►
Description
Coverage of the Monday, August 29, 2022 Cupertino City Council Hybrid Meeting. (Part 1 of 2)
A
A
A
Sorry
go
ahead:
councilman,
wooly
city
manager,
wow,
what
a
great
idea
council,
member
Willie,
that's
great,
so
city
manager,
Wu
I,
know
that
you're
kind
of
getting
onboarded
right
now
with
regard
to
the
zoom
function
on
your
laptop,
are
you
ready
to
be
introduced
to
the
public
and
I?
A
Think
a
video
if
you
could
point
a
camera
over
at
Pamela
Wu,
our
new
city
manager,
all
right
welcome
to
Cupertino
on
your
first
day
we
wanted
to
break
you
in
with
a
very
minor
element
of
the
housing
element,
and
so
thank
you
for
being
with
us
here
this
evening.
Do
you
care
to
say
a
few
words
to
the
public.
D
Thank
you,
Mr
Mayor
and
members
of
the
council.
Thank
you,
my
very
first
day
my
pleasure
to
be
here
with
the
Cupertino
residents
and
the
community
and
thank
you
for
extending
my
first
day
to
a
special
council
meeting,
looking
forward
to
get
back
to
my
element
to
talk
about
the
housing
element,
the
city
team
and
equally,
what
the
council
has
shown
me
nothing,
but
just
welcome
and
support,
so
really
looking
to
explore
my
role
with
the
city
of
Cupertino.
Thank
you.
A
Wonderful,
thank
you
very
much
city
manager,
so
we
will
go
ahead
and
go
to
the
special
meeting
agenda,
and
so
the
first
item
has
to
do
with
the
unhoused
task
force
from
the
county.
I
was
contacted
by
a
member
of
supervisor
Cindy
Chavez's
staff,
and
they
asked
that
we
designate
other
people
for
the
unhoused
task
force
because
on
their
official
roles
they
had
Stephen
sharff
and
Rod
sinks
and
so
as
as
delightful
as
I'm
sure
that
would
be
to
have
that
meeting
with
them.
In
the
representative
capacity.
A
Unfortunately,
they're,
not
elected
representatives
of
Cupertino
anymore
and
so
I
suggested
that
we
put
this
on
the
agenda
so
that
we
could
get
the
council
approval
in
a
timely
fashion.
They
were
asking
for
an
answer
back
I
believe
before
September
5th,
and
our
next
meeting
is
on
September,
6th
or
perhaps
they're
asking
for
it
earlier
than
that,
but
in
any
event
and
being
August
29th,
we
have
time.
The
default
request
is
to
have
the
mayor
and
the
vice
mayor.
A
So
myself
and
council
member
of
ice
Mary
Leong
child
respectively,
serve
as
the
alternate
or
as
the
designee
and
the
or
I
guess.
The
designees
to
the
unhoused
task
force
on
the
county.
So
if
there's
any
elaboration,
that
staff
would
like
to
do,
please
feel
free
to
do
so.
Otherwise,
I
would
just
say:
let's
go
ahead
and
take
any
public
discussion
on
it.
I
don't
see,
hands
raised
from
the
public
with
some
attendees
I
do
see
one
hand
raised
from
the
council
and
so
council
member
Moore.
Would
you
care
to
either
make
a
motion?
E
A
I
don't
know
when
the
task
force
began,
but
it
has
been
going
for
at
least
three
years
now
A
couple
of
years
ago.
Actually-
maybe
maybe
at
least
four
years
since
when
I
was
mayor
in
2018
I
believe
the
task
force
was
occurring
and
I
was
on
that
task
force.
It
has
generally
not
met
all
that
frequently,
but
in
the
last
couple
of
years
with
kovid.
A
That's,
you
know
kind
of
been
more
the
case,
but
I
think
that
as
we're
opening
back
up
we'll
probably
be
meeting
a
bit
more
frequently
I,
don't
know
what
the
prognosis
is
with
regard
to
the
estimated
time
that
this
will
last
but
I
agree
that
is
of
critical
importance
and
that
it
would
not
be
a
bad
idea
at
all
during
the
December
committee
assignments
to
go
ahead
and
make
that
part
of
the
committee
assignment
assignments
going
forward
for
the
year.
A
But
in
my
experience
it's
been
meeting
on
an
annual
basis
because
of
course
getting
all
those
schedules
rounded
together
around
the
county
is
is
is
complex,
but
but
the
meeting
this
year
is
coming
up
in
September
and
so
they're
asking
for
designees.
A
Thank
you
sure,
okay.
Well,
at
this
time,
seeing
no
further
hands
raised
I'll
go
ahead
and
entertain
a
motion
for
the
recommended
action.
Would
anyone
like
to
make
that
motion
councilmember
way
so
moved?
Okay?
Would
anyone
like
to
second
that
motion
and
I
see
councilmember?
You
have
your
hand
raised.
Second.
E
A
E
B
A
Okay,
vice
mayor
Chao,
so
because
Madam
city
clerk,
if
you
wouldn't
mind,
holding
that
vote
in
advance
at
this
point,
thank
you
very
much.
Vice
mayor
child,
please
proceed
yeah.
F
A
Okay,
I'm
I'm
more
than
happy
to
ask
the
movement
whether
councilmember
way
would
be
willing
to
have
council
member
Moore
instead
of
vice
mayor
Chao
on
the
committee
on.
A
Rather,
okay,
great
and
councilman
Wooley
is
that
okay
with
you
to
mend
all
right,
so
the
moving
and
the
secondary
have
approved
and
so
on
the
table
are
myself:
Meredith,
Paul
and
councilmember
kitty
Moore
on
the
county
on
has
unhoused
task
force,
Madam
city
clerk.
Would
you
please
conduct
a
roll
call
vote.
A
Thank
you
very
much
Madam
city
clerk.
We
are
on
to
our
next
agenda
item
and
this
agenda
item
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
let
our
city
manager
introduce
it
Pamela.
Take
it
away.
D
Thank
you,
Mr
Mayor.
The
item
before
you
is
to
discuss
the
priority
housing
sites
for
the
2023
and
2031
housing
element
update,
and
this
has
been
continued
from
the
August
16
meeting.
We
also
have
the
community
and
development
director
Benjamin
Foo
and
his
team
available
to
make
the
presentation
and
also
to
provide
an
update
to
you
so.
A
Sounds
good
thanks
very
much
Madam
city
manager,
and
so
let's
go
ahead.
Let
me
navigate
to
my
zoom
function
here.
I
see
director
Foo
your
camera's
on.
Would
you
like
to
introduce
the
presenter
for
this
item
tonight.
H
Yes,
Mr
Mayor
and
welcome
Mr
manager
and
council
members
with
us
tonight.
We
have
Lou
Connelly.
The
senior
planner
Luke
will
be
providing
the
bulk
of
the
presentation.
We
also
have
the
Consultants
here
as
well:
the
Andy
flower
from
EMC,
as
well
as
David
Masterson
from
Els
architecture
care
support.
We
also
have
our
planning
manager
piukosh
here
as
well,
but
Luke.
Please
go
ahead
with
your
presentation.
It's
all
right
with
you,
Mr
Mayor.
I
Okay,
thank
you
much
very
much
mayor
Paul
members
of
the
council,
and
you
can
share
my
screen.
I
Okay,
we're
here
tonight
to
talk
about
the
six
cycle.
Housing
element
update
and,
in
particular,
I'm,
going
to
try
to
spend
30
minutes
going
through
all
about
40
slides
that
are
going
to
give
an
overview
of
the
housing
element
update
the
process,
and
this
should
be
something
that
will
inform
people
who
haven't
intended
earlier
meetings,
but
while
also
be
a
good
overview
for
the
people
who
have
been
participating.
All
along.
I
I
So
in
terms
of
the
housing
element,
it's
a
part
of
the
city's
General
plan
and,
as
its
name
indicates,
it's
really
The
Guiding
document
on
the
city's
housing
policies
and
programs.
While
a
general
plan,
it
typically
has
looks
ahead,
20
or
30
years.
Your
housing
element
updates
a
little
different
in
the
sense
that
state
law
requires
it
to
be
updated
every
eight
years.
So
we're
looking
at
the
period
right
now,
2023
to
2031,
which
is
the
sixth
cycle,
as
the
fifth
cycle
is
winding
down.
I
Now,
when
we
talk
about
housing
in
the
housing
element,
it
one
thing
important
to
keep
in
mind
is
what
cities
are
focused
on,
is
being
able
to
accommodate
housing.
The
housing
there's,
not
a
housing
project,
that's
necessarily
proposed.
So
what
this
slide
indicates
is
the
collaborative
effort
that
goes
into
actually
developing
housing.
I
You
have
City
commissions
like
the
Housing
Commission
and
Planning
Commission
who've,
already
extensively
reviewed
the
site's
inventory.
You
have
Regional
players
like
a
bag
and,
of
course,
at
the
state
level
you
have
Housing
and
Community
Development
Department,
who
will
ultimately
certify
the
city's
housing
element,
and
with
that
you
have
the
community
itself.
So
this
is
a
very
participatory
collaborative
process,
but
as
we
go
this
please
keep
in
mind.
This
is
a
way
of
accommodating
housing.
There
is
no
specific
project.
That's
actually
proposed
briefly.
I
just
want
to
show
this
slide.
I
This
is
for
the
fifth
cycle.
Housing
element
and
the
top
blue
row
shows
what
the
arena
was
for
the
time
period
2015
to
2023.
So
you
see
that
the
city
had
a
little
over
a
thousand
housing
units
1064
to
develop
or
accommodate
during
that
time
period
and
during
that
time
period
the
city
entitled,
particularly
with
the
Valco
project,
far
more
units
than
that
a
little
over
400
of
them
were
built,
but
the
area
in
green-
that's
referred
to
on
this
this
table
as
the
pipeline.
I
Now
one
thing
to
keep
in
mind
as
we
get
into
this
and
I
mentioned
the
pipeline
projects
is
of
of
the
Full
Arena,
the
4588
figure.
The
city
is
currently
needing
its
low
and
market
rate
needs
because
it
has
significant
pipeline
units.
So
why
is
this
important
it's
important,
because
we
need
to
focus
on
the
very
low
and
moderate
income
categories
where
we
have
1193
and
755
unit?
That's
really
the
focus
of
when
we're
trying
to
identify
new
housing
sites
and
total
housing
units
to
comply
with
those
income
categories.
I
This
table
is
taken
from
the
staff
report
and
the
top
row
here
shows
again
the
arena
broken
down
by
income
category
with
the
total
on
the
right.
The
second
row
shows
the
pipeline
projects.
We
have
nine
of
those
listed
and,
as
this
indicates,
when
you
look
in
the
low
and
above
moderate
columns,
the
pipeline
projects
alone
are
already
exceeding
what
arena
is
for
those
income
categories.
I
Now,
unfortunately,
you
can't
get
a
credit
that's
applied
for
exceeding
that
could
be
applied
to
other
income
categories,
so
the
city
of
Cupertino
is
having
to
focus
on
very
low
and
moderate
income.
As
I
said
earlier,
we've
got
about
833,
very
low
income,
655,
moderate
income
for
a
total
of
1
488
units,
which
is
really
the
focus
of
what
the
city
needs
to
meet
for
this
upcoming
housing
element
cycle
a
little
more
on
the
pipeline
projects.
I
Again
when
we
say
pipeline
we're
talking
about
projects
that
have
their
entitlements
or
are
likely
to
they're,
essentially
in
the
development
pipeline,
but
they
haven't
pulled
building
permits,
nor
are
they
constructed.
So
these
are
projects
that
have
or
should
soon
have
their
discretionary
approvals
through
the
city,
cupertino's
pipeline
units
comes
to
over
3
500,
it's
35.45,
so
it's
a
very
significant
amount
for
the
city.
I
Now,
in
addition
to
that-
and
this
is
on
our
recommended
sites-
inventory,
which
is
attachment
D
to
the
current
staff
report-
there's
another
almost
2100
units
identified
that
we're
calling
tier
one.
These
are
the
recommended
units,
and
this
is
what
the
housing
and
Planning
Commission
at
the
end
of
June
and
beginning
in
July,
and
their
hearings
recommended
be
placed
on
the
housing
site's
inventory.
I
I
This
is
a
quick
look
at
the
pipeline
projects.
This
is
taken
from
again
the
attachment
D
table.
It
shows
the
city
has
nine
pipeline
projects,
and
one
thing
I
want
to
be
clear
about
is
six
of
these
are
fully
entitled,
whereas
the
Project's,
labeled,
P4,
P5
and
p8
are
on
file.
They
do
not
have
their
full
development
entitlements,
but
we
did
include
them
on
the
list,
because
they've
been
on
file
and
they've
been
working
with
staff
towards
realizing
these
projects.
I
These
are
properties
between
a
half
and
10
acres,
which
were
deemed
to
be
potential
housing
sites.
Through
this
hearing
process,
we've
now
focused
it
to
where
we
have
56
properties
and
the
the
June
28
and
July
5
joint
planning
and
Housing
Commission
meetings.
That's
where
we
resulted
in
getting
this
recommendation
and
in
those
hearings
we
had
a
very
extensive
Public
public
comment
process,
as
some
of
you
may
have
been
able
to
watch
and
listen
to
as.
J
I
Just
said,
in
addition
to
the
pipeline
sites,
we
have
56
tier
one
properties.
These
are
the
recommended
sites.
We
also
have
some
properties
we're
calling
tier
two
which
are
not
recommended
but
have
been
left
on
the
inventory
for
city
council
consideration
of
these
56
properties.
Again
we
have
about
2100
units,
potentially
that
could
be
realized
from
them
44
or
about
80
percent
of
the
56
properties.
Have
a
minimum
density
proposed
of
30
units
per
acre.
Some
have
up
to
50
units
per
acre.
There
are
no
sites
over
50
units
per
acre.
I
The
reason
the
30
unit
per
acre
threshold
is
important
is
that's
the
threshold
for
which
the
hcd
considers
sites
to
be
eligible
as
affordable
housing
sites.
Lower
density
could
certainly
still
be
good
housing
sites,
but
the
affordable.
The
the
potential
for
affordability
is
diminished,
as
density
goes
below
30..
So
that's
something
to
keep
in
mind.
I
What
we
got
out
of
meeting
with
the
Planning
Commission
were
several
goals
when
we
were
trying
to
identify
housing
sites.
First
off
was
to
not
cluster
new
housing
in
the
city's
Eastern
area,
but
to
try
to
disperse
it
and
include
as
many
units
as
we
could
on
the
western
side
of
the
city,
also
to
avoid
displacing
existing
uses,
particularly
residential
uses,
So,
to
avoid
having
people
get
this
place
through
Redevelopment.
I
Another
goal
that
the
Planning
Commission
cited
was
to
minimize
up
zoning
to
the
extent
feasible.
So
we've
tried
to
do
that
as
we've
gone
through
this.
By
having
more
sites
the
fewer
sites
generally,
the
more
you'd
have
to
up
Zone
and
also
another
factor
that
the
commission
had
emphasized
was
that
a
housing
sites
should
try
to
contribute
to
counteracting
the
school
enrollment
trends
that
are
pretty
much
declining
Statewide.
I
We
have
three
areas
essentially
that
are
getting
about
of
the
tier
one
sites
of
those
2100
units
I've
mentioned
about
1400
of
those
a
little
more
are
going
into
three
areas:
selling
Gateway
at
the
North
just
north
of
280,
or
around
Stelling
and
homestead's
intersection,
the
velco
area
to
the
right
in
the
Northeast
part
of
the
city
and
at
the
South
along
South,
the
Anza
Boulevard
between
Prospect
Road
and
Highway
85..
I
These
are
really
the
three
target
areas
for
housing
units
that
we're
recommending
a
couple
things
that
came
out
of
the
Planning
Commission
recommendations
were
the
idea
of
having
the
higher
densities
for
several
of
the
West
Side
sites
and
in
particular
along
the
Anza
Boulevard.
When
we
had
presented
this
to
the
commissions
at
the
end
of
June,
the
recommendation
was
to
have
30
units
per
acre
on
South
De
Anza
and
the
commission's
recommended
having
that
go
up
to
50
right
50
per
acre.
I
Another
concept
that
the
commission
has
mentioned
were
the
Stevens
Creek,
which
has
a
couple
of
sites
and
saw
the
Anza
to
have
50
units
per
acre
along
the
street
frontages,
but
where
those
properties
backed
up
and
directly
abutted
single-family
residential,
to
hold
the
density
down
to
30
units
per
acre
on
De,
Anza
and
25
on
Stevens
Creek
Boulevard,
our
recommended
sites
inventory
when
calculate
calculating
the
units.
If
you
refer
to
attachment
D,
that
is
all
calculated
based
on
50
dwellings
per
acre.
I
So
if
we
were
to
do
this
essentially
split
density,
it
would
result
in
a
reduction
in
those
two
areas-
foreign.
This
is
one
site
that
is
not
up
for
recommendation,
but
I
know
there
has
been
some
public
interest
in
this
and
maybe
a
little
confusion
about
why
it's
on
the
inventory.
This
is
as
a
tier
two
site:
we've
added
the
Heart
of
the
City
Crossroads
on
the
south
side
of
Stevens
Creek
between
Stelling
and
De
Anza
Boulevard.
I
Only
because
a
couple
of
the
buildings
former
restaurants,
fontanas
and
Pizza
Hut
were
mentioned
frequently
at
the
Planning
Commission
meetings.
I
just
want
to
be
clear
that
this
is
not
list.
That
is
a
tier
one
site.
It
does
not
factor
in
right
now
as
a
recommended
housing
location,
but
should
it
come
up
in
the
discussion
we
wanted
to
include
that
and,
as
you
can
see,
it's
a
very
large
property
where
the
Pizza
Hut
site
is
part
of
that
area.
15D
that
fronts
the
roads.
I
I
This
is
not
a
requirement,
but
it's
simply
something
that
is
advised
by
hcd,
so
that
if
you
have
sites
developing
in
the
eight
year
period
that
say
develop
at
different
income
levels
than
anticipated,
or
perhaps
a
lower
density,
that
by
having
a
buffer,
you
have
additional
housing
sites
available,
so
you're
still
able
to
meet
your
Arena
at
all
of
the
income
categories
and
again,
I
believe
City.
Cupertino
really
needs
to
focus
on
just
the
very
low
and
the
moderate
income
categories.
I
Excuse
me
and
currently
right
now,
the
buffer
is
close
to
30
it's
about
27.
So
right
now
the
city
is
getting
at
the
upper
end
of
the
hcd
recommendation.
I
So
something
I
alluded
to
earlier,
just
to
keep
in
mind
that,
as
a
general
rule
of
thumb,
the
more
sites
you
have,
the
less
likely
you're
going
to
have
to
up
Zone
sites
to
intensify
the
density,
the
fewer
sites
you
have,
the
more
likely
you're
going
to
have
to
upzone
to
meet
your
Greener
and
again
right
now,
the
city
has
56
sites,
in
addition
to
pipelines,
so
there's
quite
a
few
potential
housing
sites
on
the
list.
I
I
So
we
wanted
to
include
this
to
show
that
typically
sites,
if
you're,
looking
at
12
units
per
acre
or
less
you're,
talking
about
small
at
single
family
or
duet
houses,
Town
Homes
generally
run
between
the
mid-teens
and
the
mid-20s
walk-up
apartments
and
Condominiums
you're,
getting
up
to
about
30
per
acre
and
beyond
that
in
the
40
50
per
acre
range
you're,
looking
at
more
of
a
Podium
type
development
with
structured
parking.
