E
D
No
I
I
can
take
a
stab
at
that
I
know
when
we
were
going
through
the
list
it
was
double
listed.
It
was
put
in
both
a
the
pipeline
project
and
was
listed
as
a
tier
one.
In
my
opinion,
it
should
just
be
listed
as
a
tier
one
because
it
does
not
have
the
same
level
of
entitlements
as
all
the
other
pipelines
which
are
fully
entitled
projects.
So
that's
the
only
one
that
I
think
it's
a
supportable
project,
there's
applicant
interest,
but
it
is
not
a
pipeline
in
the
sense
of
say,
Valco.
U
With
it
being
made
tier
one
because
I
I'm
very
familiar
with
those
properties
along
McClellan,
because
I
live
not
close
to
it,
but
we
go
by
there
all
the
time
and
I
had
a
friend
who
was
interested
in
this
20860
McClellan,
which
is
like
right
across
the
street
from
it.
So
I'm
familiar
with
both
of
them
and
I
had
spoken
at
the
ERC
about
this
20860
when
they
had
put
in
an
applicant
application.
Excuse
me
and
I
had
suggested
to
the
Planning
Commission.
No,
no,
not
the
Planning
Commission.
U
Erc,
that's
what
I
meant
that
people
who
came
in
with
projects
like
that
should
be
allowed
to
or
be
advised
that
they
could
consider
the
housing
element
and
that
would
allow
them
to
be
able
to
be
part
of
the
housing
element
without
maybe
having
known
in
advance
that
they
could
get
a
zoning
change.
You
know
blah
blah
blah
blah.
So
that's
that's
the
reasoning
that
I
bring
to
20860
and
so
I'm,
absolutely
fine
with
that
for
209..
U
T
A
E
T
E
It'll
likely
be
part
of
the
narrative
in
terms
of
describing
how
we,
how
they
Envision
the
development
to
occur
in
terms
of
the
zoning,
we'll
have
to
figure
out
how
to
limit
that
zoning
to
what
they
wish
to
develop
and
not
have
the
residential
go
across
the
entire
properties.
To
allow
market
rate
developments
to
occur,
got.
C
There,
let's
see
I,
think
the
first
point
on
my
end
is
I
I
hope
we
moved
p8
back
to
tier
one
I
think
the
two
tier
two
sites
should
probably
be
tier
one
as
well.
That
would
actually
make
things
a
little
bit
easier
and
I
think
the
other
sites
are
here
and
then
the
last
point.
I
I
just
have
a
question,
and
this
is
just
only
because
we
we
may
all
encounter
this
if
I'm
a
member
of
this
church
do
I
need
to
abstain
on
the
vote
for
this.
I
So
that's
I
think
the
political
format
question
it
caused
him
to
play
a
number
of
questions,
including
whether
you
have
a
financial
interest,
whether
that
interest
is
different
from
anyone
else.
So
so
the
bottom
line
is
Ray.
It's
a
difficult
to
answer,
but
Mike.
My
my
gut
sense,
if
I
was
to
make
a
a
speculation,
is
that
it's
no.
L
So
I
got
little
bit
confused
because
there
was
a
remark
made
that
so
I
have
to
go
around
to
that.
The
single
family
thing
is:
can
somebody
clarify?
Where
is
you
know
if
we
have
to?
If
we
have
to
convert
this
into
a
site,
housing
agreement
site?
Is
there
some
kind
of
a
challenge
in
terms
of
using
it.
L
L
L
E
A
E
Jollyman
neighborhood
and
then
the
density
would
be
well.
It
would
be
re-zoned
to
P
res.
Currently,
it's
an
r110
site
I
believe
it
currently
has
a
density.
A
maximum
density
of
five
dwelling
ends
to
the
acre
that
would
be
increased
to
20
million
minutes
to
the
acre.
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
I
understand
that.
E
F
F
Okay,
so
this
is
right
in
my
neighborhood
I
know
about
every
one
of
these
properties.
So
I
have
a
comment
about
each
one
of
them
right,
so
I
think
6A
I
think
let
me
can.