This
is
very
general
as
a
rule
of
thumb,
but
we
thought
it
was
important
because
this
has
come
up
in
Prior
meetings.
I
So
people
have
some
point
of
reference
in
terms
of
Outreach.
We've
done
quite
a
bit
of
that
as
well.
All
households
in
January
were
mailed
postcards
concerning
the
housing
element,
update
and
all
owners
whose
properties
could
have
potentially
qualified
as
housing
sites
were
sent
letters.
Many
of
them
received
follow-up
letters.
I
The
city
has
used
its
website
as
well
as
the
engage
cupertino.org
website
and
The
Balancing
Act
map,
which
will
be
talked
about
tonight,
that
EMC
planning
has
set
up
as
well
to
out
reach
out
to
people.
E-Notifications
have
gone
out
for
our
meetings
and
social
media.
Such
as
Facebook,
Twitter
and
next
door
have
all
been
used
to
notify
people
of
meetings.
I
Additionally,
outside
of
the
formal
meetings
there
were
a
well-attended
community
meetings
held
in
May
and
July,
there
will
be
another
one
at
the
end
of
September.
These
meetings
are
largely
to
comply
with
the
affirmatively
furthering
fair
housing
Focus.
That
hcd
is
requiring
for
this
housing
element.
Update
and
again,
those
meetings
have
been
well
attended
and
we
plan
to
have
one
more
at
the
end
of
September.
I
I
want
to
briefly
go
through
the
next
five
slides
to
just
sum
up
what
the
is
in
more
detail
in
your
packet
I
believe
in
attachment
B
that
this
refers
to
surveys.
That
EMC
has
just
wrapped
up
that
started
in
June
and
concluded
on
August
16th,
where,
and
these
were
focused
on
the
individual
housing
sites
where
people
could
comment
on
the
site
or
the
density,
whether
they
liked
it
or
not.
I
I
What
emerged
from
this
is
we
had
some
areas,
there's
six
sites
that
are
shown
here
and
again.
I
just
want
to
go
through
this
briefly,
but
these
were
the
sites
that
tended
to
get
the
most
negative
response
for
people
who
had
weighed
in
on
these.
There
were
just
six
of
them
and
a
couple
in
particular
in
Monte,
Vista,
North
and
South
Blaney
had
a
high
number
of
responses.
119
and
87
shown
there
with
the
majority
of
the
people
responding
not
favorably,
similar
to
where
the
majority
of
our
tier
one
housing
is
going.
I
That's
where
we
receive
most
response
and
properties,
as
you
can
see,
Stelling
Gateway,
Homestead,
Valco
selfianza,
and
also
to
the
left
of
your
screen
in
the
Monte
Vista
North.
That
was
the
site
on
Linda
Vista.
That
I'm
sure
we'll
be
talking
about.
J
I
That
got
the
most
individual
response
to
that
site
being
listed
again.
These
were
some
other
sites,
four
of
them
where
we
had
about
a
split
response
slightly
below
50
percent
and
then
the
majority
of
these
other
sites.
These
are
all
tier
two
properties,
so
none
of
these
factor
in
as
recommended
housing
sites.
But
the
thing
to
note
is
the
majority
of
these
in
hardest
City
Crossroads
part
of
the
City
Central
and
East,
as
well
as
some
South.
The
Anza
sites
that
are
tier
two
generally
got
a
favorable
response.
I
Next
steps
in
this
process,
why
why?
What
we're
really
talking
about
tonight
with
the
site's
inventory
and
why
it
needs
to
get
finalized,
is
it
is
the
critical
path
for
getting
our
environmental
review
process
started?
There's
going
to
be
an
environmental
impact
report
prepared
for
this
project
that
will
include
looking
at
rezoning
for
the
sites
so
until
we
can
get
this
finalized
and
know
which
sites
we're.
I
Looking
at
how
many
units
at
what
densities,
we
can't
really
move
on
the
environmental
document,
the
due
date
or
the
certification
date
that
was
anticipated
for
Bay
Area
cities
was
January
31
2023,
like
the
majority
of
Bay
Area
cities.
Cupertino
is
not
going
to
be
able
to
meet
this
date
for
having
its
housing
element
certified.
I
So
what
that
really
means
is
that
by
a
year
from
that
date,
January
31
2024
will
need
to
not
only
have
the
housing
element
certified
but
have
all
of
the
individual
housing
sites
rezoned
to
be
able
to
accommodate
the
arena.
If
you
had
the
the
real
significant
change
is
for
cities
that
were
certified
on
time,
that
being
January
2023
beta
fed
three
years
to
rezone,
we
will
have
one
it's
estimated,
that
the
eir
process
is
going
to
run
about
nine
months
time.
I
So
if
we
were
to
get
the
housing
sites
inventory
finalized
this
week,
we're
looking
at
hopefully
having
a
draft
eir
around
Memorial
Day
beginning
of
June
next
year.
I
Other
next
steps
outside
of
the
housing
site's
inventory.
The
Housing
Commission,
is
going
to
work
with
the
policy
and
program
aspect
of
this
to
try
to
tie
our
Housing
Programs
back
to
those
sites,
we're
hoping
to
have
the
meetings
with
the
Housing
Commission
as
soon
as
possible,
possibly
even
in
late
September
and
to
shortly
thereafter
have
a
public
draft
of
a
housing
element
that
goes
through
a
comment.
Pro
period,
that's
very
similar
to
SQL,
where
there's
a
30-day
comment
period
on
the
draft,
hcd
will
be
reviewing
all
the
comments
received
and
responses
to
those.
I
So
it
is
very
if
you
have
familiarity
with
the
SQL
process.
This
is
a
very
similar
method
way
to
approach
things
again
tonight,
just
to
emphasize,
because
there's
so
much
to
to
deal
with
with
the
housing
element.
What
we're
really
here
trying
to
focus
on
tonight
is
the
are
the
housing
sites
and
their
density.
It's
very
easy
to
tie
these
into
discussions
of
zoning
or
policy,
but
for
tonight
this
is
what
we're
going
to
try
to
focus
on
zoning
and
policy.
Discussions
will
certainly
come
later
and
are
also
a
key
aspect
of
the
housing
element.
I
I
I
Okay,
here's
here's
a
slide,
that's
essentially
looking
at
the
whole
city
and
classifying
all
the
housing
sites.
Tier
one
is
shown
in
yellow
again
those
are
your
recommended
housing
sites.
Tier
two
is
showed
in
Orange.
Those
sites
are
up
for
consideration,
but
no
longer
do
not
have
any
housing
units
proposed
on
them.
Now
they
could
be
added
to
the
list
if
tier
one
sites
were
deleted
or
added.
I
I
The
Red
Dot
on
the
site
indicates
that
the
city
has
received
owner
interest
in
the
form
of
a
letter
or
email
and
what
you
also
see
at
the
small
payable
on
the
map.
There
is
Target
density
and
height.
While
it's
an
imperfect
thing.
We've
tried
to
express
height
in
feet
based
on
density,
because
this
has
been
a
topic
at
the
at
several
of
the
meetings.
So
when
we're
talking
about
sites
that
are
50
dwelling
units
per
acre,
we're
looking
at
a
building
height
of
about
65
feet.
I
The
table
below
I
believe
where
it
says,
40
units
per
acre,
45,
45
foot
height
45
feet
would
be
the
recommended
height
alt
for
30
dwelling
units
per
acre.
So
the
35
on
that
last
row
below
there
that
would
be
describing
something
that
I
would
say
would
be
more
like
a
20
unit
per
acre
site.
I
I
The
next
here
is
the
north
Blaney
area.
There
are
two
properties
up
there,
just
south
of
280
on
the
east
side
of
North
Blaney.
The
larger
of
the
two
sites
is
a
mini
storage
with
an
adjacent
single
family
home
is
what's
existing
on
those
sites
today,
and
these
are
also
proposed
of
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
when
the
next
area
is
South
Blaney.
These
projects
are
between
South
Blaney
on
the
right
and
De
Anza
Boulevard
on
the
left,
and
they
are
located
on
the
north
side
of
Bollinger.
I
I
Moving
to
Heart
of
the
City
East
they're
directly
below
the
Valco
site,
shown
in
green
are
the
tier
one
properties.
There
are
really
two
sites
here,
I
believe
that
18a
is
referred
to
as
United
Furniture
site
and
just
to
the
east
of
that
is
a
gas
station
location.
These
are
the
only
tier
one
properties
on
Stevens,
Creek
Boulevard,
and
they
are
recommended
at
50
units
per
acre
again
with
the
Planning
Commission
recommendation
that
the
rear
of
these
sites
respect
the
density
of
their
neighborhoods
and
have
a
lower
density
and
or
lower
Building
height
on
it.
I
Similarly,
on
Heart
of
the
City
Crossroads,
which
was
shown
earlier,
all
of
the
sites
that
are
listed
here,
none
of
them
are
recommended
or
counting
towards
tier
one
housing
units.
We
did
feel
given
that
the
discussions
that
came
up
with
the
Planning
Commission
that
it
was
important
to
include
this
side,
this
slide
in
case
anybody
was
still
interested
in
sites
such
as
fontanas
or
the
former
Pizza
Hut.
But
again
this
is
not
recommended
and
the
large
block
there
on
the
south
side
of
Stevens
Creek
Boulevard.
I
We
do
not
have
any
onerous
interest
received
from
the
property
owner
and
the
last
area
before
I'm.
Going.
To
conclude,
this
part
of
the
presentation
we're
looking
at
is
the
Homestead
area
north
of
280.
Most
of
the
development
is
on
either
side
or
not
development.
Most
of
the
tier
one
properties
are
on
either
side
of
Stelling
Road
on
the
south
side
of
Homestead,
and
we
have
a
couple
other
smaller
sites
to
the
West,
19,
A
and
B,
for
which
we
have
owner
interest.
I
There's
the
remaining
information
for
those
the
cluster
of
sites
along
selling
and
Homestead
are
proposed
to
be
50
dwelling
unit
per
acre
sites,
similar
to
what
we're
looking
at
on
Stevens,
Creek,
Boulevard
and
South
bianza
Boulevard.
I
So
at
this
point,
I've
gone
through
the
overview
and
half
of
the
city
more
or
less
half
of
the
areas,
and
that
was
going
to
conclude
my
presentation
at
this
point.
So
I
would
be
happy
to
turn
this
back
to
the
council
or
if
there
would
be
public
comment
taken
at
this
time.
A
Okay,
great,
thank
you
very
much
Luke,
and
so
let
me
go
ahead
and
go
through
the
process
here.
I'm
gonna
go
ahead
and
share
one
panel
of
my
screen,
so
this
was
the
overview
slide
if
you're
following
along
and
you've
downloaded
the
presentations
on
our
website.
I
believe
this
is
slide
number
29
on
page
16,
although
that
might
be
a
little
bit
off.
Let
me
just
take
a
quick
look.
Yes,
it
is
slide.
29
is
on
page
15.,
and
so
the
overview
presentation
was
what
Luke
just
presented.
A
A
Video
has
has
me
on
here,
but
if
video
you
could
share
the
zoom
screen
if
it's
being
shared,
if
it's
not,
then
just
let
me
know
and
I
can
you
know
attempt
to
share
it
depending
on
what
you
guys
see?
Oh
you
only
see
a
blank
screen.
Okay,
so
that's
probably
why?
So,
if
you-
maybe
why
don't
I
do
this?
Why
don't
I
stop
to
share
and
then
whoever
was
sharing
their
screen?
Was
that
Luke
were
you
providing
it
or
was
maybe
the
city
clerk's
office
doing
the
presentations?
Yes,.
A
Yeah,
why
don't
you
bring
up
slide
number
30
again
and
then
we'll
you
know,
show
the
people
looking
on?
Okay,
so
that
should
be
I.
Don't
know
what
slide
that
is,
it's
probably
in
the
40s
or
something.
A
Yes,
slide
number
30
there,
okay,
so
to
make
it
clear
where
we
are
procedurally
we're
going
through
the
first
eight
sites
here,
A
through
H
in
terms
of
the
maps
that
we
just
looked
at,
and
so
we
do
invite
public
comment
generally
on
this
item,
but
we're
going
to
be
taking
these
in
in
tranches
because
we
anticipate
getting
through.
You
know
roughly
half
this
evening
and
possibly
needing
to
continue
this
to
tomorrow.
A
One
thing
I
will
say
before
we
set
those
expectations
going
forward
in
this
exercise
is
that
tomorrow
we
did
feel
is
very
necessary
to
have
a
live
discussion
and
to
give
people
time
to
provide
public
comment
at
this
time
at
the
very
beginning
of
the
item.
But
if
we
do
continue
it
to
tomorrow,
we
will
likely
notice
it
as
a
zoom
only
meeting,
and
so
let
me
just
check
in
with
the
city
manager
and
the
City
attorney.
Are
you
okay
with
that?
A
K
K
A
J
K
A
So
it
essentially
have
to
be
unlocked
and
available
to
the
public.
Okay,
okay,
understood
so,
let's
cross
that
Bridge
when,
if
we
get
to
it
and
so
once
again,
everyone
we're
taking
public
comment
generally
for
this
item
too,
and
so,
if
you
are
on
Zoom,
please
raise
your
hand
for
public
comment.
A
If
you
are
here,
live,
please
fill
out
a
blue
card,
we'll
take
a
public
comment
on
all
of
these
items,
but
please
just
be
advised
that
we're
looking
at
the
first
eight
of
them
a
through
H
for
the
various
you
know
proposed
sites
for
site
selection
of
the
housing
element.
And
so
let
me
go
to
my
participants
here.
A
Right
now,
I
have
six
participants
with
hands
up
in
Zoom
that
just
turned
into
five
and
then
six
now,
seven
okay,
so
they
are
Jennifer,
Kalisha,
Webster,
Kylie,
Clark,
Michael,
straws,
Joshua,
Pringle,
Govan,
tatachari,
Kylie,
Clark,
again
mayor
Dundon
and
Scott
Connolly,
and
so
we
asked
that
in
the
time
that
the
first
speaker
is
speaking,
please
either
have
your
hand
raised
in
Zoom
and
if
you're
live,
please
have
your
blue
card
filled
out.
There's
another
way
to
have
your
comments.
A
Read
into
the
record,
and
that's
if
you
email
your
comments
to
city
clerk,
that's
all
one
word
at
cupertino.org
in
the
time
allocated
form
the
first
person
to
speak,
and
so
we
will
go
in
that
order.
The
zoom
hands
and
then
the
blue
cards
live.
And
then
the
comments
read
into
the
record
by
the
city
clerk,
so
Jennifer
welcome
and
you'll
have
three
minutes.
L
Thank
you,
mayor
Darcy,
hi,
I'm,
Jennifer,
Griffin
and
I
actually
had
a
phone
call
a
few
seconds
ago
and
I
sent
them
away,
so
I
I
didn't
just
start
out
since
I
was
a
bit
confused
I.
My
one
of
the
things
of
my
concern
and
I
I
compliment
the
staff
and
Consultants
on
the
maps.
I
thought
they
were
very
well
done,
an
improvement.
There
is
something
that
is
a
tier
one
site
which
is
24a,
which
is
in
the
Valco
complex.
L
It
is
the
site
that
is
next
to
the
quote:
hole
in
the
wall
next
to
280
and
the
back
property.
Why
is
that
a
tier
one
I
understand
they're
trying
to
put
Supportive
Housing
in
there,
but
we
have
not
discussed
this
and
I.
Don't
think
that
that's
a
good
tier
one
I
live
near
that
area
and
the
East
Side
needs
to
know
what
is
going
in
there
and
we
need.
We
will
be
asking
questions
about
it.
L
The
other
sites
that
were
in,
where
is
you're,
bear
with
me
here,
because
there's
a
lot
of
papers,
there's
23e,
23g
and
23h
on
Wildflower
way
and
South
De
Anza
Boulevard.
Why
are
these
sites
in
black,
and
what
do
they
mean?
L
I
also
will
just
make
a
statement.
Hcd
right
now
has
viciously
attacked
the
city
of
San
Francisco
and
is
saying
very,
very
negative
things
about
City.
This
is
this
is
absolutely
hcd
should
not
be
doing
that.
You
do
not
do
that
to
people
to
cities
that
you
are
dealing
with,
hcd
is
making
up
its
own
rules
and
it's
becoming
to
be
a
very,
very
dangerous
average
adversary.
L
I
have
been
following
the
skag
Cog
in
Southern
California.
They
were
recently
given
three
years.
There
was
a
bill
that
was
passed
in
July.
They
have
been
gone
from
one
year
to
three
years
to
rezone.
We
need
to
look
at
that.
Northern
California
should
not
be
treated
any
differently.
I
do
not
agree
with
hcd;
they
are
out
of
line,
they
have
not
asked
the
public
and
I
will
tell
you
right
now.
I
will
never
vote
for
Gavin
Newsom
as
president
If.
This
nonsense
does
not
stop
with
hcd.
L
These
numbers
are
out
of
line
and
I
have
been
following
this
very
carefully
for
the
last
four
years,
and
it
is
intensely
for
the
last
year
and
a
half
I
will
not
have
my
state
put
through
this
type
of
Mayhem.
It
is
insulting
and
as
a
somebody,
a
voting
member
of
this
state
I
will
not
have
my
city
be
treated
the
way
hcd.
Nobody,
no
agency
in
this
state.
Okay,
can
you
imagine
NASA
behaving
that
way?
It
will
not
be
tolerated.
There
will
be
pushback.
There
is
an
initiative
called
the
neighborhood
Fair
neighborhood
initiative.
L
A
Thank
you
very
much
Jennifer
and,
in
addition
to
the
names
that
I
read
off
previously,
we
have
wrote
a
fry
as
well
on
Zoom
Madam
city
clerk.
Are
there
any
live
blue
cards
for
this
item
to
speak?
No.
B
A
B
A
M
Thank
you
good
evening,
mayor
and
city
council.
My
name
is
Kalisha
Webster
and
I
am
the
senior
housing
advocated
housing
choices,
a
non-profit
service
provider,
helping
people
with
Developmental
and
other
disabilities
to
find
and
retain
affordable
housing
throughout
Santa
Clara
County
in
developing
the
housing
site's
inventory.
Hd
requires
cities
to
affirmatively
further
fair
housing.
M
In
order
to
do
so,
the
city
must
first
complete
a
comprehensive
housing
needs
analysis
of
special
needs
groups,
assessment
of
fair
housing
and
housing
constraints
analysis
only
once
those
sections
of
the
housing
element
are
completed
and
specific
housing
needs
and
development
constraints
identified
and
the
city
create
a
compliant
housing
site's
inventory,
which
meets
hcd's
requirements
to
affirmatively
further
fair
housing,
because
the
city
has
chosen
to
proceed
with
developing
its
Health
insights
inventory
before
these
other
sections
are
complete.
There
are
many
shortfalls
at
hcd
is
likely
to
call
out
in
the
current
list.
M
Instead,
the
city
should
prioritize
sites
and
policies
which
increase
net
new
homes
while
minimizing
displacement
of
current
residents.
Please
continue
your
work
for
sustainable
plan
that
will
provide
housing
for
all
incomes
and
abilities,
and
that
will
further
fair
housing
practices.
Thank
you
thank.
N
Hello,
my
name
is
actually
Anusha
manava
I,
don't
know
why
it's
showed
up
as
Kylie
Clark,
but
I
am
a
program
associate
at
West
Valley,
Community,
Services
and
I've
been
working
closely
with
our
clients,
other
community
members
and
housing
element
staff
to
collaborate
and
bringing
more
housing
into
Cupertino
and
after
having
the
privilege
of
hearing
directly
from
clients
at
Community
meetings
and
through
my
job
I
found
out
how
valuable
it
is
to
hear
from
people
who
have
experienced
homelessness
and
housing
insecurity.
I
think.
N
The
way
we
see
housing
is
depicted
in
the
media
can
be
reductive
and
Miss
nuances
and
discussions.
We
have
about
housing
and
by
hearing
from
and
including
people
with
lived
experiences
in
our
discussions,
we
can
better
discuss
and
understand
housing
issues
with
more
humanity
and
Clarity.
That's
all
I'd
like
to
share.
Thank
you.
O
Hello,
thank
you
very
much
mayor
Paul,
hello.
Vice
mayor
Chao
and
members
of
the
city
council,
I
am
Michael
straws
I'm,
with
Kimco
Realty
and
Cupertino
Village
LP,
we
own
the
99
Ranch
anchored
Cupertino
Village
property
on
North
wolf
across
from
Apple
Park.
Our
shopping
center
is
referred
to
in
the
draft
housing
materials
as
area
a
the
north
Valco
Park
area.
I
wanted
to
comment
that
some
have
suggested
that
retail
properties
should
be
eliminated
from
the
inventory
list
to
preserve
the
city's
retail
inventory.
O
We
we
wanted
to
clarify
and
and
comment
that
we
that
that
we
are
a
retail
Reit,
so
retail
is
and
will
remain
our
core
use
at
Cupertino
Village,
and
also
to
note
that
our
plan
concept
accomplishes
the
first
200
or
170
to
200
Apartments
without
any
displacement
of
small
businesses
or
residents
and
with
more
rather
than
less
retail.
This
is
accomplished
by
adding
multi-family
over
a
new
replacement
retail
building
with
parking
below.
O
It's
also
contemplated
in
in
our
concept
that
a
future
second
phase
with
more
retail
enhancements
and
more
residential,
can
could
be
implemented
later
during
the
2023
to
2031
housing
element
cycle.
Our
housing
element
concept
also
does
not
impact
the
approved
hotel
at
our
property,
and
the
hotel
site
is
not
included.
We
wanted
to
note
that
we
think
that
retail
sites
are
wonderful
locations
to
add
density
and
to
add
residential
units,
and
the
two
uses
of
the
retail
and
and
housing
are
complementary
and
compatible
in
areas
where
there's
infrastructure
already
in
place.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
C
Thank
you
for
being
so
detailed
Michael.
The
question
that
I
would
ask
is,
if
you're,
adding
200
units
to
that
existing
site
and
keeping
the
retail
what
you
know
since
you've
already
kind
of
looked
at
this.
Can
you
tell
us
what
your
height
would
be.
O
A
I'm
going
to
cut
you
off
there,
councilmember
Willie,
in
the
interest
of
keeping
everything
within
three
minutes
Michael,
you
got
a
little
bit
of
time
left,
and
so
that's
the
that's
the
standing
practice.
If
it's
within
the
three
minutes,
I'll
go
ahead
and
open
it
up
for
questions
from
Council
and
so
Council.
If
you
do
have
those
questions,
though,
use
your
zoom
function,
hand
and
I'll
go
ahead
and
call
you
in
there.
Thank
you
very
much
so
next
we
have
Joshua
Pringle,
welcome,
Joshua.
P
Hello
Council,
my
name
is
Joshua
Pringle
I
am
a
current
resident
of
Cupertino
I,
actually
live
in
Vista
Village,
which
is
ran
by
West
Valley
Community
Services
I
just
want
to
give
some
insight.
You
know,
on
the
whole
horrible
housing
situation
here
in
Cupertino,
I've
been
living
at
Vista
village
for
the
past
eight
years
have
no
issues
here
whatsoever.
No
issues
in
the
city
of
Cupertino
as
a
whole.
P
The
process
was
kind
of
difficult
because
at
the
time
I
was
homeless
and
I
was
staying
in
a
THU
unit,
which
was
which
was
also
ran
by
West
Valley,
and
it
took
a
couple
months
before
a
caseworker
showed
up
to
the
house,
and
then
you
know
just
talked
to
everybody
in
the
unit.
Everybody
was
going
over
income
limits
and
stuff
like
that,
and
eventually
me
and
my
roommate
eventually
moved
in
back
in
April
of
2014.
P
the
whole
to
me
application
process
just
when
it
comes
to
just
renting
in
affordable
housing
unit.
I,
really
think
that
needs
to
be
changed,
because
the
reason
why
I
said
it
is
because
I
live
in
a
course
of
the
program
housing
unit.
P
Now-
and
it's
helped
me
out
a
lot
because
because
of
how
low
my
rent
is,
I'm
able
to
save
my
money
for
just
emergencies
or
just
other
things
and
I
just
wish,
it
was
solely
just
based
on
just
income
and
not
so
much
that
other
things
like
good
credit,
because
that
was
the
only
thing
that
was
really
holding
me
back,
because
I
made
money
I
made
enough
money
to
afford
the
housing,
but
they
would
turn
me
down
just
because
of
credit,
and
so
I
would
like
to
see
a
change
in
that,
and
also
just
more
afford
a
house
more
more
affordable
housing.
P
Excuse
me
just
for
families
in
general,
in
the
city,
I,
don't
think
we
have
enough
of
that.
So
I'm
glad
we're
having
I'm
glad
this.
This
meeting
came
about
and
yeah
and
I.
Thank
you
for.
Actually,
you
know
having
this
plan
to
build
more
housing
here
in
the
city,
because
I
do
love
this
city.
A
lot.
I
have
no
issues
here.
It's
a
safe
environment,
I
live
with
a
roommate
so
and
I
I've
lived
it
ever
since
so
yeah.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
Q
Hi,
can
you
hear
me?
Yes,
we
can
welcome
again.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Dear
mayor
council
members,
the
new
city
manager,
City
attorney,
and
the
city
clerk
I'm
I'm,
going
to
read
a
mail
which
was
sent
by
Peggy
Griffin
I'm
doing
this
on
her
behalf.
She
is
away
from
the
station,
so
she's
not
able
to
join
and
she
doesn't
have
access
to
Internet.
Q
So
let
me
just
read:
I'll
be
unable
to
attend
Monday
and
Tuesday
night's
meeting,
but
strongly
request
that
you
do
the
following:
distribute
the
sites
equitably
across
the
city
Reserve,
our
neighborhood
commercial
centers
find
old,
Office
Buildings.
Instead,
whenever
density
increases,
the
need
for
these
retail
centers
will
increase
substantially.
We
need
them
to
enable
our
city
to
thrive
and
make
it
walkable
from
homes
nearby
do
not
put
our
neighbor
neighborhood
commercial
centers
on
The
Chopping
Block.
Q
If
you
pick,
these
sites
require
that
the
first
floor
be
80
percent
of
the
total
existing
square
footage
retail
and
that
at
a
minimum
there's
at
least
as
much
retail
square
footage
as
exists
today,
write
down
right
now.
The
center
at
the
center
at
South,
Blaney
and
Prospect,
is
on
the
list.
The
center
at
Homestead,
Road
and
Stelling
is
on
the
list.
Recently
we
have
lost
the
center
at
Foothill,
Expressway
and
Stevens
Creek
due
to
staff.
This
the
center
at
Foothill
and
Michelin
has
been
reduced
significantly
remember.
Q
Any
housing
element
site
is
then
eligible
to
be
an
SB
35
site
make
sure
the
sites
you
pick
can
reasonably
handle
an
sv35
project.
Remember
the
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
is
the
minimum
density
the
STD
considers
possible
for
sites
that
might
have
affordable
housing.
That's
why
the
push
for
30
dwelling
units
per
acre,
but
not
every
site,
is
capable
of
handling
the
density.
Please
be
reasonable.
Sincerely
Peggy,
Griffin
and
I
would
like
to
add.
I
would
like
to
welcome
our
new
city
manager
and
and
also
I.
A
Thank
you
govind.
Next,
we
do
have
that
Second
Hand
by
Kylie,
Clark
and
so
Kylie.
If
you're
different
from
the
first
Speaker
then
feel
free
to
give
your
remarks.
R
Hi,
thank
you.
So
much
sorry,
I,
don't
know
what
that
mix-up
was,
but
this
is
the
real
Kylie
Clark
I'm,
the
public
policy
coordinator
at
West,
Valley,
Community
Services,
and
we
have
a
couple
of
folks
with
Lyft
experience
here
who
I'm
excited
that
you're
getting
to
hear
from
so
I
just
want
to.
Thank
you
so
much
for
your
hard
work
and
dedication
as
you
work
to
build
more
housing
in
Cupertino,
and
also
to
encourage
you
to
give
extra
weight
to
these
voices
of
people
who
are
actually
impacted
by
the
housing
crisis.
R
As
you
know,
there's
a
massive
housing
shortage
in
the
city
and
we
now
have
the
opportunity
to
decide
where
this
much
needed
housing
will
go.
So
thank
you
for
including
the
voices
of
the
community
in
these
decisions.
It's
been
really
great,
having
West,
Valley,
Community
Services
work
with
the
city
to
include
our
clients
and
other
community
members
in
the
process,
and
thank
you
to
the
council
for
your
support,
as
we've
done
this
and
I
look
forward
to
seeing
which
sites
you
move
forward
with.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
very
much
Kylie
and
our
next
speaker
I
have
mayor
dunden
in
my
notes.
Oh
yes,
hand
raised
from
mayor.
Welcome.
S
You
thank
you,
council
members.
I
am
one
of
those
people
that
have
lived
experience.
I
am
a
Cupertino
resident,
my
name
is
Mayor
dungeon
I
am
a
person
with
disabilities
and
I
also
live
in
below
market
rate
housing.
S
It's
been
a
very
huge
privilege
for
me
to
do
so,
and
it
did
take
me
three
years
of
continuously
applying
each
year
to
qualify
for
that
below
market
rate
housing
at
the
time
and
I
believe
still
now.
There
is
no
below
market
rate
housing
that
is
accessible,
so
I
would
just
ask
that
we
continue
to
be
aware
that
there's
a
huge
need
from
several
directions:
people
with
disabilities,
but
also
seniors
so
in
terms
of
having
specific
senior
housing
in
specific
accessibility
needs
met
by
some
of
the
housing
that
we
are
producing.
S
It
really
does
benefit
us
to
have
people
of
many
different
classes
and
capacities
within
the
communities
because
they
become
quite
Fierce
about
how
they
participate
in
their
community,
and
that
is
incredibly
valuable
so
that
our
cities
don't
die
so
as
we're
working
through
all
of
the
specific
sites
and
we're
being
careful
about
the
traffic
and
all
of
the
other
issues
that
we're
balancing
here.
S
I
do
just
want
to
continue
to
have
us
being
clear
that
having
a
diverse
Community
does
actually
make
us
more
vibrant
and
alive,
and
we
are
definitely
missing
any
of
the
middle
housing
so
in
having
these
affordable
housing
sites.
I
often
hear
that
people
are
talking
about
all
the
problems
that
it
brings.
I
want
to
say
from
lived
experience.
That
is,
that
is
not
my
experience.
S
A
T
Good
afternoon
good
evening,
council
members
just
wanted
to
address
a
couple
of
things:
I
really
liked
it.
As
the
Cupertino
grows
I
like
to
do,
we
can
to
retain
Our
Community
Values,
which
does
include
diversity
but
also
retains
Cupertino
as
a
great
place
to
live
work
shop
and
play
now.
I
want
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
protecting
our
tax
revenue.
T
The
other
one
also
has
to
do
with
income
to
the
city,
which
preserves
our
Our
Community.
Values
is
sales
tax
now
per
the
also
for
the
most
recent
budget.
We
get
about
40
million
dollars
in
sales
tax
and
by
my
estimate
about
half
of
that.
Maybe
20
million
is
coming
from
Apple
and
I
really
I.
Think
of
that
as
sort
of
bonus
money,
because
that
money
is
coming
from
a
lot
of
that
money
is
coming
from
online
purchases
all
over
the
state
of
California.
T
So
when
Apple
products
are
purchased
online,
it
is
as
though
those
products
have
been
purchased
in
Cupertino,
and
we
get
65
of
that
revenue
and
apple
actually
gets
35
of
it.
So
we
need
to
do
what
we
can
to
protect
our
sales
tax
revenue,
which
means
to
protect
our
commercial
centers.
So
it
makes
continues
to
make
Cupertino
a
great
place
to
live
workshop
and
play.
We
are
continuing.
As
Govan
mentioned
per
Peggy's
commentary.
T
We
have
been
losing
our
commercial
centers,
we've
been
losing
our
neighborhood
commercial
centers,
and
that
means
we
can't
walk
to
shop
and
and
it
it's
it
it's
leading
to
the
destruction
of
our
community
and
making
it.
You
know,
isn't
as
great
a
place
to
live
anymore,
so
I.
Thank
you
very
much
and
let's
do
what
we
can
to
protect
our
our
Revenue
to
the
city
through
property,
tax
and
sales
tax.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
Rhoda,
and
that
is
our
last
speaker.
We
don't
have
any
further
hands
that
were
up
at
the
time
that
the
first
Speaker
concluded
speaking
at
this
time.
We
had
no
blue
cards
that
had
come
in
at
that
point
and
no
emails
as
well
to
be
read
into
the
record,
and
so
let's
go
ahead
and
bring
this
back
to
council
and
I'll
go
ahead
and
provide
an
allocation
of
five
minutes
each
for
any
follow-ups
to
the
public
comments.
E
Okay,
thank
you.
So
I
was
just
wondering
because
the
comment
about
the
commercial
centers
was
was
brought
up.
Were
there
any
office
only
locations
within
our
housing
element,
these
the
site
selection
list?
That's
the
first
question.
A
Okay,
thanks
councilmember
Luke,
you
have
your
camera
on.
Did
you
want
to
speak
to
that
question?.
I
Yes,
so
thank
you,
mayor
Paul
and
council
member
Moore
I,
believe
you
know,
Pew
gosh,
as
planning
manager
with
the
history,
probably
has
more
history
with
the
individual
sites,
but
I
do
believe.
We
have
some
office
and
quite
a
few
commercial
properties
on
the
housing
list.
We've
with
the
exception
of
single-family
homes,
there's
very
little
residential
on
the
current
list.
A
E
Commercial
but
I
don't
see
I,
don't
see
the
distinction
with
the
with
the
with
this,
with
the
zoning
on
on
the
list
that
something
was
originally
just
zoned
for
office.
So
I
was
just
curious
about
that.
U
Thank
you,
Mr
Mayor,
good
evening
Council,
when
we
were
looking
at
the
site
so
so
historically,
the
city
has
not
had
any
sites
that
are
zoned
exclusively
or
from
a
land
use
perspective
that
are
used
exclusively
for
office
uses.
So
much
of
the
city
has
a
land
use
that
allows
both
office
and
Commercial
uses.
So
I,
don't
think.
If
you
went
through
our
our
land
use
designations,
you
would
find
something.
U
That's
that's
only
office
only
you
might
find
the
one
off
site,
maybe
but
in
terms
of
the
site
selection
process,
we
did
go
through
with
the
Planning
Commission.
We
went
through
every
site,
we
kind
of
talked
about.
What's
on
the
site
as
it
exists
today,
Etc
I
was
just
briefly
looking
after
you
asked
the
question
I
believe
there
are
at
least
two
sites
that
I
could
identify
that
currently
only
have
offices
on
them.
One
I
believe
is
a
a
site
in
the
gosh,
the
barlap
Preston
area.
U
That's
the
north
Foothill
Boulevard,
it's
site,
1C
I,
believe
and
that
one
has
an
office
building
on
it
and
then
the
other
one
is
the
office
building
at
the
southwest
corner
of
McClellan
and
Stelling
Boulevard.
Those
were
the
two
that
I
could
point
you
to
off.
Just
off
the
cuff.
At
this
point,
oh.
E
Okay,
okay
I
was
I
was
just
curious
about
that
with
regards
to
the
the
Kimco
site,
if
the
city
clerk
Kirsten,
if
you
could
show
the
one
PDF
slide,
if
you
could
screen
share
that,
because
I
think
it
is
a
little
misleading.
If,
if
we're
going
to
have
something
which
is
a
mixed
use
site
to
show
us
the
nice
images
from
I
think
it
was
a
league
of
California
cities
had
had
the
nice
images
showing
us
what
things
will
look
like
if
they're
they're
housing
at
various
densities.
E
So
so
this
is
a
mixed
use
site
and
we
all
know
this.
This
is
the
the
rise
before
and
after
before
is
the
the
previous
Falco
sp35
version,
and
after
is
the
the
current
Rise
and
that
you're
looking
at
48
dwelling
units
per
acre.
So
that's
why
I'm
saying
it's
misleading
to
tell
us
to
show
us
those
images
of
what
you
know.
E
So,
with
regards
to
the
Kimco
site
hearing
that
the
retail
would
be
retained
and
that
you
would
have
I
I'm,
presuming
residential
over
the
retail
and
and
at
the
percentages
that
we're
asking
for
for
include
illusionary
housing,
I
think
they
there's
going
to
be
qualification
for
density
bonus
units
on
top
of
that
plus
waivers,
if
I'm
understanding
this
correctly
and
and
perhaps
someone
from
staff
would
could
could
let
me
know
on
that
that
and
those
waivers
could
be
for
height
or
or
set
back
things
of
that
nature
am
I.
A
Seconds
if
it
takes
longer
I'll
start
my
clock
Steph,
did
you
want
to
Luke
or
Pew?
Did
you
want
to
answer
that.
I
Yeah
regarding
the
the
density
bonus,
questions
and
waivers,
those
are
certainly
in
play
on
all
of
the
housing
sites.
So
I
think
when
we're.
You
know
two
things:
when
we're
talking
about
housing
and
Heights
based
on
specific
densities,
we
realize
it
is
very
general
if
you
have
a
mixed-use
commercial
at
the
base,
you're
likely
going
to
have
taller
buildings
because
you're
having
a
floor
devoted
to
commercial
use
and
that
you
tend
to
have
a
higher
ceiling
height
on
that,
so
that
pushes
the
overall
Building
height
up.
I
But
when
we
are
talking
about
the
you
know
whether
it's
density
or
height
density
bonus
is
not
factored
into
that
equation.
And
again
we
don't.
We
don't
have
specific
projects
before
us
now,
I
think
the
Assumption,
particularly
foresights
30
units
per
acre
or
50
units
per
acre,
we're
probably
going
to
see
some
type
of
a
density
bonus
coming
in
on
I
would
say
nearly
all
of
those
properties.
I
You
may
get
a
few
that
don't,
but
I
would
expect
density
bonus
waivers
to
be
requested,
and
if
we,
if
we
have
any
other
further
discussion
on
this
I
know,
David
masonton
with
Els
architecture
is
here.
David
may
have
something
as
well
to
to
add
to
this
discussion.
E
Okay,
real
real
quick,
if
I
may,
through
the
mayor,
sure
go
ahead
with
regards
to
the
eir
I
I
think
that
there
would
be
a
component
in
there
where
you
would
be
looking
at
at
Heights
expected
Heights
and
I
just
want
to
point
out
that
that
might
be
quite
a
challenge
to
guesstimate
if,
if
we're
looking
at
at
a
mixed-use
site
with
with
the
density
bonus
added
on
so
do
you
anticipate
that
Heights
would
be
mentioned?