Can
someone
share
the
spreadsheet,
please
yeah,
okay,
6A,
I
I
believe
you
know
that
that
should
become
tier
one
if
the
resident,
if
the
property
owner
is
already
asking
for
you,
know,
building
something
there
I,
don't
know
why
it's
not
tier
two.
It
should
become
tier
one.
F
So,
okay,
so
so
so
that's
about
6A
p8!
My
understanding
is
you
know,
because
that
that
owner
reviewed
their
plans
with
me
and
I'm
sure
they
did
it
with
other
planning,
commissioner
as
well,
their
intent
was,
you
know,
to
build
four
homes
in
that
one
acre
with
you
know
adus,
so
I
was
going
to
ask
you
know
to
count
eight
units
from
it,
because
you
know
every
unit
that
they
are
building
has
a
Adu
as
well.
E
So
the
spreadsheet
will
be
corrected,
like
I
said
yeah.
If
this
is
the
planning
commission's
recommendation
to
include
the
20
units,
or
at
least
20
dwelling
units
to
the
acre,
depending
on
what
their
acreage
is,
but
we
will
account
for
that
and
that's
why
I
was
showing
it
would
be,
struck
off
as
p8
and
would
be
added
into
this
list
as
6E.
So.
F
F
Okay,
so
then
that
designation,
for
you
know
p8,
is
fine
6A.
We
already
talked
about
and
6B
as
it's
listed,
you
know,
I
think
you
know
that's
okay,
6D
I
agree
with
you
know
the
residents
comments.
You
know
I'm
a
little
bit.
You
know
disappointed
to
see
you
know,
churches,
you
know
getting
converted
and
you
know
all
this
like,
because
the
place
of
worships
are
places
of
worship.
F
So,
but
if
that's
what
another
Warner
wants
to
do,
I
guess
you
know
we
need
to
allow
it
but
I'm
a
little
bit
disappointed
now
with
you
know,
what's
happening
there
so
on
6c
I
suggest
you
know,
that's
a
such
a
small
unit.
I
think
it's
about
what
point
three
acres:
0.25
Acres.
What
is
it
point
three
so.
K
F
Yeah
so
I
suggest
you
know
just
removing
it,
because
it's
it's.
If
you
look
at
you
know
that
that
area,
it's
all
like
you
know
single
family
homes
and
I,
don't
think
you
know
we
want
to
kind
of.
You
know,
put
something
odd,
odd
structure
out
there
in
that
corner
and
and
I
don't
even
know
how
this
made
it
to
the
list.
You
know
with
the
0.3,
because
I
thought
now
we
were
looking
at
you
know,
0.5
and
above.
A
E
A
F
U
E
So
let
me
stop
that
particular
property
owner
is
really
invested
in
the
development
that
they're
pursuing
right
now,
which
is
a
six
unit
subdivision
I
think
with
each
has
its
own
Adu
I,
think
that
is
so
far
along
in
the
process.
I
would
actually
just
take
that
as
a
as
a
pending
project
like
a
pipeline
project,
yeah.
K
H
E
A
F
A
A
F
C
U
A
C
L
L
U
L
L
A
K
A
C
U
A
A
K
B
B
K
E
A
K
C
C
A
I
C
We
are
respecting
commissioner
kapil's
wish
to
vote
on
60
separately.
The
Inc
and
attorney
blue
I
believe
this
is
how
it
works.
If
we
vote,
if
you
want
all
four
voted,
you
vote
Yes
on
this
first
proposal
and
then
the
second
proposal
will
vote
for
60
depending
what
it
is.
You
can
vote
it
in
or
vote
against
it.
You
will
have
the
same
effect.
B
C
C
U
C
I
C
E
A
H
T
U
G
D
L
C
A
H
L
A
T
U
O
A
F
B
C
Q
A
E
There
is
a
hotel
entitled,
I
think
APN
316-45017,
which
is
1.68
Acres.
There
is
a
hotel
entitled
on
that
particular
site
at
168
room
hotel.
But
aside
from
that,
we
have
talked
with
the
Kimco
Group,
which
is
a
Reit
I
believe,
and
they
actually
would
like
to
rebuild
the
ranch
99
store,
that
is
on
the
site.