E
I
know
that
the
previous
2014
version
had
some
Heights
mentioned,
and
some
different
scenarios
for
that
as
well.
Thank
you.
A
If
I
may,
please
is
that
City
attorney.
K
Jensen,
yes,
please
proceed.
Yes,
so
generally
you
wouldn't
need
to
look
at
at
height
to
determine
environmental
impact.
So
so
so
we
you
know,
we
look
at
the
total
number
of
units
to
determine
some
impacts,
such
as
air
quality,
but
height
generally,
would
not
factor
into
that
analysis.
E
Okay,
so
I.
Thank
you.
I
I've
reached
the
end
of
my
time,
but
I
did
want
to
comment
briefly
on
with
regards
to
displacement,
and
you
know,
I
can
understand
the
the
wish
to
not
have
displacement
at
this
time
or
any
other
time.
E
But
as
we
move
on
to
our
next
housing
element,
we
are
going
to
run
out
of
these
commercial
spaces
which
are
being
utilized
for
the
housing
element
process,
and
we
will
need
to
do
infill
residential
development
in
and
it's
it's
going
to
happen
and
I
personally.
E
I
would
rather
see
it
begun
now
for
some
of
the
older
apartment
units,
perhaps
that
that
some
that
a
new
development
could
happen,
and
then
it's
done
in
a
slow
and
methodical
way,
rather
than
we
essentially
hit
the
wall
on
on
the
available
property
these
in
our
next
cycle
and
then
we're
then
we're
forced
to
have
a
number
of
of
apartment
buildings
end
up
needing
to
to
be
entitled.
A
Council
member
Moore
I'm
going
to
stop
you
there
because
you've
now
utilized
three
minutes
of
my
time.
So
I'm
gonna
go
ahead
and
go
on
to
vice
mayor
ciao
of
vice
mayor
Joe.
F
I
yeah
I'd
like
to
get
an
answer
for
one
of
the
Public's
comment
about
the
fair
housing
assessment.
I
think
I
have
been
asking
for
that.
Sixth
March.
So
what's
the
status
on
that,
it
seems
I,
think
it's
a
collection
Webster
she
mentioned.
The
HTT
requires
us
to
First.
Do
the
fair
housing
assessment
and
then
to
other
parts
of
the
housing
element
is
first.
Is
that
true?
Second,
what's
the
status
of
that.
V
Yes,
we
are
doing
these
in
parallel.
We
we
have
already
initiated
our
draft.
We
have
doing.
We
have
gone
a
long
way
with
our
analysis,
so
we
are
taking
into
consideration
affh
as
we
consider
these
sites
throughout
the
process
and
affh
will
absolutely
be
prominent
in
our
process
as
we
move
forward
in
discussing
policy
and
how
policy
relates
to
these
sites.
F
V
V
This
is
an
iterative
process,
so
we
we
have
initiated
our
analysis
and
we
have
initiated
our
draft
document
for
that
section
of
our
of
our
draft
plan.
So
it
is
happening.
It
is
coinciding.
They
are
happening
in
parallel.
Hcd
does
not
require
that
one
must
be
complete
before
the
next
step
begins.
To
answer
your
question
directly.
F
No
that's
good
to
know
so
you
did
consider
the
fair
housing
assessment.
You
know
draft
form.
However,
no
the
council
is
asked
to
make
decision
without
the
knowledge
of
any
draft
fair
housing
assessment
that
doesn't
seem
to
be
appropriate,
since
the
draft
should
be
shared
with
the
console.
So
when
we
make
decision,
we
do
consider
those
even
in
the
draft
draft
form.
V
What
we
understand
about
affh
when
it
comes
to
Cupertino
is
that
it
is
the
highest
resource
area
throughout
the
city.
So,
as
as
so,
we
don't
have
the
same
kind
of
challenges
that
some
other
cities
within
California
do
when
you
consider
geographical
locations.
F
V
F
You
know
what
I
believe
into
the
time
sorry
I
have
to
cut
you
off,
so
I
see
that
some
of
the
tier
one
sides
have
no
owner
interest,
but
some
of
the
tier
two
sites
have
owner
interest.
So
how
are
decision
recommendations
made
that
some
without
owner
actress
or
interior,
one
versus
yeah?
Why?
Why
is
there
a
different.
I
If
I
can
I'll
try
to
answer
that,
some
of
the
tier
two
sites
before
didn't
meet
the
area
requirements.
For
instance,
they
were
too
small,
even
though
we
had
owner
interest
and
when
we
presented
the
sites
also
to
the
Planning
Commission,
their
tier
one
rose
to
the
level
it
did,
because
those
were
the
sites.
The
commissions
supported
housing
more
so
on.
So
it
could
be
location,
it
could
be
the
size
of
the
tier
2
site
owner
owner
interest
alone
was
not
something
that
guided
it
had
to.
F
J
I
It's
an
attachment
C
to
the
staff
report,
there's
a
two-page
text
that
describes
very
briefly
what
the
commission,
what
their
rationale
was
or
why
the
recommendations
were
made
or
if
there
were
changes
to
the
particular
site.
It's
very
brief,
but
that
attempts
to
to
clarify
why
certain
decisions
were
made.
F
Okay,
thank
you
and
then
on
I
hope
to
clarify
with
some
sites
who
are
not
selected
as
housing
element
sites,
for
example,
Kenyan
Crossing
on
could
still
proposed
project
on
any
time
during
a
housing
element
cycle
right.
So
what's
the
difference
when
your
site
is
selected
or
not
so
versus
not
selected,
not
selective
doesn't
mean
the
owner
cannot
proceed
with
building
a
proposed
project.
So
what
difference
does
that
does.
A
I
A
I
A
Okay,
okay,
I'm
going
to
cut
you
off
there.
So
let's
go
ahead
and
you
know
if
people
want
another
round,
but
let
me
just
give
a
fair
opportunity
for
everyone
to
ask
some
questions
first.
So
next
we
have
council,
member,
Willie
and
then
councilmember
way.
C
Okay,
I'll
start
first,
just
real
briefly,
I'm,
so
glad
we
had
this
continued
to
tonight,
so
that
we're
coming
at
things
with
a
a
focus
as
opposed
to
a
huge
agenda
like
we
usually
have
on
our
council
meeting.
So
thank
you
very
much
for
doing
that.
Second
up
Luke.
Thank
you.
So
much
for
a
a
very
nice
presentation
get
us
all
back
up
to
speed
on
this.
The
residents
that
are
watching
great
now
we're
focused
now
we're
able
to
to
work
through
this.
C
The
first
item,
I'd
like
to
bring
up,
is
going
to
be
with
resident
engagement.
I
did
look
at
the
attachment.
You
know
they
had
resident
responses,
and
you
know
I
hear
that
there's
a
thousand
responses.
C
What
I
really
want
to
know,
though,
is
really
how
many
residents
have
been
participating
throughout
this
process
to
date.
If
you
can
give
me
that
that
would
be
great
if
you
have
a
table,
how
many
of
them,
how
many
people
participated
in
the
survey
I
I'm,
unfortunately,
feeling
that
number
of
1000
responses
or
comments.
One
thousand
comments:
it
gives
the
wrong
impression.
C
If
somebody
takes
the
survey,
this
is
the
way
I
feel
and
if,
if
I'm
incorrect
by
all
means
correct
me,
if
someone
takes
the
survey
and
has
20
comments,
it
adds
20
to
that
number,
bringing
it
to
a
thousand.
So
again,
I
want
to
know
how
many
residents
have
been
participating.
How
many
residents
are
aware
we
sent
the
postcards
to
every
household,
but
how
many
people
have
truly
been
participating
in
this
very
important
process?
That's
the
first
main
question:
do
what
you
can
to
answer
that
and
then
I
have
a
second
question.
I
I'll
try
to
answer
that
quickly:
I'll
defer
on
the
survey
component
to
Andy,
but
we
have
certainly
been
doing
a
lot
of
notice.
Our
our
lists
on
our
e-notifications
are
probably
about
18
to
1900
people
who've
registered,
who
are
regularly
receiving
notifications
of
the
process.
The
attendance
at
the
meetings
is
not
you
know
in
that
range.
I
would
say
the
two
Community
meetings
we
had
in
May
and
July
were
our
most
heavily
attended.
We
got
about
a
hundred
people
register.
J
I
I
The
July
meeting
was
all
virtual
and
we
probably
had
about
the
same
amount
of
participation,
but
it
was
all
in
a
virtual
format,
so
I
don't
have
a
table
or
specific
numbers,
but
I
know
we
have
been
trying
to
do
all
we
can,
through
our
websites,
social
media,
everything
possible
to
try
to
gauge
interest
on
this.
I
will
defer
to
Andy
on
the
survey
and
the
comment.
The
question
on
that.
C
V
Ahead,
oh
yes,
we
do
have
a
separate
housing
survey,
that's
available
on
our
website
right
now
and
we'll
be
tallying
up
the
results
from
that,
and
for
that
we'll
have
specific
numbers
of
people
who
may
have
participated.
It
is
true
that
the
way
that
we
calculated
over
a
thousand
particular
comments
is
that
if
somebody
bothered
to
take
the
time
to
comment
on
more
than
one
location,
then
each
of
those
was
considered
a
unique
comment
and
they've
all
been
tallied
up
together
with
the
attachment
that
was
made
available.
C
C
A
C
And
he
said
that
Saratoga
put
up
a
sign
and
after
they
did
that
they
had
a
huge
number
of
residents
that
participated.
I,
think
we
need
to
learn
from
our
surrounding
neighborhoods
and
do
at
least
as
good
as
them
so
I'll
leave
it
at
that.
I
do
have
other
questions,
so
I
would
like
a
second
round
great.
W
Thank
you,
mayor
Paul,
so
my
questions
are
are
for
maybe
whoever
can
answer
it?
One
question
from
the
residents
is:
she
would
prefer
owner
occupied
housing,
which
I
think
is
a
pretty
reasonable
request
and
how
is
legally
that
we
can
say
we
want
percentage
of
owner
occupied
or
residual
guideline
to
follow
for
the
Developers.
I
I
will
take
a
shot
at
that
generally,
when
you're
looking
at
Zoning
for
housing,
it's
you're
you're,
looking
at
things
like
again
density
height
and
the
residential
use,
not
the
type
of
tenancy
that
you
have
involved.
You
know
I
I,
think
as
you
go
to
you
know.
W
So
it's
basically
the
developers
would
probably
decide
how
many
percentage
that
the
city
really
doesn't
have
the
legal
authority
to
demand
it.
If
I
can
understand
it
as
it
is.
There.
K
W
Thank
you,
and
also
on
the
mix
you
on
the
preserving
our
retail
commercial
opportunities.
We
can't
make
make
it
a
mixed
use,
demand
or
or
provide
that
guidelines,
but
it's
up
to
developers
whether
they
want
to
have
a
mixed
use
or
only
residential,
I
kind
of
like
to
know
the
legal
authorities
that
city
has.
K
So
I
mean
this:
the
city,
the
city,
has
you
know
flexibility
to
to
require
things
like
ground,
filler,
commercial,
there's,
no
legal
prohibition
to
that.
So
it's
it's
more
of
an
economic
consideration
and
then
a
consideration
of
density.
You
know,
if
you
add
an
additional
floor
of
commercial.
The
same
number
of
housing
units
is
going
to
be.
You
know,
10
to
15
feet
higher.
W
Okay,
so,
for
example,
we
zoned
it
mixed
use,
and
but
the
developer
comes
in
was
just
residential.
Does
the
city
have
any
recourse
to
demand
more
a
mixed
use
instead
of
a
just
residential
I.
W
Okay,
okay,
so,
but
we
can
pay
attention
to
that.
So
I
just
have
one
suggestion
on
the
pipeline
projects.
I
am
very
concerned
about
the
pylon
projects
they
are
in
the
pipeline,
so
we
have
communication
methods
with
the
owner.
So
can
we
at
least
reach
out
and
get
a
commitment
letter
saying
that
they
are
going
to
be
building
it
in
the
next
eight
years
so
that
at
least
we're
satisfied?
The
hcd's
demands,
if,
if
that's
possible,
I
think
that
would
be
good
for
our
pipeline
projects
to
receive
a
commitment
letter
from
the
owners.
A
Okay,
well,
please
proceed
Luke,
no.
W
A
Right,
councilman
boy,
thank
you
very
much
you're
at
8
40..
That
is
actually
a
remaining
time
other
than
maybe
just
a
few
seconds
that
I
have.
But
let's
let's
go
another
round
unless
you
have
a
follow-up
question
councilman
away
at
this
point,
no!
No
at
this
time.
Okay!
So
let's
do
this!
It
stands
at
6.
30!
A
Do
Let
me,
do
a
quick
poll
of
people
with
their
hands
raised,
so
we've
got
vice
mayor,
Chow,
council,
member
Willie,
council
member
Moore.
Do
you
think
another
three
minutes
would
do
it
or
are
you
thinking
a
little
bit
more
time
for
your
initial
questions
here
and
so,
let's
start
with,
since
we
started
with
council
member
more,
let's
start
with
councilmember
Moore,
don't
go
into
the
questions.
Just
do
you
think
about
three
minutes
will
do
it.
E
Could
you
clarify
mayor
Paul
what
you're
expecting
to
have
after
these
initial
questions?
Yes,.
A
A
So
there
will
be
abundant
chances
to
ask
at
least
eight,
hopefully
this
evening,
for
each
of
the
maps.
Okay,.
E
A
Oh
yes,
I'm
having
the
same
stop
at
midnight
that
I've
had
for
the
you
know,
duration
of
this
year
and
and
and.
J
A
Previous
year
last
year,
all
right,
thank
you,
you're
welcome.
So
three
minutes
is
good
councilmember
vice
mayor
Chow.
Are
you
in
agreement
with
that?
Would
three
minutes
do
it
for
you.
J
A
It
okay
and
councilmember
Willie.
C
A
Your
best
all
right,
okay,
well
customer,
will
your
hands
still
raised,
but
I'm
gonna
assume
that
you'll
you'll
stay
within
time
all
right,
I'm,
not
seating
over
any
time
this
time.
So
let
me
have
a
council
member
Moore.
Take
nice.
A
Council
member
more
you
have
before,
but
but
let
me
since
you're,
not
on
your.
E
Cameras,
yeah
pardon
yeah
I
was
actually
after
the
vice
mayor
I,
if
my
hand
was
raised
after
hers.
E
Okay-
okay,
that's
that's!
Fine.
I
was
looking
at
well
in
hearing
this
concern
about
the
pipeline
projects
and
and
looking
at
this
there's
a
newsletter
someone
puts
out
and
I
would
I
would
like
to
hear
what
the
what
the
city
has
to
say
about
The
Rise
project-
and
you
know,
what's
going
on
with
that.
I
think.
That's
probably
the
biggest
question
people
have
and
what
is
your
understanding
from
the
developer?
You
know
I
have
seen
the
Geo
Tracker
reports
that
are
coming
through.
E
What
is
your
understanding
from
the
developer
about
their
intention
to
move
forward
with
that
particular
projects?
I
do
recall
in
2018
there
was
a
time
estimate
of
six
to
eight
years
and
there
was
a
different
project
with
an
eir
that
studied
a
10-year
time
line,
but
verbally
a
member
of
the
developers.
Teams
said
something
like
six
to
eight
years.
For
that,
so
there's
some
comment
about
what
their
intentions
are.
I'd,
love
to
hear
that.
Thank
you.
K
Yeah
I,
just
I
I,
addressed
that
question.
To
the
extent
we
can
so
you
know
so
you
know
so
for
purposes
of
this
exercise.
You
know
we
have
every
reason
to
believe
that
that
project
is
moving
forward
and
we
are
going
to
provide
evidence
to
hcd
that
it
will
be
likely
to
be
completed
within
the
six
cycle
time
period
by
2031..
K
So
so
that's
you
know,
I
think,
that's
that's
what
we
can
say
about
it
tonight
for
purposes
of
this
exercise
and
I'm
certainly
able
to
have
a
broader
discussion
of
it
with
any
council
member
that
would
like
to,
but
it
that
really
hasn't
been
agendized
tonight.
E
Okay
through
the
mayor,
if
I
may
ask
this
question,
is
no:
it's
still
your
floor.
You
still.
E
Is
there
anything
that
the
city
is
doing,
which
is
slowing
that
project
down?
No
thank
you.
A
Okay,
well,
thank
you
very
much.
Councilman
Moore!
That's
a
minute
for
you
in
your
time.
Let's
go
on
to
vice
mayor
ciao,.
F
Okay,
thank
you
so
for
the
future.
Could
we
please
add,
in
addition
to
the
units
per
acre,
that's
zoned
for
also
the
units
for
density
bonus,
that's
35
for
in
the
interest
of
transparency,
especially
since
I
think
Luke
mentioned
the
likely
all
the
projects
will
request
the
city
bonus,
so
I
think
then
this
way
the
public
would
know.
F
Here's
what
it's
known
for,
but
he's
here
is
what
it
will
actually
be
built
for,
and
then
people
would
have
transparency
on
what
exactly
aside
will
be
the
build
for,
and
then
one
public
comment
mentioned
about:
more
affordable
housing
for
families,
I
think
for
we
we
have
seen
quite
a
lot
of
affordable
housing,
but
then
they
tend
to
come
in
for
seniors
or
in
steel
deals
or
one
bedroom,
but
affordable
housing
for
two
or
three
bedrooms
we
tend
to
get.
The
developer
will
ask
for
concession.
F
As
a
result,
even
our
BMR
menu
requests,
comparable
units
dies
and
unit
type.
They
get
exception
on
that.
So
maybe
this
is
not
the
topic
of
this
discussion,
but
I
think
in
our
housing
policies.
We
need
to
talk
really
need
to
have
policies
to
ensure
that
they
cannot
take
its
exception
on
our
requirement
to
provide
bigger,
affordable
below
market
rate
units
and
for
the
Kinko's
side.
F
I
I
do
wonder
if
the
current
developer
has
interest
of
building
only
redevelop
only
one
building
of
the
entire
site
is
it
possible.
We
only
Zone
a
portion
of
the
site
for
residential
at
the
density
that
they
request
rather
than
in
the
entire
site,
because,
as
we
know,
property
could
change
head.
The
next
developer
could
come
in
and
say:
I
want
to
apply
this
density
for
the
entire
site,
and
then
we
lose
all
the
retail,
so
I'm
just
wondering
whether
it's
possible
to
zoom
a
specific
portion
of
a
site
for
certain
density,
30.
A
A
To
answer
that
question
regarding
partial
rezoning
of
site
Luke.
I
We
yeah
well,
you
could
Zone
a
portion
of
a
site
or
an
individual
property
at
a
different
density
that
that
can
be
done
for
for
that
site.
We
believe
what
was
recommended
was
appropriate.
I
The
I
believe
the
the
hotel
property
was
taken
out
of
the
site,
with
the
remainder
being
eligible
for
Housing
Development,
but
if
the
council
chooses
to
focus
zoning
or
a
particular
density
on
a
property
that
can
certainly
that
certainly
could
be
your
decision.
Yeah.
F
Thank
you,
I
didn't
quite
get
an
answer
for
my
earlier
question.