E
Currently
they
wish
to
take
that
ranch,
99
store
and
rebuild
it
at
the
corner
of
wolf
and
Homestead
and
build
housing
on
top
of
that
as
a
first
phase,
and
then
they
wish
to
build
a
housing
on
another
part
of
it,
while
keeping
the
newer
commercial
buildings
and
potentially,
maybe
removing
one
of
the
rear
commercial
buildings,
because
those
are
just
so
old.
That
is
what
they
have
told
us
at
this
time.
M
M
I'm
I'm
really
concerned
with
okay,
so
I
don't
know,
is
the
hotel,
the
one
that
was
going
to
be
on
the
Duke
of
Edinburgh
site
and
whether
they're
planning
on
building
that,
because
we
worked
on
that
one,
a
lot
also
I'm
concerned
about
the
they
just
put
a
new
parking
garage
in
there
in
the
back.
We
spent
a
lot
of
time
on
this.
What
in
terms
of
what
they're
trying
to
do
here?
This
is
a
major
shopping
site.
M
It's
used
by
many
different
cities
and
I'm
really
really
concerned
that
that
you're
going
to
have
to
look
at
how
the
site,
how
you're
running
traffic
around
the
site,
how
you've
got
access
in
and
out
again
we
have
another
church,
that's
on
the
property,
it's
not
owned
by
them,
but
I
I'm
really
concerned
that
this
this
it's
it's
again.
It's
hcd
I
swear
to
God.
M
They
it's
like
pushing
they
we're
pushing
commercial
out
and
all
we
want
is
housing.
You
know
I'm,
sorry,
yeah,
I'm,
glad
I
hope
that
they
keep
Ranch
99
there,
but
I
wouldn't
guarantee
it.
How
many?
How
high
is
this
thing
supposed
to
be,
and
has
anybody
done
a
traffic
study?
They
should
alert
Sunnydale
if
this
property
is
rebuilt.
I
I'm
really
upset
about
this.
Thank
you.
M
N
A
E
H
E
Changes
to
the
density
so
that
they
can
actually
account
for
all
the
our
BMR
program
requires
them
to
provide
a
certain
number
of
very
low
income
units
and
that
entitles
them
to
a
fairly
large
density
bonus.
They
are
looking
for
the
kind
of
development
that
they're
looking
for
in
response
to
other
questions
that
were
asked.
They
intend
to
keep
at
least
they've
told
us
that
they
intend
to
keep
the
raw
parking
structure
exactly
where
it
is
and
the
residential
would
be
set
back
from
the
Sunnyvale
residence.
E
P
H
C
A
A
Yeah
one
of
my
adult
nieces
gets
so
mad
when
everyone
calls
it
Ranch
99,
but
I
used
to
do
it
too,
so
it
sound.
You
know
if
you've
been
to
this
shopping
center,
a
lot
of
it
is
empty
and
you
know
it's
very
old.
This
was
originally
called
Valco
Village
many
years
ago,
and
you
know
so
I
can
understand
why
they
want
to
rebuild
it
and
not.
You
know
not
keep
it
up.
A
F
Yeah
so
I,
like
staff
recommendation
on
this,
so
my
only
request
and
comment
is,
you
know,
preserving
retail,
because
you
know
there's
a
lot
of
you
know
residential
around
that.
So
we
do
need
to
preserve
the
retail
I.
Don't
know
I
would
hate
to
see
it
turn
into
not
just
100.
You
know
residential.
So
if
you
do
something
you
know
to
preserve
detail
great.
E
I
was
just
going
to
say
that
the
property
owners
commented
again.
They've
told
us
at
this
point
that
they
intend
to
keep
much
of
the
retail
that
is
on
the
site
untouched,
but
in
terms
of
the
hotel,
you
know
if
the
commission
wishes
to
keep
the
hotel
and
potentially
the
tot
that
comes
from
the
hotel
side.
You
know
that
site
could
come
off
the
list.
If
that
is
your
interest,.
A
A
C
A
C
H
C
L
Would
like
to
have
the
retail,
because
without
the
retail,
a
lot
of
workable
issues
are,
you
know,
coming
to
picture
so
I
definitely
would
recommend
that
we
somehow
have
the
retail
there,
which
I
believe
is
the
wish
of
the
owner.
I
also
want
to
carve
out
the
017
because
of
the
tot
and
then
for
the
rest
of
the
things
I
mean
if
it
is,
if
it
is
going
to
help
to
resolve
the
issue
of
meeting
the
arena
goals.
L
That
is
one
thing,
but
I
I
still
feel
that
you
know
there's
just
too
much
construction
on
that
side.
I
I
mean
I
I.
Just
don't
see.
You
know
that
place
is
going
to
get
clocked
completely.
I
mean
it's
going
to
be
it's
going
to
be
a
big
mess
eventually
and
I.
Don't
know
how
attractive
this
place
is
going
to
be
as
a
housing
site
and
I'll
leave
it
at
that.
I'll
come
back
for
any
additional
thoughts.
U
Thank
you,
chair
I,
I,
favored,
this
site
being
added
to
the
housing
element
and
I
I.
Guess:
I'm,
okay,
with
I
I,
see
you're
carving
out
5017
net
added
units.
Maybe
50
is
that
what
you're
talking
about
so
that
I
get
I'm?
Okay
with
that
as
well,
but
I
do
think
it's
a
very
fine
sight
for
adding
houses
and
so
I
would
vote
Yes
for
that.
C
A
A
C
C
L
What
about
the
the
retail
element?
What
about
it
I
mean?
Are
we
going?
Are
you
going
I
know
that
the
the
owners
saying
that
they
want
to
have
the
retail
return,
the
retail,
but
you
know,
is
there
something
you
want
to
have
it
as
part
of
the
you
know,
part
of
the
tier
one
upgrade
or
do
you
want
to
not
have
any
conditions
on
that.
A
No,
you
know
I
can't
imagine
them
not
building
a
new
99
Ranch,
that's
an
extremely
popular
99,
Ranch
much
more
than
the
other
one
in
Cupertino,
the
other
retail,
the
new
retail
Long
Wolf
I.
Think
will
you
know
I
doubt
if
they
would
take
that
down,
because
especially
it's
mostly
restaurants
and
apple-
does
not
provide
free
food
to
their
employees
anyway,
I
I,
don't
I
would
not
complicate
it
by
trying
to
require
retail,
which
we
can't
do
anyway.
A
C
A
chair
I
believe
if
I
remember
the
discussions,
they
had
opened
the
new
99
Ranch
on
De
Anza,
because
they're
intent
on
shutting
it
down.
I,
don't
know
if
it's
because
the
remodel
or
if
it
was
because
they
were
not
going
to
do
anything
with
99
Ranch
at
that
site.
So
just
something
to
think
about
back
to
commissioner
tatachari's
point
so.
D
G
K
A
B
A
L
L
A
A
F
K
J
A
A
A
E
A
E
E
Understanding
is
that,
based
on,
of
course,
Again
State
density
bonus
law,
you
know
the
base
density
would
be
set
to
50
and
then
they
could
have
up
to
a
fairly
High
State
density,
bonus
on
it
and
then
they're.
You
know
hoping
to
be
able
to
get
as
many
units
as
they
can
on
this
particular
site
close
to
350
units.
Let's
say
right.
A
H
A
K
M
M
I
I'm
I
I'm
really
confused
whether
this
is
supposed
to
be
a
housing
element
site.
If
you
have
Supportive
Housing
here
is
that
considered
I
mean
that
means
they
have
if
they
want
Supportive
Service,
they
have
to
provide
services
here.
It's
also
right
next
to
the
Steve
Jobs
Trail
I'm,
going
to
call
it
that
280
Trail
you're
going
to
have
campers
on
that
trail.
M
I'm,
sorry
that
this
came
up
under
the
housing
element,
but
we
need
to
have
a
transparence
discussion
with
the
public
about
this.
Then
again,
it's
on
the
east
side.