What
difference
does
it
make
for
a
property
owner
or
a
applicant?
Whether
a
site
is
still
is
selected
as
housing
element
site
versus?
Not
what
difference
does
it
make
in
terms
of
the
the
laws
they
have
to
comply
with,
or
it
doesn't
make
a
difference
to
them
except
then,
now
they
have
a
okay.
G
A
I
I'll
try
to
do
it
very
briefly.
If
you're
a
housing
element
site
one
benefit,
you
would
get
say
is
you
are
on
the
city's
list
identified
as
a
housing
element
site?
We
would
be
doing
an
environmental
impact
report,
analyzing
Housing
Development
on
that
property,
so
you
would
get
the
benefit
as
a
property
owner.
A
I
A
Sorry
I'm
cutting
you
off
vice
mayor
child
I'm,
cutting
off.
Let's
go
councilmember
Willie.
C
Great,
thank
you
very
much,
so
we
know
what
we
must
do.
That's
not
an
issue
here.
I'd
like
to
share
my
screen.
C
C
This
is
the
Saratoga
sign
and
the
size
of
Cupertino
I
think
we
need
one
of
these
on
West
Stevens,
Creek,
East,
Stevens,
Creek
I
think
we
need
South,
De,
Anza,
Boulevard,
North
de
ANZ
Boulevard,
and
one
on
Homestead
I
just
leave
it
at
that.
We
need
the
community
to
be
aware
of,
what's
going
on
and
be
a
part
of
the
process.
Next
thing
that
I
will
pull
up
here.
C
So
bub
road
is
supposedly
tomorrow
night,
but
I
don't
see
what
I'm
after
onto
the
bub
road,
so
I'd
like
to
point
it
out.
Hopefully,
City
staff
would
do
a
little
bit
of
research,
I've
driven
bubb
Road
a
lot
taking
my
kids
to
Kennedy
for
sports
Kennedy
School.
All
these
Office
Buildings
here
I
think
really
need
to
be
looked
at
hard,
we're
going
to
gain
almost
2
million
square
feet
of
office
at
Valco.
Here's
all
this
office
building
A
lot
of
it
is
very
old.
C
It's
next
to
the
freeway
and
it's
next
to
the
railroad
tracks
and
it's
not
a
budding
houses
directly.
So
here
is
prime
high
density
locations.
I'd
like
to
know
how
many
acres,
how
many
parcels,
how
the?
How
the
owners
work
notified
and
to
what
degree
did
we
really
go
to
to
talk
to
them
and
I'll
just
say
that
it
sure
seems
to
me
there's
going
to
be
multiple
owners,
even
if
one
of
them
is
interested
and
says
gee,
whiz,
I'll,
put
high
density,
that'll,
conceivably,
spur
other
owners
to
say
wow.
C
A
C
W
Just
a
couple
comments
I
actually
have
been
following
with
all
the
commission
meetings
listening
on
how
they
decided
on
a
housing
size,
they
did
go
through
each
site,
even
though
I
thought
the
discussion
were
a
little
bit
random,
but
I
think
that
is
how
we
got
our
recommendations.
I
do
think
some
of
the
tier
two
sites
that
our
Council
can
really
consider
it
seriously,
especially
the
ones
that
the
owners
are
willing
to
be
considered
so
I
think
we
have
opportunity
to
do
that.
That's
one
comment.
The
second
comment
is
back
to
the
pipeline
projects.
W
I
do
believe
that
we
need
to
carefully
looking
at
more
more
units
to
substantiate
the
pylon
project,
just
in
case
the
pipeline
projects,
don't
pan
out
that
we
see
letter
from
the
owners
that
were
not
interested
in
building
it.
So
that's
another
comment
and
for
my
fellow
council
members
that
we
should
look
at
a
few
tier
two
projects,
maybe
add
more
choices
to
our
tier
one
choice
as
just
a
comment.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
councilmember,
while
you're
right
at
one
minute
at
a
time
there.
Let
me
utilize
my
90
seconds
here,
quick,
quick,
quick
question,
so
we
had
a
real
estate
discussion
last
Thursday
about
acquiring
potential
property
and
we're
considering
it
for
affordable
housing.
Very
briefly,
if
that
gets
acquired,
it
is
not
on
a
tier
one
or
tier
two
list
here.
Just
to
reiterate.
That
does
eventually
count
if
it
comes
within
the
cycle.
Is
that
correct?
Or
is
that
not
correct
because
it
is
not
under
consideration?
V
A
A
You
know
I
thought
we
had
dealt
with
this
last
time
and
I
think
that,
from
a
legal
perspective,
if
you
have
a
pipeline
project
but
and
certainly
from
an
ethical
perspective,
if
if
State
legislation
was
lobbied
for
and
passed,
and
you
end
up
having
a
project
like
SB
35,
is
there
any
reason
to
think
that
that
pipeline
project,
if
there's
an
intention
to
build
and
a
stated
intention
to
build,
should
not
and
would
not
count
as
part
of
your
Arena
housing
allocation,
Mr,
City
attorney
Jensen.
K
No,
so
hcd
guidance
expressly
recognizes
that
pipeline
projects,
both
projects
that
have
been
entitled
and
projects
that
are
at
other
phases
of
the
development
project
can
count,
and-
and
you
know,
as
we've
discussed
multiple
times
as
you
point
out-
that
there
has
to
be
a
showing
that
the
project
is
likely
to
be
built
within
the
planning
period.
A
K
Will
provide
evidence
to
hcd
of
that
you
know
there.
There
have
been
some
comments
received,
for
example,
by
San
Francisco
to
San
Francisco,
asking
them
to
provide
additional
evidence
as
part
of
their
housing
element.
Project
I
think
that's
an
excellent
road
map
for
us
to
look
at
as
we
move
forward
agreed.
A
K
Well,
just
like
every
other
jurisdiction,
that's
gone
through
this
process
recently
in
the
state.
San
Francisco
got
a
number
of
comments
from
hcd
on
their
first
draft
housing
element
and
they
have
room
for
it
to
improve.
There's
nothing
unique
about
San
Francisco.
In
that
regard,
every
city
has
got
that's
submitted
a
housing
element
in
the
past.
Several
years
has
gone
through
that
process.
Right.
A
K
That's
fair,
you
know,
but
we'll
you
know
we'll
obviously
work
with
with
hcd
to
provide
the
kind
of
evidence
that
they're
looking
for,
but
you
know
I
think
again,
it's
not.
It's
not
unusual
to
get
these
kind
of
comments
on
the
first
round
of
your
housing
element.
Okay,.
A
Well,
thank
you
very
much
Mr
City
attorney,
and
so
let's
go
ahead
and
bring
this
back
to
either
council
member
way
or
councilmember
Moore.
You
are
the
ones
that
have
some
remaining
time:
council
member
Moore.
You
have
about
a
minute
20
and
John
councilmer.
Will
you
have
about
10
seconds
if
you
wanted
to
do
a
real,
quick
one
but
and
council
member
away
you've
been
quite
efficient
with
your
time
as
well
I
clock
you
in
as
about
three
more
minutes
in
total.
E
I'm
sure
I
would
like
to
have
an
updated
table.
E
Lu1
the
one
in
the
previous
General
plan
is
showing
that
Citywide
we
have
available
about
799,
000
square
feet
of
commercial
still
available
and
553
or
54
000
square
feet
of
office
still
available
and
to
your
point,
I,
don't
I,
don't
know
that
if
you,
if
you
want
to
hear
this-
but
it
is
rather
I-
think
absurd,
it
might
might
be
the
right
word,
but
it's
rather
absurd
that
we're
having
to
essentially
take
a
a
kind
of
an
assertive
posture
with
regards
to
the
Valco
project,
to
ensure
to
hcd
that
we
are
going
to
have
a
project
which
will
worsen
the
housing
shortage
while
using
a
housing
law
that
we
need
to
ensure
that
it
get
built
and
I
I,
maybe
there's
a
better
word
than
absurd,
but
it
sure
feels
that
way.
A
Thank
you
very
much
councilmember
Moore,
and
so
let
me
take
this
to
council
member
Wade.
Did
you
have
any
follow-ons
at
this
time.
W
Just
one
question,
and
maybe
how
do
we
go
about
and
do
this
I
understand?
We
are
short
of
the
very
low
income
housing
for
833
units
and
the
model
income
for
6.55.
W
So
when
we
are
doing
our
housing
elements,
how
do
we
ensure
the
properties
we
either
zoned
or
choose
satisfy
that
numbers
does
when
we
say
below
market
rate,
do
we
can
we
tell
the
developers
or
that
site
say
we
need
this
much,
this
many
low
income,
this
many
models,
because
that's
what
we
need
or
if
they
want
to
do
low
income,
we
already
satisfy
that
number.
How
do
we
go
about
doing
that.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
councilman
away
for
that
question.
I
do
see
Andy
with
a
with
a
camera
on
Chris
is
here
Andy.
Did
you
want
to
address
that
question.
K
Yeah
I'll
do
my
best
and
Andy
should
definitely
jump
in,
because
I
think
this
is
his
area
of
expertise.
So
I
mean
this
is
something
you
know
we.
We
can't
necessarily
Zone
properties
for
very
low
income
or
moderate
income
development.
However,
we
can
develop
policies
that
encourage
those
kind
of
develop
that
kind
of
development,
and
you
know
that's
going
to
be
one
of
the
next
stages
of
the
process.
The
Housing,
Commission
and
eventually,
Council
will
weigh
in
on
our
housing
element,
policies
and
Andy.
K
You
should
feel
free
to
provide
more
detail
that,
if,
if
you're
able
to
do
so.
V
What
will
said
I
don't
have
anything
to
add
at
this
moment,
but
we
look
forward
to
that
process.
A
Okay,
great
anything
else,
councilmer
Wayne,
okay,
great
so
councilman
will
you
have.
C
K
You
know:
that's
not
that's
I
mean
that
would
be
unusual.
I
would
have
to
look
into
that
to
see
if
that
were
feasible
so,
but
that
would
certainly
be
unusual.
A
That
great
thanks
very
much
folks
we're
at
6
51
on
an
official
computer
clock
time
which
I
am
assuming
is
syncing
with
everyone
else's.
So
let's
go
ahead
and
take
a
five
minute
break.
We
will
reconvene
at
6
57
and
then
at
that
time
we'll
go
into
the
maps
and
again,
if
you're,
looking
at
presentations
on
the
city
website
and
all
the
materials,
it
was
slide.
A
Number
29,
page
15
if
you're
looking
at
the
longer
list
or
the
comprehensive
list
of
all
the
various
sites
that
we're
looking
at
okay,
we'll
see
you
in
about
five
minutes
thanks,
so
we
are
going
to
go
ahead
and
proceed
in
the
map
evaluation,
part
of
this
presentation
and
exercise
just
to
catch
everyone
back
up.
This
is
item
number
two.
On
our
special
meeting
agenda
night
we've
had
the
staff
presentation.
A
There
have
been
comments
from
members
of
the
public
on
this
item
and
we've
had
a
couple
of
rounds
of
council
questions
and
comments
right
now,
this
time
I'm
going
to
return
this
to
Luke
Connolly
of
Our
Community
Development
Department
Luke,
thanks
for
providing
a
great
presentation
this
evening,
and
did
you
want
to
start
us
off
on
the
map
by
map
evaluation
exercise.
J
J
I
We'll
go
back
this
just
as
a
refresher.
This
was
the
Citywide
map
that
shows
all
of
the
areas
and
we're
going
to
go
through
the
first
eight
area
maps
starting
just
north
of
Valco
on
the
upper
right
there,
so
I'll
go
to
the
next
slide.
I
Okay,
this
is
the
area
that
we're
talking
about,
and
you
have
the
site
26a,
which
is
made
up
of
several
properties:
Cupertino
Village,
that
is
the
only
tier
one
site,
as
I
indicated,
it
has
owner
interest
on
it
and
is
shown
at
a
30
unit
per
acre,
recommended
density
for
that
entire
site
and
I
don't
know
if
we
want
to
get
into
additional
questions
too
again
we
have
Andy,
David,
masonton
and
I
believe
Pew.
Also,
we
would
have
other
capabilities
to
go
in
and
look
at
the
site
in
different
dimensions.
I
If
you
know
if
we
want
to,
if
there
are
any
questions
on
this,
we
could
just
open
it
up
to
that,
however,
would
be
the
most
efficient
way
to
proceed.
A
Yes,
that
sounds
good.
So,
let's,
let's
do
this
Luke
I
have
a
hands
up
from
Council
and
well.
Let
me
let
me
do
a
quick
calculation
here,
so
we
have
about
five
hours
left
eight
sites
to
get
through
allocation.
Roughly
you
know
half
an
hour,
let's
go
ahead
and
provide
three
minutes
per
council
member
at
this
time,
and
so
I
don't
know
what
the
order
was,
but
I
think
it
may
have
been
council,
member,
Willie,
council,
member
Moore
and
then
council
member
way
of
the
hands
that
are
raised.
A
E
Okay,
so
what
I
would
like
to
see
on
this
table
would
be
actually
the
the
total,
the
the
acreage
that
we
have
at
that
site
and
the
total
total
units
in
when
I'm.
Looking
at
the
the
the
recommended
sites,
inventory
I,
don't
know
what
attachment
this
one.
Is
there
you're
showing
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
as
the
target
density,
so
I
I,
don't
know
if
this
was
if
there
was
a
subtotal
even
for
this
particular
site.
E
Could
somebody
answer
that
and
then
I
think
moving
forward
for
the
for
the
next
night?
If
we
could
have
the
the
the
target
density
with
a
with
a
total
for
the
entire
site,
that
would
be
very
helpful.
But
if
someone
could
could
let
me
know
what
the
total
is
you're
expecting
at
this
location,
because
I've
got
several
different
attachments
that
I'm
trying
to
work
with
that.
Would
that
would
be
helpful.
A
Great,
thank
you.
Thank
you
for
that
question.
Councilman,
so
I
see
Pew,
you
have
your
Cameron.
Did
you
want
to
speak
to
that.
A
Okay
and
council
member
more
did
you
have
any
follow-on
to
that.
E
Oh
not
at
this
this
time,
but
I
do
want
to
just
reiterate
what
I
said
earlier,
which
was
with
regards
to
the
request
to
have
this
maintained
as
mixed
use
with
the
retail
at
this
location
that
the
the
height
that
we're
looking
at
is.
Is
it
that's
aspirational?
Perhaps,
is
a
good
one
for
that,
but
it's
gonna
it'll.
E
It
would
end
up
being
quite
a
bit
taller
and
if
they're
and
I'm
wondering
when
this,
when
this
estimate
of
this
35
foot
height
was
made,
was
there
a
an
expectation
that
there
was
going
to
be
some
open
space
Parkland
at
this
particular
location,
so
I
mean
we
could
do
a
pretty
quick
calculation
if
you
did
the
the
300
and
what
was
it?
Maybe
320,
some
odd
dwelling
units
I,
don't
know
what
multiplier
you're
using
if
it's
a
2.83
or
a
2.9
multiplier
residence
per
unit.
E
You
can
come
up
with
a
total
number
of
residents
and
then
work
out
your
Parkland
dedication
requirement
for
that
particular
site
30
seconds.
So
how
far?
How
far
down
the
down
the
road
did?
You
work
this
out
to
to
come
up
with
that
Target
height,
given
that
we
have
a
Parkland
requirement
and
you
would
have
ground
floor
retail.
Thank
you
briefly.
A
J
K
Mean
the
Parkland
dedication
ordinance
I
mean
that
does
not
apply
to
Ironside
dedication.
There
are
open
space
requirements
in
our
zoning
ordinance,
and
presumably
there
would
be
for
the
zoning
on
this
side.
I
would
say
that
this
is
just
a
general
question
of
you
know,
generally
applicable
to
all
the
sites
that
we're
discussing
today
that
we
get
into
zoning.
There
will
be
things
like
a
there
will
be
a
trade-off
between
things
like
kite
and
open
space.
It
will
ultimately
be
up
to
council
to
make
that
trade-off.
A
Okay,
great,
so
that's
about
three
and
a
half
I'll
just
seat
over
half
a
minute
one
time,
councilmember
well
you're
the
next
person
with
a
hand
raised,
and
so
did
you
want
to
follow
on
on
this
map.
Yes,.
W
W
City,
okay,
so
Parkland
delegation,
traffic
mitigation-
that's
all
should
be
included.
My
question
for
this
side
is:
we
did
receive
a
letter
from
the
owner
and
it
says
it's
going
to
be
a
mixed
use.
My
question
for
this
site
is
I.
Do
think
it's
a
great
location
because
it
is
very
close
to
Apple
campus,
it's
close
to
North
to
the
workplace.
It's
on
the
target
height
if
I,
remember
clearly
or
I
hope.
It's
not
a
mistake.
The
staff
did
say
when
we're
doing
30
units
per
acre,
the
height
average
is
like
45.
I
I
K
J
I
X
X
You
know,
I,
think
the
height
that
we're
looking
at
as
Luke
is
saying
would
probably
be
about
45
feet
with
the
Assumption
there'd
be
some
ground
floor
retail,
but
you
know
the
biggest
impact
on
sort
of
the
viability
of
these
sites.
Often
times
is,
is
how
the
parking
is
handled
and
what
the
parking
is
required.
X
W
I
Should
be
45.,
okay,
I
just
clarify
that
that's
a
mistake,
I
would
say:
45
should
be
pretty
uniformly
applied
to
the
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
and
particularly
where
you
have
a
mixed
use.
Site
35
feet
would
not
work.
Okay,.
X
A
Okay,
thank
you
very
much,
councilman
way,
220
40
seconds
left,
and
so
next
we
have
any
any
other
council,
member
Willie
or
vice
mayor
Chao.
Vice
mayor
Chow,.
F
F
We
see
that
there
is
26
a,
but
then
you
have
one
two,
three
four
five
six
different
addresses.
So
these
are
all
so
there
are
multiple
six
Parcels
on
the
26,
a
site
that
is
correct,
and
then
what
is
the
accurate
total
acreage?
I
couldn't
find.
That
is
adding
attachment
e,
where
you
have
a
description
for
each
site.
I
see
some
sites
you
do
have
acreage
listed.
Is
there
like
a
table
of
all
the
sites
where
they're
accurate.
F
Oh,
not
in
the
attachment
right
now
correct
I
do
see
attachment
that
he
has
some
acreage
for
some
sites,
but
I
have
to
read
through
the
text
to
find
okay
and
then
that
would
be
great
I
think
it's
important
to
have
accurate.
So
we
talk
about
units
per
acre
and
then
when
are
we
are
talking
about
the
total
units?
Are
we
talking
the
total
units
25
per
acre
for
the
entire
site
to
to
accommodate
the
proposed,
but
the
totally
total
total
units?
F
But
but
here
you
are,
you
have
six
sides,
six
Parcels.
They
each
have
some
units
listed,
but
then
my
understanding
is
not
all
of
them
will
be
redeveloped.
Only
one
building
will
be
redeveloped,
so
30
seconds
I'm
confused,
which
one
of
these
is
the
one
that
is
has
a
building.
Now
the
owner
intends
to
redevelop.
J
I
So
we
are
treating
it
essentially
as
a
a
site
that
happens
to
be
comprised
of
multiple
Parcels,
as
many
of
these
sites
are
and
the
30
units
per
acre,
that's
shown
is
applied
evenly
over
the
site.
So
it's
a
very
general
way
of
doing
it
at
this
point
in
time.