Again,
we
are
getting
dumped
with
everything
I'm,
sorry,
not
the
people,
but
the
traffic
and
those
people
are
going
to
need
to
have
cars.
Velco
is
a
complete
destruction
site
right
now.
M
How
can
they
even
contemplate
building
this
if
Valco
hasn't
even
been
built
out,
I
I
think
this
thing
should
be
taken
off
the
housing
element
site
and
if
you
want
to
do
a
pipeline,
that's
fine
but
they're
going
to
have
to
talk
to
the
residents
that
live
in
that
area.
You
cannot
have
supported
housing
there
without
talking
to
the
public.
Thank
you.
A
S
But
I
I
hope
this
whole
document,
the
idea
that
stating
the
number
of
Stories
versus
Heights
goes
away
and
that
the
height
is
actually
put
in
there
in
a
maximum
height,
including
mechanical,
on
a
rooftop
and
towers
for
elevators.
If
there's
such
for
parking
on
the
roof,
because
we
so
many
cities
get
screwed
by
that
not
being
the
case.
So
in
every
instance
of
this
whole
thing,
we
need
to
do
height
based
on
maximum
absolute
con,
absolute
maximum
feet
and
measured
from
grade
not
from
some
weird
place
so
I.
S
Just
because
and
I
say
that,
because
I
was
looking
at
this
and
it's
slated
for
eight
stories,
which
means
nothing
well,
it
means
something,
but
it
doesn't
mean
the
real
number.
So
it's
just
a
reminder
that,
hopefully
we
can
get
that
taken
care
of
in
every
instance
here
and
I.
Don't
know
how
I
have
mixed
feelings
about
this
I
wonder
if
they
don't
negotiate
something
with
the
county.
What
could
be
built
there
instead,
because
we
certainly
don't
need
any
more
luxury
housing
there.
S
N
I
agree
with
both
Jennifer
and
Lisa.
My
concern
is:
why
isn't
the
Outback
site
that
the
county
already
has
on
this
list?
Instead,
that's
a
better
site
for
people
to
have
access
to
shopping
and
also
transportation
and
not
be
impacted
by
waiting
for
this
Valco
project
to
go,
the
Outback
site
could
be
started
and
completed
and
have
affordable
housing
available.
A
J
J
This
will
be
conditional
to
the
SQL
approval
right
and
also
any
kind
of
a
traffic
Story
related
to
this.
Is
that
true,
or
is
that
that's
a
question?
Basically
I
suspect
this
will
not
pass
sequel,
but
but
that
is
a
a
guess.
It
is
not
I,
don't
have
the
facts,
but
I
presume
that
Walco
has
not
passed
Sigma.
It
has
a
contaminated
land.
This
will
be
a
is
basically
in
a
close
proximity
to
that.
J
D
C
C
U
Excuse
me
yeah
a
concern
that
I
have
with
this.
Putting
it
on
the
housing
element,
maybe
facilitates
it,
but
there's
a
lot
of
land
use,
changes
that
need
to
be
made
to
approve
the
housing
element,
and
this
particular
site
will
require
that
same
thing.
Right,
we're
changing
it
from
CG
to
residents,
and
so
that's
probably
a
major
concern.
L
I
think
I
continue
to
have
the
issue.
That
first
of
all,
is
the
CG
side
being
converted
into
residential
side.
You
know
I
still
believe
that
Outback
is
a
much
better
solution
and
I
I.
Don't
know
why
it's
not
there
in
this
list,
and
you
know
we
should
not
be
a
party
to
some
other
agencies
trying
to
make
deals.
I
think
we
should
just
focus
on
our
back
and
we
should
just
leave
this
as
as
CG
and
there's
no
need
to
pack
all
the
density
on
this
side
and
convert
this.
L
F
D
F
H
A
T
I
would
I'm
concerned
about
the
environmental
being
surrounded
by
that
much
pollution
from
the
freeway
I've,
never
considered
something
this
close
and
with
it
almost
feels
like
you're
surrounded
by
it.
I
feel
like
it's,
not
a
good
thing
to
put
humans
there
I'm.