So
I
think
like
some
of
the
very
specific
questions,
even
things
related
to
open
space,
we're
not
at
that
level
of
detail
right
now,.
F
A
U
So
the
my
understanding,
based
on
discussions
with
the
property
owners,
is
that
the
out
the
parcel
outlined
in
the
teal
right
here
as
the
building
that
he
wishes
to
demolish
and
relocate
to
the
corner
up
on
the
north
east
side.
That
is
my
understanding
and
that
has
the
ranch,
911
99
Ranch
grocery
store
in
it,
and
that
is
going
to
be
relocated
in
a
mixed-use
building
in
the
northeast
corner
of
the
site.
In
order
to
do
that,
there
is
no
clear
way
for
us
to
demarcate
the
densities.
U
A
Okay,
peel,
let
me
cut
you
off
there
and.
U
A
With
about
a
minute
left
of
my
time,
I
started
my
my
clock
a
couple
months
ago.
Let
me
go
to
council
member
Willie.
Did
you
want
to
ask
any
questions
or
my
comments
on
this
site?
Okay,
yeah?
If
you
go
ahead
and
put
that
map
back
up
I'll
just
you
know
utilize
my
first
round
time
here.
A
So
with
regard
to
the
sturdy
dwelling
units
per
acre,
you
know
I
think
it's
understood
that
the
35
foot
height
limit
was
that
was
just
a
across
the
board.
Typo
is
that
right?
45
is
what
we
should
be
considering
just
to
reiterate.
A
Okay,
so
So,
based
upon
the
comments
here,
it's
sounding
like
30
dwellings
per
acre,
which
again
is
the
legal
requirement
for
making
some
assumptions
about
what
about
very
low
income
or
low
income
or.
A
Okay,
great
so
that's
correct,
right!
That's
correct,
okay,
presumptively
suitable
for
a
loan,
very
low,
and
so
with
regard
to
what
we're
looking
at
here
on
the
map
up
here.
What
you're
saying
is
that
they're
looking
to
relocate
the
99
Ranch
Market,
but
we
don't
really
have
clarity
as
the
entirety
of
the
project.
Right
I
mean
you're
not
going
to
have
it
until
they
submit
a
project.
Is
that
correct,
correct.
U
A
Well,
let
me
ask
you
another
question.
Let
me
ask
another
question
so,
with
regard
with
regard
to
a
height
expectation,
okay,
wouldn't
it
be,
and
and
few
you
know-
Andy
Luke
Chris
Pamela.
Anyone
if
you
want
to
answer
this
question,
it's
fine
is.
Is
it
fairly
valid
to
say
that
if
a
unit
is
smaller,
it
is
likely
to
be
more
affordable.
I
A
Yeah
I
mean
no
solid
rule,
but
absolutely
I
mean
so
so
really
that
adheres
to
our
aims
here.
Right
I
mean
if
you're
trying
to
stay
within
a
particular
height
limitation
and
the
size
of
a
unit
is,
is
an
issue
in
terms
of
expense.
Then
a
smaller
unit
will
generally
be
more
affordable.
I
mean
I,
don't
mean
to
make
this
like
some
kind
of
self-evident
statement,
but
just
to
reiterate
it,
that's
probably
right
right.
A
Yes,
okay,
Andy,
I'm
gonna
take
your
not
as
a
reiteration
of
that.
So
let's,
let's
go
on
council
member
Willie.
You
have
your
hand
your
signaling
at
this
time.
Would
you
like
to
ask
some
questions
or
make
some
comments
here.
C
U
S,
all
of
that
does
need
to
be
evaluated
to
make
sure
that
what
what
they
wish
to
build
can
be
built,
and
in
general,
if,
if
we
do
set
rules
that
do
not
allow
them
to
build
what
we
tell
them,
they
could
build.
Potentially,
then
they
are
able
to
use
density,
bonus,
waivers
and
and
other
tools
that
state
law
does
allow.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Okay,
thanks
very
much
councilmember
Willie,
that's
about
45
seconds!
So
let's
go
ahead!
Customer.
Are
you
willing
to
see
it
any
time
over
if
we're
kind
of
Distributing
time
on
this
all
right?
So
let's
go
back
to
council
member
Moore
and
vice
mayor
Chow
has
a
hand
still
raised
councilmember
Moore.
E
Big,
thank
you.
Okay,
a
particular
Site
Area
when
it
came
to
the
the
ERC
a
couple
of
years
ago
for
the
hotel
approval
and
there
was
a
dry
cleaner
that
had
been
on
the
site
and
I'm
I'm
at
the
envirus
store
the
site
right
now
and.
E
E
One
of
the
reports
indicated
that
there
had
been
some
intrusion
into
the
the
Good
Samaritan
site
from
the
PCS,
so
I'm
wondering
what
the
the
current
status
is
if
someone's
gone
through
these
reports,
because
now
we're
looking
at
in
my
concern
before
was
was
regarding
the
the
hotel
about.
A
Yes,
update
on
the
yes,
the
pce
contamination.
U
Anyone
yeah
I
can
attempt
to
try.
Yes,
please
so
there
had.
We
do
not
have
an
update
unnecessarily
on
the
status
of
that
environmental
cleanup,
but
that
is
all
they're
all
very
good
questions
and
will
be
evaluated
with
both
the
environmental
review
that
is
going
to
be
conducted
and
with
any
future
development
projects.
We
do
have
regulations
in
place
that
will
require
cleanup
of
the
site
to
residential
levels
before
residential
uses
can
be
placed
on.
A
A
A
You
all
right
great,
all
right
so
I
think
we've
pretty
much
exhausted
time
here.
Councilman
Wade,
you
have
a
few
seconds
left,
you
don't
want
you.
Are
you
willing
to
see
that
time
over
to
councilman
Moore
councilman
Moore?
You
still
have
your
hand
up.
Did
you
want
to
follow
up.
E
Yes,
I
just
just
want
to
point
out
that
the
most
recent
report
on
the
on
the
pce
contamination
is
August
12th
this
year.
So
it's
it's
very,
very
recent
reporting
news,
so
I
think
I
think
we
should
be
looking
at
it
before
we
make
make
our
choices.
Thank.
A
You,
okay,
thank
you
very
much.
Councilman
Moore,
you
know
and
again
we're
probably
going
to
take
an
Omnibus
motion
at
the
end
of
this
and
so
I
hope
everyone's
taking
notes
we're
on
map
a
let's
at
this
time,
move
over
to
map
B.
Would
anyone
like
to
get
us
to
the
next
map,
and
it
looks
like
this?
Is
this
map
C.
A
Right
so
oh
I'm,
looking
at
my
own
file.
So
if
anyone
would
like
to
move
us
to
map
B
great,
all
right
and
Luke,
did
you
want
to
give
a
brief
overview
or
anyone
from
staff
Andy?
With
regard
to
this
map,
yeah.
I
I
could
just
jump
in
yes,
there's
really
one
site
here,
24a,
which
I
believe
is
commonly
known
as
the
Simeon
site.
It's
currently
undeveloped,
it's
immediately
North,
where
the
former
velco
mall
was
at
just
south
of
280.
This
is,
unlike
the
previous
site,
was
30
units
per
acre.
This
is
listed
at
50..
I
We
have
owner
interest
on
this
as
well
and
I
believe
the
feeling
has
been
that
this
might
make
a
good,
affordable
housing
site
just
given
its
location.
So
that's
really
all
I
have
to
add.
It
is
the
only
the
only
site
on
this
map,
so
I
am
happy
to
turn
this
over
for
discussion.
A
Okay
same
as
the
prior
map,
we'll
go
ahead
and
allocate
three
minutes
each
and
when
anyone
like
to
start
us
off
I,
don't
see
any
hands
here.
Councilmember
way
your
hands
raised.
W
A
I
I,
could
we
we
have
thought
about
most
planning
land
use
development
standards,
have
a
range
I,
I
think
what
staff
has
looked
at
for
these
densities,
we're
using
the
term
minimum
because
that's
what
hcd
wants
to
see,
but
we've
also
thought
about
it
as
a
Target
density,
so
I
I
believe
the
recommendation
would
really
be
that
if
we
have
a
range,
it's
a
very
tight
range,
so
something
maybe
say
like
45
to
50
or
something
that's
a
50
unit
site.
I
So
it's
certainly
conceivable
if
the
council
would
want
to
have
the
ability
to
go
below
the
minimum
density,
but
again
where
you
really
want
to
be
able
to
hit
those
numbers.
So
you
can
demonstrate
to
hcd
that
that
number
of
units
can
actually
be
realized
on
the
property.
W
J
I
There's
nothing
there's
no
document
or
anything
saying
that
we've
established
this,
but
that's
been
the
staff's
thinking
as
we
go
through
this
to
make
sure
the
density
is
really
hitting
our
Target.
Okay.
W
Thank
you,
my
other.
Another
question
is
when
we
with
following
up
with
council
member
Moore's
question
on
cleanup,
there
is
regulation
agencies.
That's
that
can
monitor
that.
My
question
is
all
right:
eir.
Are
we
going
to
have
that
investing
it
already,
or
is
it
going
to
be
when
the
development
developer
comes
or
owner
comes
with
the
project.
I
I
think,
in
a
sense,
it
would
be
both
because
this
is
going
to
be
what's
called
a
program
level
eir,
where
you're
going
to
have
as
much
information
about
the
sites
as
you
can
disclose
at
any
particular
time,
but
for
a
site
that
say
has
a
potential
contamination
issue
37.
It's
certainly
involve
further
environmental
work
when
there's
a
development
application
on
file.
So
the
expectation
would
be
that
these
housing
sites,
when
they
become
actual
projects,
could
tear
off
of
the
program
eir,
but
they
certainly
may
have
to
do
additional
work
to
develop
the
site.
A
Okay,
great
and
that's
time,
let's
go
to
council
member
more
followed
by
vice
mayor
Chao,.
E
Mayor
Jen,
yes,
I,
don't
recall
us
going
to
the
public
on
site.
26
and
I
was
wondering
if,
if
you
wanted
to
go
back
and
and
do
that
before
we
get
because
our
focus
is
on
these
the
individual
sites,
then
we
move
on
to
the
next
one
I'm,
just
a
little
worried
that
our
train
of
thought,
or
at
least
mine,
isn't
gonna,
isn't
going
to
follow
through
if
we're
bouncing
back
to
the
project
and
having
a
group
of
comments
from
the
public
law
at
once.
A
My
plan
was
to
follow
the
stated
outlined
that
we
we
placed
on
I
believe
I
want
to
say
slide
28.
If
anyone
wants
to
back
up
to
slide
28
to
take
a
look,
the.
A
Came
after
the
presentation,
and
so
after
Maps,
a
through
H
I,
believe
that
we
were
going
to
take
another
round
of
public
commentary
if
time.
A
No
need
to
go
back,
I
I!
Think
we
get
it
now.
So
thank
you.
Whoever's
controlling
the
the
slide
deck
okay,
so
councilmember
Moore!
Let's
go
ahead
and
start
your
time
on
these
followings
you're
I'm!
Sorry,
you,
you
muted
yourself.
E
Very
okay,
so
I
am
a
little
also
concerned
about
the
lack
of
a
sound
while
in
the
north
of
this,
this
particular
property.
So
when
we're
looking
at
an
eir
I'm
going
to
assume
that
that
will
be
analyzed,
the
lack
of
a
sound
wall
and
the
proximity
to
the
freeway,
whether
or
not
we
would
have
any
kind
of
recommendation
to
be
500
feet
or
more
from
the
from
the
freeway.
Thank
you.
J
U
Eir
will
probably
be
looking
at
it
at
a
programmatic
level
and
will
also
be
making
recommendations
with
regard
to
whether
any
development
will
be
able
to
meet
our
regulations
of
the
45
I
think
it's
called
cnel
the
decibel
limit
cnel,
which
is
the
community
noise
level
inside
the
unit.
So
we
just
there
will
be
mitigations
whatever
whether
there's
a
sound
wall,
whether
there's
triple
or
quadruple,
paint
windows
or
whatever
those
things
are
so
we'll
we'll
have
those
mitigations
factored
in.
A
No
okay,
so
you're
at
one
minute.
Your
time,
let's
go
to
Vice
merchao.
F
Not
particular
about
this
side:
I,
just
don't
want
to
clarify
staff
mentioned
earlier.
They
can
get
ready,
is
a
table
with
acreage,
but
then
I
was
requesting.
We
should
have
average
of
each
slide.
That's
for
easy
access
and
also
I
would
like
acreage
and
the
units
per
acre
for
pipeline
sites
too,
so
that
we
have
a
comparison.
No,
what
what's
already
there?
F
A
Okay,
great
so
well,
I
see
cameras
going
on
and
off
Andy
did
you
want
to
okay,
you
put
your
thumb
up,
so
that's
that's
good.
You
can
add
it
to
the
maps
in
terms
of
the
table
for
the
requested
information
here
for
remind
me
vice
versa.
Was
that
overall
acreage
or
was
it
overall
acreage
in
something.
F
A
I
see
our
city
manager
has
a
handwritten.
Yes,.
D
So
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
through
Vice
mayor's
request,
so
we
will
be
reporting
out
the
acreage
throughout
tonight's
presentation,
but
I
see
that
our
consultant
is
also
willing
to
add
the
information
for
tomorrow's
presentation
that
will
certainly
make
that
presentation
available.
Vice
mayor
I
also
heard
you
asking
to
have
the
comparison
of
the
pipeline
project.
Is
that
something
you
would
like
to
see
for
tomorrow's
presentation
or
the
late
at
a
later
date?
Not.
F
D
And
in
terms
of
the
property
owners
information,
as
long
as
their
public
information,
we
can
make
that
available.
I'm
looking
at
my
planning
staff
to
see
if
they
those
informations,
are
readily
available.
If
so,
whether
or
not
you
have
the
capacity
to
make
them
into
the
chart
by
tomorrow,.
I
D
D
We
will
City
staff
and
city
council
will
have
another
chance
to
design
the
project
in
terms
of
sound
wall
in
terms
of
the
cleaned
up
in
terms
of
setback
in
terms
of
other
issues
that
are
more
Project
Specific,
so
I
do
want
to
assure
counsel
and
the
staff
that
you
know
when
the
project
comes
forward,
there
will
be
adequate
environmental
review,
provided
before
the
approval
is
guaranteed.
So
this
will
be
the
high
level
conceptual
review
to
make
sure
to
get
to
ensure
hcd
that
we're
providing
enough
units
fair.
A
Enough
fair
enough,
so
let
me
let
me
just
stop
the
clock
on
this,
so
just
to
be
fair
advice
from
a
child,
so
so
just
I
I,
guess
it's
fair
to
say,
Madam
city
manager,
that
if
we
have
questions
that
may
affect
our
view
of
the
recommended
density,
for
instance,
or
even
inclusion
of
a
particular
site.
That's
fair
game
right.
A
I
mean
I
understand
that
it
is.
You
know
it
is
a
time
issue
as
to
whether
you
can
explore
every
facet
in
detail
of
a
particular
parcel
of
land,
but
I
I
mean
you
know
from
from
what
I've
gauged
I
think
this
level
of
questioning
is
is
pretty
reasonable.
You
know
thus
far
I've
been
trying
to
keep
us
in
track
time
wise,
but
in
terms
of
the
the
depth
of
the
detail,
if
you
see
something
that
goes
a
little
bit
too
far
into
the
ways,
just
let
us
know
I
mean
certainly.
D
Certainly
I
do
want
to
kind
of
move
it
along
because
you
know
we
do
have
16
areas
to
go
through
just
kind
of
want
to
remind
counsel
that
when,
when
the
night
goes
on
further
we'll
be
tired,
but
those
are.
This
is
not
going
to
be
your
last
time.
Looking
at
the
side,
especially
for
most
of
the
project,
planning
staff
and
correct
me,
we
probably
don't
have
a
proposal
yet
so
we're
kind
of
Designing
this
project
in
a
vacuum
understood.
A
Okay,
fair
enough:
okay,
vice
versa.
Let
me
restart
your
time
here,
you're
at
about
two
minutes
and
15
seconds,
and
so
please
continue
I.
A
Great,
let
me
go
to
council
member
Moore,
you
utilize
about
a
minute,
so
councilmember
Moore.
Why
don't?
If
your
hand
is
raised
on
you,
please
continue.
E
Okay,
thank
you,
mayor,
Paul
I
was
wondering
if
there
was
a
recommendation
from
the
Planning
Commission
or
the
Housing
Commission,
with
regards
to
having
a
step
down
density
for
this
particular
site.
My
concern
is
that
this
particular
neighborhood
to
the
West
is
receiving
you
know
and
as
I
had
asked
to
have
the
screen
share
of
the
the
Valco
project.
It's
it's
receiving
the
brunt
of
an
extremely
tall
project
and
I'm
concerned
about
this
50
dwelling
units
per
acre
or
65
foot
height.
How
far
away
from
these
homes
will
that
will
that
be?
E
What's
the
setback
in
our
current
zoning
I?
Don't
want
us
to
agree
to
something,
and
then,
when
it
comes
to
us,
we
realize
that
the
configuration
of
the
site
and
whatnot
makes
it
it
very
contentious
for
the
neighbors
to
the
West.
So
I'd
like
I'd,
like
to
hear
there
was
some
consideration
about
the
the
impacts
there.
E
I
For
for
this
location,
no,
there
was
no
concept
of
stepping
down
density
or
height
that
that
discussion
was
limited
to
South
the
ends
Boulevard
and
the
Stevens
Creek
sites
near
Estates.
So
for
the
Simeon
property
no,
there
was.
There
was
nothing
like
that.
This
had
a
uniform
50
unit
per
acre
recommendation
with
no
discussion
of
limiting
it.
As
you
got
near
the
neighborhoods.
I
I
certainly
feel
that,
if,
if
there
is
a
concern
like
that
in
terms
of
lessening
the
density
on
one
portion
of
the
site
or
having
some
type
of
a
condition
that
would
perhaps
limit
Building
height
I
think
that
would
be.
That
would
be
fine.
Since
we've
already
raised
height
as
a
discussion
topic
tonight,
right.
A
It
would
probably
be
sensible
right
because
before
you
go
forward
with
eir,
you
don't
want
to
have
to
redo
it
if
we
were
to
impose
a
further
restriction
in
the
middle
of
this
process,
right
I
mean
presumably
some
of
the
zoning
would
happen
between
now,
and
you
know,
let's
assume,
that
we
get
this
done.
You
know
in
this
next
couple
days
or
maybe
a
session
further
down
the
road,
but
hopefully
not
too
too
much
further
down
the
road.
Let's
say
you
know,
the
eir
is
happening
somewhere
between
now
and
10
months.
A
Out
from
now,
you
know.
Presumably
some
of
the
zoning
is
going
to
be.
You
know,
kind
of
considered
for
at
least
some
of
these
sites,
and
so
I
I
think
yeah.
This
I
mean
please
feel
free
anyone
to
interject
and
let
me
I'm
sorry
councilman
Moore.
Let
me
go
ahead
and
stop
your
time
if,
if
anyone
disagrees
with
that,
let
us
know,
but
for
something
like
this,
it
really,
you
know,
does
make
a
lot
of
sense
to
go
ahead
and
you
know
kind
of
put
those
restrictions
in
Pew.
You
have
your
hand
raised.
U
Yes,
Mr
Mia.
Thank
you.