So
sorry,
it's
probably
the
only
one
I,
don't
I,
don't
agree
with,
maybe
other
better
uses
for
it.
But
that's
all
thank
you.
C
I
was
just
I
was
just
thinking
like
it's
nice
to
have
the
voi,
given
that
the
Valco
folks
removed
it
when
they
built
the
rise,
not
sure
where
to
put
those
units,
the
moderate
units
for
teachers
that
had
zero
displacement
and
yeah.
At
least
these
guys
can
look
into
valko,
which
is
going
to
be
250
feet.
So
I
just
thought
it'd
be
interesting.
That's
all.
A
Okay,
so
yeah
personally
I
do
favor
this
site,
because
this
is
really
the
only
site
where
we
can
hope
to
have
it.
A
hundred
percent
affordable
project
which
we
desperately
need
to
meet
our
vli
numbers,
and
you
know
the
reason
that
this
site
is
here
and
Outback
is
not
is
because
there
is
an
effort
to
kind
of
swap
the
sites
and
because
this
site,
you
can
get
a
lot
more
affordable
housing,
a
lot
more
units
on
it
than
you
can,
the
Outback
site,
which
is
much
smaller.
A
Yes,
there's
drawbacks.
There's
you
know
it's
close
to
the
freeway.
In
the
past
there
was
a
proposed
condo
complex
back
there
that
got
rejected
by
voters
and
yeah
yeah.
We
don't
know
if
the
toxic
waste
problem
has
extended
to
this
to
this
parcel,
but
you
know
it
can
be
remediated,
it's
not
cheap,
but
it
can
be
remediated
if
possible.
You
know
at
some
expense,
so
personally,
I
would
I
would
keep
this
as
a
tier
one.
A
U
Excuse
me
shopping,
and
things
like
that,
which
is
what
the
the
other
site
is
so
good
because
of
you
know
Transit
and
shopping
all
that
stuff.
So
does
anybody
know
the
answer
to
that
that
if
this
goes
forward
and
Council
approves
the
housing
element
that
then
somehow
that
guides
the
overall
decision,
the
county.
A
E
The
general
plan
basically
allows
no
residential
uses
on
this
particular
property.
At
this
point,
the
this
is
an
owner
interest
side.
We
did
receive
an
owner
interest
form
on
this,
so
there
is
certainly
some
motivation
from
the
current
property
owner
to
do
something
with
the
site
related
and,
and
they
are
negotiating
with
the
county
on
it.
U
E
If
you
look
at
whoa
yeah,
if
you
look
at
row
24a
where
it
says
the
general
plan
designation,
current,
that's
Regional
shopping,
basically,
meaning
that
there
are
no
residential
uses
currently
allowed
on
it.
So
I
do
not
believe
the
county
would
move
forward
with
acquiring
the
site.
If
there
are
no
residential
uses
allowed
on
it,
because
they
would
not
be
able
to
develop
it
with
an
e-worm
of
housing,
because
the
land
use
would
prohibit
it
from
design
from
proceeding
with
any
form
of
housing.
E
Q
A
A
G
So
I
I
kind
of
second
chair
charts
comments,
I
personally,
don't
like
housing
right
by
the
freeway
cities
like
Fremont,
have
put
you
know:
high
rise,
almost
high-rise
buildings
for
the
Bay
Area
right
by
680,
and
it's
terrible
there's
a
lot
of
noise
pollution,
and
then
there
might
be
vibration,
I
hope.
Whoever
finally
builds
this
project
takes
all
that
into
account
and
builds
accordingly,
but
other
than
that.
The
fact
that
we
are
getting
some
low
income
housing
is
something
that
we
can't
pass
up
on.
A
S
U
A
A
B
E
D
I
could
ask
a
question
on
the
Simeon
site,
I
think
some
of
the
objection
I
don't
know
if
it
was
so
much
density
as
Building
height
if
putting
a
lower
Building
height
on
the
site.
Maybe
at
six
stories
would
that
have
changed
things
because
it's
possible
to
build
at
that
density
with
at
a
lower
Building
height,
especially
for
an
affordable
housing
project.
Correct.