I
did
want
to
reiterate
that
I
believe
that
the
property
owner
has
requested
a
certain
number
of
units,
and
so,
if
there
is
a
discussion
about
stepping
down
density
that
that
be
considered
in
in,
if
you
do
a
decrease
density
in
certain
part
of
the
site,
if
the
council
would
consider
increasing
density
on
the
rest
of
the
site
in
order
to
help
the
property
owner
make
up
for
that
difference.
U
A
Fair,
so
councilmember
Moore
I
have
250,
but
let's
go
ahead
and
provide
you
another
minute
here:
go
ahead.
E
All
right,
okay,
I,
just
wanted
to
see
what
what
we
can
do
here,
if
is
the
if
the
two
157,
if
that
is
the
target
number
that
they're
looking
for
I,
think
that
what
the
suggestion
from
from
from
Pew
can
happen,
but
I
I
keep.
You
know,
thinking
density
bonus
waiver,
even
though
I'm
asking
for
this.
E
We
know
that
they
can
just
take
it
as
a
waiver
and
and
go
to
the
height
that
they
feel
that
they
need
and
if
you
argue
with
it,
you're
going
to
end
up
in
court,
I
think
I'm
understanding
that
correctly
all
right.
That's
it.
A
Thank
you,
okay.
Thank
you.
Councilmember
Moore
and
I
have
a
couple
more
hands
raised
from
council
member
way
and
vice
merchao.
Let
me
see
council
member
way.
Did
you
want
to
follow
on
here?
Actually
you
you
exhausted
your
time,
interestingly
enough,
but
but
let
me
see
if
anyone
would
like
to
seat
any
over.
Oh
you're,
good,
okay,
Vice,
merchao,.
A
F
Have
the
information
what
the
property
owner
requested
I
think
that's
a
good
information
to
have,
because
we
had
another
public
comment
last
time:
it's
a
property
owner
who
requested
a
density,
but
they
didn't
like
the
density
assigned
to
them.
So
I
think
this
information
would
be
appreciated
as
part
of
the
slide.
A
Okay,
fair
enough,
let
me
hold
on.
Let
me
let
me
let
me
stop
you
there.
So
I
don't
want
all
these
kind
of
requests
to
collect.
So
before
we
kind
of
forget
what
they're
Andy,
you
said,
you
had
additional
information
for
each
of
these
sites.
Do
you
have
any
additional
information
for
this
site
with
regard
to
owner
Communications.
V
A
Okay:
okay,
if
staff
wants
to
jump
in
and
can
provide
some
information
pertinent
to
vice
mayor
child's
question
that
had
to
do
with
what
was
the
owner
requesting
on
the
site.
U
A
Okay,
let's,
let's
just
stop
that
there!
Oh
thank
you.
Let's
go
back!
Thank
you!
Pew
I
apologize
for
cutting
you
off,
but
I
I
think
yeah
Vice
marchao
did
you
want
to
follow
on
with
any
additional
questions.
A
Great
councilman
Wally
anything
at
this
point:
okay
with
the
Simeon
property
here,
I
think
that
we
do
have
a
good
opportunity.
We
should
certainly
be
looking
at
the
neighborhood
off
to
the
west
and
in
terms
of
a
50
dwelling
unit
per
acre
situation,
you're
talking
about
a
65
foot
height.
A
If
it
goes
right
up,
the
Border
I
would
be
very
reticent
with
regard
to
you
know,
making
sure
that
you
have
some
kind
of
buffer
zone
there,
where
it
is
considerably,
you
know
less
height,
and
so
looking
at
the
rest
of
the
configuration
it
seems
like
you
could
assign
a
greater
density
to
another
area,
but
also
briefly
in
terms
of
that
density,
bonus
question:
what
does
the
density
bonus
invocation
do
to
the
density
with
regard
to
you
know
any
of
these
particular
densities,
but
50
does
50
go
to
75
or
does
50
go
to
some
other
number?
K
Yeah,
so
for
for
projects
that
are,
you
can
primarily
market
rate,
but
mixed
income
projects
that
can
the
density
bonus
can
go
up
to
50
percent.
So
if,
if
it's
the,
if
50
dwell
units
per
acre,
is
the
primary
constraint
on
the
density
that
could
be
increased
to
75
dry
units
per
acre,
if,
if
they
take
the,
if
they
provide
the
requisite
number
of
affordable
units
and
take
the
full
density
bonus?
Okay,.
A
Okay,
so
I
would
take
it
under.
As
my
comment
I
would
agree,
with
councilmember
Moore
and
and
figure
out
a
a
building
plane
plan
such
that,
if
you
were
in
the
neighborhood,
you
would
actually
have
a
much
closer
to
one-to-one
type
of
or
or
whatever
the
proper
building
plan
would
be,
such
that
you
don't
have
an
imposition
of
a
maximumly
tall
height
right
next
to
your
border.
A
With
regard
to
the
density
bonus
invocation,
yes
and
I
understand
what
council
member
Moore
was
referring
to
the
concessions.
You
know,
there's
got
to
be
some
limits
and
you
know
frankly,
those
limits
haven't
really
been
adequately
explored
at
this
time,
but
you
know
I
think
that's
another.
You
know
entire
policy
based
conversation
and
legal
interpretation
study.
So
let's
go
ahead
and
move
on.
If
we
have
any
further,
you
know
quick
follow-ons,
but
other
than
that
I
think
staff
does
have
the
requests.
A
If
you
have
that
information
at
the
ready
as
to
the
various,
you
know
backup
information
that
we
have
for
each
of
these
sites.
Please
do
have
that
prepared
and
then
against.
To
reiterate,
some
of
these
map
immediately
available
pieces
of
information
are
going
to
be
ready
for
us
tomorrow
evening
for
the
subsequent
maps
that
we
look
at
after
night.
So,
let's,
let's
go
on
to
map
C
and
great,
so
that's
I
think
we
might
have
skipped
one
over
okay,
great
and
who
would
like
to
give
us
the
north
Blaney
neighborhood
introduction.
I
Okay,
mayor
Paul
I
will
just
give
a
brief
overview.
You
have
two
properties
on
the
in
the
north,
Blaney
neighborhood
they're,
just
south
of
280
just
to
the
east
of
Blaney.
I
The
larger
of
the
two
properties
is
a
Mini
Storage
site
and
the
smaller
property
is
a
single
family
residence
that
abuts
right
up
to
that.
Those
are
the
only
two
properties
here:
they're
both
shown
at
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
and
like
the
Cupertino
Village
property.
These
are
really
treated
as
one
contiguous
site,
even
though
there
were
two
parcels,
and
that
is
really
about
all
I
have
to
add
I
think
if
we
want
to
get
into
questions
that
would
be
good
to
do
at
this
time.
E
Hey,
thank
you.
I
I
believe
this
was
the
site
that
was
commented
on
by
a
member
of
the
public
with
regards
to
the
single
family
home
and
regarding
the
the
interest
or
lack
of
interest
of
that
owner
to
have
their
home
included.
Is
that
do
I?
Have
that
correct
and
is
it?
Is
it?
Is
it
proper
for
us
to
include
this?
E
I
I
could
try
to
give
a
brief
answer
on
that.
This
council
member
Moore
is
correct
that
the
single-family
home
had
come
up
in
previous
meetings.
I
I
had
received
an
email
that
had
indicated
that
the
current
owner
is
not
interested
in
being
a
housing
element
site
or
developing.
In
the
eight
year
period
the
site
was
left
on
the
list
because
it
essentially
rounds
out
the
larger
Mini
Storage
site.
I
The
question
about
whether
owner
interest
is
certainly
something
hcd
is
looking
for,
but
a
lack
of
owner
interest
would
not
necessarily
eliminate
a
site
I
think
if
the
housing
lot
was
treated
as
a
standalone,
it
would
not
be
a
good
site
because
it's
such
a
small
property.
The
only
reason
it
was
retained
on
the
list
is
because
it
fits
nicely
with
the
larger
property,
but
certainly
if
there's
a
desire
to
not
have
a
site
where
the
current
owner
has
expressed
that
they're
not
interested.
That
would
be
the
council's
prerogative.
F
Thank
you
so,
both
of
these
sites,
the
owner,
has
not
expressed
interest
right.
I
Yeah
Excuse
me:
yes,
that
that
is
correct,
but
in
the
in
the
case
of
the
single
family
home,
the
owner
indicated
that
they
would
not
be
developing
the
Mini
Storage
site.
We've
not
received
any
comment
at
all.
F
And
and
then
we
because
I
understand
there
are
other
sites,
I
have
been
acquired
before
I'm
told
they
are
too
small
evil
when
there
are
actually
three
adjusting
fast
Parcels
together,
they
are
big
enough.
So
so
it's
good
to
know
that
we
are
considering
combining
sites,
even
when
they
actually
are
separate
person.
Separate
owners
in
the
housing
elements,
so
is
that
the
direction
we
are
going
now
they,
these
two
sites,
have
two
different
owners
currently.
F
So
the
reason
is
I'd
like
to
share
with
the
public.
Thank
you
for
peel
for
sharing
this
Cupertino
property
site
that
I
forgot
about
that.
It
was
very
useful.
You
just
Google
for
Cupertino
property
information.
Then
you'll
get
this
site.
There
is
a
login,
ignore
it.
Just
downloading
and
you'll
have
a
free
access.
Here
you
enter
a
property
address,
then
you'll
see
the
property.
So
these
are
the.
This
is
a
Mini
Storage
site,
that's
currently
there
in
this
single
family
home,
and
then
they
are
across
the
street.
They
have
other
homes.
F
A
Okay,
great
thanks,
Ms
Michelle
you're
at
2
30
with
30
seconds
remaining
yeah
and
GIS
is
great.
They
really
do
some
fantastic
work
there.
So
anyone
else
on
map
C
at
this
time.
Vice
versa,
it
seems,
like
your
hand,
raised
again.
Did
you.
W
Yes,
I
do
understand
that
whether
the
owner
has
interest
or
not
doesn't
prevent
us
from
including
in
the
housing
elements,
but
we
do
have
a
owner's
specific
session
is
not
interested,
so
I
would
put
that
into
a
little
bit
more
weight
and
we
do
have
a
lot
of
tier
two
that
we
could
consider.
So
this
is
what
my
personal
is
I'm
going
to
put
this
as
a
question
mark
going
forward.
Thank
you.
A
Okay,
thank
you
very
much,
councilmember
way.
That
was
only
about
20
seconds,
and
so,
let's
see
council
member
Moore
I
have
you
at
about
a
minute
20
left.
Did
you
want
to
or
let
me
check
in
with
councilman
wooly.
Did
you
have
any
comments
on
more
questions?
Okay,
thanks
counselor
William,
councilmember,
Moore.
E
Okay,
thank
you.
Does
someone
from
Steph
recall
the
height
of
the
of
the
public
storage
building,
which
they
are
there
right
now
they're
kind
of
closing
it
up,
but
does
someone
remember
that
that
particular
height
I
know
it's
up
on
the
hill
but
I'm
kind
of
I'm?
E
Actually,
thinking
about
this,
this
40
foot,
40
foot
height
and
what's
kind
of
curious
about
this
particular
site
is
that
you
have
this:
the
olive
wood
between
the
the
property
line,
so
you've
got
a
street
and
then
some
more
space
and
so
I'm
thinking
in
terms
of
setback
and
then
doing
a
step
up
along
the
280
and
and
whether
or
not
this
could
actually
have
some
potential,
perhaps
going
to
the
45
but
30
seconds.
Okay.
E
U
If
I
may
ask
a
clarifying
question
to
councilmember.
E
The
one
that's
under
construction
yeah,
if
the
top
I'm
thinking
about
the
highest
parapet.
Just
so,
if
we,
if
we
have
something
that's
pretty
tall
along
the
280,
you
know
that
that
that
it
would
be
okay.
It
is
somewhat
of
a
kind
of
a
a
valley
feeling
in
in
that
part
of
of
the
280,
where
the
sides
slope
up
and
things.
U
E
A
O
F
U
F
A
Okay,
thank
you
very
much.
Vice
mayor
ciao
I
don't
see
further
hands
raised
on
this
item.
C
councilman
Moyer
your
hands
raised
so
council
member
Willie
has
about
two
minutes
left.
Did
you
want
to
ask
a
follow-on
question.
E
More
of
a
statement
with
the
I
believe
there
were
two
storage
projects
was
the
did.
The
one
near
Mary
and
I
I
think
I
think
it
did
get
approved
to
have
kind
of
a
storage
cell
densification
for
lack
of
a
better
term,
but
there
was
there
was
one
near
the
Mary,
Avenue,
Bridge
and
I.
Don't
know
if
that
one
did
get
approved.
I
have
some
some
vague
recollection
about
that.
That.
E
E
I
Okay,
thank
you,
mayor
Paul,
we're
now
looking
at
the
South
Blaney
neighborhood,
so
we've
traveled
pretty
much
straight
down
Blaney
at
the
bottom
of
the
map
that
blue
line,
where
you
see
the
two
yellow
sites,
that's
Bollinger
road.
So
these
two
properties,
the
one
on
the
west,
is
fronting.
De,
Anza
Boulevard,
the
one
on
the
right
is
at
Bollinger
and
South
Blaney,
there's
owner
interest
for
that
I
believe
that
is
typically
referred
to
as
the
tin
tin
market
site.
I
So
the
densities
for
these,
the
Blaney
and
Bollinger
site
is
20
units
per
acre
as
you
get
towards
De
Anza
Boulevard.
Those
sites
have
a
density
of
30
units
per
acre
and
again
both
of
these
sites,
11,
A
and
B,
are
made
up
of
multiple
Parcels
but
they're
treated
as
two
independent
sites.
A
Slide:
okay,
just
a
quick,
clarifying
question:
technically
Luke:
are
these
tier
one
sites
or
are
these
tier
2
sites?
These.
I
Yeah
yeah,
that's
misleading,
I.
Think
the
one
going
down
the
column
is
more
indicative
that
they're
tier
one
so
yeah.
If
that's
misleading,
that's
not
the
case
they're,
both
correctly
shown
on
the
map
and
the
yellow
color
that
indicates
their
tier
one.
Okay,.
E
Okay,
thank
you
and
sorry
Luke
for
the
for
the
for
this
question.
Could
you
again
say
where
and
and
why
you've
got
the
20
dwelling
units
per
acre,
which
part
of
that
site.
I
The
20
dwelling
units
per
acre
is
site
11a,
so
it's
uniformly
over
the
site
there
at
the
South
Blaney
and
Bollinger
the
one
with
the
Red
Dot
on
it.
E
All
right,
okay,
so
I'm
not
sure
how
to
pronounce
it
properly,
but
Tintin
Market
was
in
the
upper
upper
like
North
West
corner
of
that
lot.
The
Walgreens
is
this:
you
know
the
little
the
square,
that's
missing
there
on
the
on
the
corner.
I
You
know
that
was
the
commission's
recommendation.
I
also
believe
that
going
into
the
meeting
that
that
was
staff's
recommendation
as
well,
I
think
the
feeling
that
this
was
more
of
a
neighborhood
market
and
I
know.
There
was
also
some
discussion
about
potentially
retaining
commercial
on
the
site,
which
would
have
then
lessened
the
residential
density.
U
If
I
may
I
believe
staff's
recommendation
going
in
in
was
30,
do
I
use
to
the
acre
with
the
understanding
that
there
would
be
some
commercial,
probably
included
with
the
project,
but
at
20
dwelling
units
to
the
acre
we're
pretty
much
guaranteed
to
see
Town
loan
development
with
very
little
replacement
for
Marshall.
Unless
we
have
some
really
different
regulations.
E
Okay,
so
how
tall
will
this
end
up
being
if
we're
doing
you
know,
we've
got
the
mix
of
the
30
and
the
20
and
it's
saying
Target
Heights
35,
but
if
we
have
commercial,
are
we
really
50.
A
Okay,
okay,
thank
you,
councilmember
Moore,
that
was
at
2
15..
You
have
45
seconds,
and
so
let's
go
to
council
member
way.
W
All
right,
so
my
question
is
on
the
Tintin
side:
11a.
It
is
designated
20
unit
per
acre.
What
would
be
the
the
drawback
or
the
cons,
the
concerns
of
the
neighborhood,
if
we
upload
it
to
30
unit
per
acre?
Is
that
because
the
loss
side
is
too
small
to?
Is
it
not
doable
or
is
just
because
the
Planning
Commission
believes
that
it's
the
neighborhood
that
we
should
limit
to
20
instead
of
30.
I
It
it
could
accommodate
the
30
units
per
acre,
there's
many
other
sites,
this
size
that
we
are
showing
and
yeah.
As
I
said,
I
mean
44
over
56
properties
are
30
or
50
units
per
acre.
So
it's
difficult
to
say
exactly
what
the
impact
would
be
on
the
neighborhood,
but
again
the
other
side
11b,
which
is
nearby
that's
shown
at
30
units
per
acre
as
well,
so
I
think
it's
more
of
a
judgment,
call
and
a
preference.
W
Okay,
so
okay,
so
I'm
gonna
put
on
them
on
my
market,
because
it's
a
church
on
the
west
side
and
the
east
side
is
planning.
There
is
some
neighborhood
on
the
North
side,
I
believe
I'm
very
familiar
with
that
site
because
they
use
the
shop
in
Tintin
and
so
I
I'm
gonna
put
a
question
mark
that
we
might
be
able
to
get
30
per
acre
if
we
eliminate
some
of
the
other
sites.
So
that
would
be
what
I'm
gonna
put
on
my
Note.
A
Okay,
thank
you
councilmember
way,
you're
a
145
and
so
115
left
councilmember
Willie.
You
have
your
hand
raised
next.
C
C
I
Not
necessarily
at
30
units
per
acre
and
I
would
be
happy
to
defer
to
David
masinton
on
this,
but
my
guess
is
that's
more
of
a
Tipping
Point
you're,
not
necessarily
going
to
have
structured
parking,
I.
Think
housing
you're
pushing
the
upper
limit
at
that
point.
Okay,.
C
C
Then
at
40
units
per
acre,
underground
required
and
one
level
of
underground
parking
and
then
50
units
is
that
still
achievable,
with
one
layer
of
underground
parking,
that's
general
for
all
these
sites,
when
we're
talking,
30,
40
50.,
it
just
seems
like
an
appropriate
time
to
bring
it
up
here
when
we
have
these
houses
all
around
it
and
we're
going
to
have
underground
parking.
X
Yeah,
so
the
cost
of
underground
parking
is
quite
High,
so
I
would
think
that
you
would
need
to
at
least
get
to
50
units
per
acre
to
to
even
have
a
shot
at
validating
that,
but
I
think
it
would
be
a
push
most
under
up
underground
parking.
Right
now
is
costing
you
know,
40
45
000
space
so
that
have
the
severe
impact
I
think
they
would
go
to
an
above
ground
garage
or
a
deck
before
they
would
do
that.
Okay,.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Thank
you,
David.
Thank
you,
councilmember
Wooley
councilmember.
Will
you
stand
at
150
with
about
a
minute
10
left.
So
let's
go
vice
mayor,
Chow
I
think
you
have
not
yet
spoken
on
this
map.
Vice
Merchant.
F
Yeah,
thank
you
so
I
wonder
if
10
a
and
10B
they
have
the
same
owner.
F
I
mean
both
of
them
are
not
under
so
I
can
share
the
screen.
Oh
you
actually
have
that
yeah.
Actually,
let
me
share
the
screen
that
I
got
from
this:
a
very
nice
city,
property
information
site.
F
U
F
U
F
U
That
is
the
30
feet
in
that
area,
and
their
density
is
15
dwelling
against
the
acre
for
that
particular
parcel,
but
it
they
they're
not
very
happy
about
having
to
do
it.
I
can
tell
you
that
they,
if
they
could,
they
wouldn't
have
done
that.
U
A
That
was
time.
Okay,
thank
you.
Okay,
all
right!
So
we'll
go
ahead,
and
can
you
put
your
original
map
up
Luke
for
map
D?
Please
and
I'll
go
ahead
and
start
my
clock
in
about
30
seconds
or
so.
A
Great,
so,
with
regard
to
the
the
fiscal
viability,
I
want
to
hear
again
what
I
thought
I
heard
previously
Pew.
Did
you
say
that
you
think
that
it's
not
financially
viable
at
20
dwelling
units
per
acre
that
30
dwelling
units
would
be
necessary
or
did
I
hear
that
incorrectly.
U
No
I
just
wanted
to
make
the
point
that
the
if
there
was
to
be
commercial
development
included
at
20
years
of
the
acre,
the
best
bang
for
your
buck
would
probably
be
Town.
Home
Development.
A
Okay,
okay,
I
see
a
20
drawing
units
per
acre.
Okay
and
gosh.
I
really
want
to
ask
this
question,
but
if
a
City
attorney
stopped
me,
if
you
just
don't
feel
like
it's
appropriately
noticed,
but
you
know,
Bollinger
has
had
some
issues
with
regard
to
traffic
incidents,
and
you
know
this
is
actually
part
of
you
know
a
pedestrian
I'm,
not
sure
if
bikes
have
been
an
issue
but
I
I'm
sure
we're
we're
looking
at
it
for
potential.
You
know
improvements
over
time.
I
mean.
A
Is
there
anything
that
we
could
be
doing
related
to
this?
That
could
help
out
I
mean,
especially
with
things
like
you
know,
perhaps
movement
of
of
kids
across
Bollinger
over
to
West,
San,
Jose,
and
vice
versa.
I
mean
this
actually
is
at
a
major
intersection
or
near
it
with
the
Walgreens
at
that
intersection.
Is
there
something
that
we've
been
considering
and
might
it
relate
to
you
know,
density
issues?
A
Okay-
okay,
that's
fair
all
right!
So
I
I
guess
that
was
my
primary
question
on
this
one.
There
are
20
dwelling
units
per
acre,
that
does
seem
a
bit
low
and
it
doesn't
give
us
the
very
low
or
low
income,
statutory
assumption
and
so
I'm
going
to
hold
this
in
advance
for
kind
of
considering
whether
we
should
perhaps
up
it
a
bit.
But
that's
my
question
and
comment.
So
I
guess
I
stand
at
about
two
and
a
half
hold
on.
A
One
second
counts
my
way,
let
me
see
where
you're
at
well
you're
you're,
you're
you're
abundant
on
time,
but
I
do
have
a
couple
of
other
of
the
I'll
come
back
to
you
is
that
okay?
Okay,
so
for
this
next
round
going
through
council
member
or
Andy,
did
you
want
to
address
anything
that
I
was
asking
about
or.
V
Just
briefly,
yes,
yes,
your
your
question
can
lead
to
further
discussion
in
our
next
policy,
part
of
theirs
our
update
cycle
and
and
that's
that,
if,
if
you
were
to
bring
this
up
to
30
dwelling
units
per
acre,
it
would
be
advantageous
for
us
to
consider
within
our
policies
any
kinds
of
improvements
that
might
be
able
to
be
made.
That
is
something
that
HTT
likes
to
look
to.
So
I
just
want
to
put
a
pin
in
that
for
discussion
in
the
future.
Okay,.
A
Great,
thank
you
definitely
make
a
mental
note
of
that,
because
it
can
actually
affect
quite
a
few
things.
So
we'll
go.
Let
me
just
let
everyone
know
councilman
Moore.
You
have
about
45
seconds
councilmember
way
a
minute.
15.,
council,
member
Willie
you'll
have
to
remind
me
because
I
didn't
write
down
in
your
time.
If
you
had
exhausted
your
time
and
then
we'll
go
back
with
any
other,
you
know
quick,
additional
questions.
Councilmember
Moore.
E
Hey,
thank
you
so
I
really
liked
the
other
map,
because
I
could
get
a
sense
of
where
the
2.7
Acres
actually
actually
is,
and
if
you
move
it
up
to
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
that
that
density
gets,
you
know,
gets
you
another
27
units
across
the
whole
site.
You
get
another
another
a
little
over
five,
so
I
I
am
curious
about
that.
The
the
odd
shape
of
the
the
the
2.7
Acres
actually
lends
itself,
in
my
opinion,
to
the
potential
to
have
a
step
down
to
the
to
that.
E
One
looks
like
one
neighboring
home
to
the
north
and
also
going
I'm
looking
at
the
VTA
map.
Just
because
I
know,
there's
a
the
bus
down
Bollinger,
which
will
take
you
over
to
Danza
College,
the
the
25.
So
you
are,
you
are
on
a
bus
route
there
and
I.
I
would
keep
that
in
mind
because
I
think
it
as
as
it
gets
denser
in
this
area
that
that
route's
going
to
be
pretty
popular
right.
A
Thank
you,
okay,
thank
you,
councilman
Moore,
and
that's
that's
time
for
you
and
let's
go
to
council
member,
wait
who
had
a
follow-up
actually.
W
A
real
quick
follow-up
and
actually
probably
being
answered
already.
If
we
go
to
30
per
acre,
then
we
would
have
more
more
low-income
housing
opportunities
and
as
well
as
a
lot
of
more
mitigation
opportunities,
is
that
fair
statement.
G
Well,
certainly,
legally,
we
would
be
designated
at
30
dwelling
units,
an
acre
as
being
you
know,
in
the
low
income
and
the
very
low
income
range
presumptively,
okay,
okay,
so
that
was
pretty
brief
about
20
seconds
or
so
so
anyone
else
at
this
time,
councilmember
Willie,
you
have
your
hand
raised,
but
no
he
didn't.
Okay,
so.
A
I
Okay,
thank
you,
mayor
Paul.
It's
map
e
Heart
of
the
City
East
special
area.
There
are
two
tier
one
sites
on
here:
18a
and
B.
We
also
have
a
couple
tier
two
sites
shown
in
Orange,
18c
and
D.
I
The
tier
one
sites
are
directly
opposite
from
the
Valco
property
on
across
Stevens
Creek
I
believe
it's
the
United
Furniture
site
is
18a.
18B
is
a
gas
station.
These
sites
were
recommended
at
a
density.
I
Again,
that's
split
with
the
portion
closer
to
Stevens,
Creek,
Boulevard,
being
50
units
per
acre,
and
these
portions
that
would
be
close
on
n18a,
that
is,
it
would
be
closer
to
residential
neighborhoods
would
be
down
to
25
units
per
acre,
so
I
guess,
if
you
average
that
over
the
site,
it
would
be
37
and
a
half
units
per
acre
if
it
was
broken
down.
50
50.-
and
these
are
the
only
I
believe
part
of
the
city
tier
one
properties
that
we
have
so
that
concludes
staff's
initial
presentation.
On
this
slide.
Thanks.
A
Luke
so
firsthand
from
councilman
Moore.
E
For
me,
with
regards
to
Heart
of
the
City
I,
would
want
to
look
at
part
of
the
city,
east,
Center,
Crossroads
and
and
West
I,
don't
think,
there's
anything
out
in
the
west
area.
I
would
actually
want
us
to
go
through
all
all
three
and
and
then
work
work
on
it,
because
the
crossroads
area,
I
believe,
was
not
brought
to
the
Planning
Commission.
E
This
was
something
we
talked
about
when,
when
we
first
looked
at
this,
so
there's
there's
a
group
there
that
I
think
we
need
to
have
a
discussion
about
with
regards
to
equity
and
balancing
and
what
what
our
plan
is
so
I'm,
I
I,
don't
I,
don't
personally
want
to
agree
to
anything
with
with
regards
to
the
the
East
special
area
without
having
a
full
look
across
because
the
the
situations
changed
since
it
went
to
the
planning
and
Housing
Commission.
Thank
you.
A
Okay,
thank
you
councilmember
Moore,
that
was
50
seconds
and
so
council
member
Willie
you're.
Next,
you
have
your
Andrews.
C
My
comment
on
this
is
you
know,
I
I,
just
don't
think
we're
being
Equitable
when
we
start
looking
at
this
one.
We've
got
Valco
2402
units
at
that
area
of
this
entire
city,
and
now
we're
talking
Simeon
property,
which
we
already
discussed
at
257
units
and
now
we're
saying
well,
United
Furniture.
Let's
go
ahead
and
put
another
165
units,
I
I,
just
can't
I
can't
climb
on
board
with
that
I
think
Simeon
property
is
a
unique
one.
C
It's
a
more
or
less
a
continuation
of
the
Valco
property
and
it's
up
against
the
freeway
doesn't
really
lend
itself
to
something
else.
But
this
is
you
know
a
major
retail
area,
United
Furniture,
currently
along
with
a
few
other
shops
that
are
in
there
and
as
I
brought
up
at
the
very
beginning.
We've
got
bub
Road
all
that
office.
We've
got
Falco
two
million
square
feet
of
office
coming
really
tearing
into
the
jobs
to
housing
ratio.
C
I
think
we
should
be
seriously
looking
at
reducing
potentially
reducing
the
office
on
bub
Road,
to
kind
of
do
some
type
of
compensation
for
this
2
million
square
feet
and
put
high
density
housing
where
it's
bound.
It's
it's
at
a
Transit
section
with
85
right
there
and
it's
sandwiched
between
that
85
and
the
railroad
tracks.
So
the
high
density
and
I'm
going
to
go
and
drive
it
tomorrow
and
see
how
many
of
those
those
current
buildings
are
vacant.
I,
I,
really
hope
staff
is
going
to
come
back.
C
P
C
A
You're
going
to
have
okay.
Thank
you,
okay,
you're!
Exactly
three
minutes.
Is
there
further
comment
here?
I,
don't
see
hands
raised
here,
but
council
member
way
and.
W
A
Okay,
yeah
that
was
15
seconds,
so
all
right,
18a,
that
is
the
the
United
Furniture
Shopping
Center,
or
the
shopping
center
that
that
has
United
Furniture
in
it
and
so
I
I
guess
at
this
time
you
know,
given
what
Andy
was
saying
with
regard
to
you
know:
potential
other
things
that
that
could
come
about
as
an
adjunct
result
of
development
I
mean
I.
Think
we
could
stipulate
that
across
Stevens
Creek
Boulevard
with
2402.
You
know,
units
of
Housing
and
near
2
million
square
feet
of
office.
A
I
mean
it's
going
to
loom
large
over
this
site.
Right
I
mean
it
is
truly
difficult
to
visualize.
You
know
my
augmented
reality
Workshop,
you
know,
notwithstanding
from
you
know
yesterday,
even
if
we
could,
you
know
put
that
on
a
camera
I
had
to
put
in
a
plug
for
that
right,
but
you
know,
even
even
if
you
could
visualize
it
right
now.
It's
it's
it's!
You
know
it.
It's
it's
quite
a
substantial
change.
I
would
like
to
have
a
sense
of
you
know.
A
If
staff
does
have
an
immediate
idea
or
perhaps
set
of
ideas
of
what
could
be
happening
at
18a
or
18b
to
be,
you
know,
kind
of
I,
don't
know
what
the
right
verb
here
is,
but
to
take
into
account
what's
happening,
north
of
Stevens,
Creek,
Boulevard
and
Pew,
you
look
like
you're
up
for
it.
You
have
your
your
camera
on
any
any
thoughts
on
this
I
mean
you
know
within
the
context.
Of
course,
the
fact
that
we're
having
a
housing
density
discussion
but
but
anything
else
that
we
can
keep
in
our
mind
here.
U
Sure
I,
just
don't
want
to
state
that
you
know
the
property
owner
is
very
interested
in
developing
housing.
Here
we
did
see
a
very
preliminary
concept
of
town
home
development
here
and
you
know
which
would
be
at
the
45-foot
height
limit,
and
so
we're
just
trying
to
you
know
like
we
said
when,
when
the
housing
element
process
kind
of
came
about
the
property
owner
approached
us
and
said
that
this
is
what
we
want
to
do.
U
You
know
we
want
to
have
a
little
bit
of
higher
density
here
in
order
to
have
the
you
know,
ability
to
provide
some
underground
parking
or
do
something
so
have
a
little
bit
of
increased
height,
but
but
have
more
units
on
it,
because
the
maximum
units
that
that
they
could
have
on
here
is
about
50.
Why
do
I
want
to
say-
and
they
didn't
even
want
to
build,
that
with
the
original
proposal
that
they
were
coming
in
on.
A
U
That
has
been
broached
again
that
I
don't
believe
there
you.
With
the
original
proposal
we
saw,
we
saw
a
very
small
retail
pad.
You
know
that
they
were
they
just
wanted
preliminary.
You
know
assessment
from
us
on
what
can
and
can't
be
done.
So
there
wasn't
a
whole
lot
of
retail.
I
will
put
that
out
there,
but
but
it.
A
A
Now:
okay,
thank
you!
Okay,
let's,
let's
go
and
council
member
more,
but
let
me
check
my
notes
here
as
to
what
our
timings
look
like,
oh
councilmember,
more
you
have
plenty
of
time
did
did
Vice
merch
out.
Did
you
want
to
say
anything
on
this
or
should.
F
U
I,
don't
believe
they
can.
They
are
interested
in
preserving
as
much
retail
as
there
is
right
now.
It's
a
very
large
warehouse
furniture
store
right
now,
and
so
there
is
very
little
interest
in
providing
retail
in
any
development.
F
That's
okay,
I'll
get
the
information
tomorrow
and
for
the
guest
gas
station
that
gas
station
is
a
I
think
a
pretty
popular
one.
Maybe
the
only
one
that
many
people
can
walk
to.
You
can
leave
your
car
and
then
walk
or
take
via
to
go
home
if
the
owner
doesn't
have
interest.
Why
is
that
put
on
tier
one
and
it's
a
really
tiny
site
too.
U
It's
just
provided
as
an
when
the
when
we
kind
of
looked
at
the
whole
site.
The
two
sites
are
kind
of
I,
won't,
say
they're
owned
by
the
same
people,
but
they're
owned
within
the
same
family,
and
so
that
was
kind
of
a
consideration
that
we
looked
at
when
looking
at
the
sites.
U
F
It
is
actually
in
the
garage
whether
you
need
it
yes
or
not,
used
you
need
garage
and,
and
that's
a
really
tiny
sight,
even
if
it's
right
next
to
a
bigger
one,
so
I
don't
understand
that
and
then
10
the
other
two
sides,
the
10
C
and
sorry.
Can
you
read
the
18c
that's
currently
on
is
that
a
Bank
of
America
site
I
was
currently
a
office
building
right.
U
F
F
A
F
A
E
Okay,
so
I'd
like
to
continue
on
with
the
where
what
the
vice
mayor
was
looking
at
I'm,
actually
also
interested
in
18c
and
18d,
and
the
table
does
not
show
the
total
new
unit.
So
I'm
I'm
I'm,
pretty
interested
in
having
those
moved
from
tier
two
to
tier
one
and
because
I
like
the
distribution
there
and
and
I,
don't
I,
don't
like
the
the
50
dwelling
units
per
acre
that
was
put
across
all
of
the
the
18s
that
we
have
here.
E
So
so,
if
the,
if
18c
it
looks
like
it's,
the
0.96
acres
plus
1.71
at
the
50
dwelling
units
per
acre,
I'd
kind
of
like
it
that
even
if
these
were
tier
two,
that
you
would
show
us
the
what
the
what
the
potential
total
is.
Even
if
it's
done
like
in
a
pale
gray
font
or
something
to
distinguish
it
or
some
color
there.
It
was
anyway
to
know
it
but
I'd
like
to
know
how
what
what
the
yield
would
be.
E
If
we
did
that
for
the
tier
looked
at
that
for
tier
two,
because
essentially
I
want
to
negotiate
with
the
the
Heart
of
the
City
locations
and
have
some
better
distribution
in
that
area,
rather
than
having
everything
impacting
that
the
wolf
Stevens
Creek
inner
intersection
and
I
do
certainly
agree
with
the
we're
still
going
to
need
garages
to
fix,
fix
the
dents
and
all
this
stuff,
that's
gonna
that
happens,
and
you
know
that
even
the
the
Tesla
Shop's
very
very
busy,
if
you're
trying
to
get
a
spot
in
there.
E
So
it's
not
that
need
is
not
going
to
go
away.
It's
just
going
to
be
different.
So
does
anyone
know
the
total
there
for
18.?
Looking
at
18
c
at
tier
two
18c.
E
Okay
and
is,
and
is
that
that's
for
the
two
parts
to
18c,
taking
both
of
them
together:
okay
and
that's
and
then
and
that's
a
townhouse
looking
Arrangement.
That's.
A
Okay,
councilmember
Willie,
more
I'm.
Sorry,
you
were
in
the
middle
of
a
thought
so
and
you
had
gotten
out
that
18c
has
about
18
units
and
Pew
I'll.
Just
ask
is
a
very
brief.
After
follow-up,
how
many
did
18d
have.
U
18C
would
have
80
dwelling
units
to
the
acre
in
18,
the
other
one
I'm.
Sorry
I'm
gonna
go
back
here.
A
That's
30
right,
okay,
anyone
else
at
this
time,
councilmember
way
you
have
about
yeah
about.
W
Two
minutes
so
I'm
gonna
make
one
brief
comment,
because
we
are
very
concerned
about
the
1.8
million
square
footage
of
office
space
at
Falco
and
or
the
rice.
This
sits
right
across
it
and
I
think
could
complement
the
housing
shortage
that
the
rice
is
bringing
I
understand
the
balance
that
we
need
to
be.
So
we
just
keep
this
in
mind
and
then,
as
we
go
into
the
west
side,
though
I
really
don't
believe
in
each
website,
but
that's
okay.
We
can
just
keep
this
in
mind.
A
Okay,
great:
let's
go
to
council
member
Willie
and
I
I!
Guess
we'll
borrow
some
time
from
councilman
away.
If
that's
okay,
all
right
councilman
wooly,.
C
Yeah
I'm,
just
gonna
I'm,
just
going
to
reiterate
again
all
that
density
on
Stevens
Creek
Boulevard,
it's
going
to
be
a
mess.
We
need
to
be
more
Equitable
and
spreading
out
all
of
the
the
transit.
That's
going
to
be
going
to
this
increased
density
and
shifting
it
less
than
a
block
away
is
not
going
to
help
Stevens
Creek,
so
I'll
leave
it
at
that.
A
Yeah,
okay,
thank
you.
Thank
you.
Councilmember
Wooley,
yeah,
no
I
I,
agree
I!
Really,
if
you
look
at
the
pipeline
units
and
there's
no
reason
why
you
shouldn't
I
mean
really
just
in
any
way
you
slice
the
exercise.
It's
it's
a
lot
of
units
there.
Okay,
let's
go
and
I
have
8
27
on
computer
clock.
Let's
go
ahead
and
reconvene
at
8
33,
we'll
take
a
five
minute
break
and
we'll
start
up
with
map
f.
Thank
you
we'll
see.
You
then.