►
Description
Coverage of the Tuesday, August 30, 2022 Cupertino City Council Meeting. Part 2 of 2.
A
Yeah
now
and
I
do
see
a
couple
of
hello
council
members
on
camera,
so
we
have
Borum
and
let
us
take
this
to
our
city
manager.
Pamela.
Did
you
want
to
give
us
a
brief
overview
of
how
we're
going
to
go
through
your
various
Consolidated
notes
on
the
points
and
issues
that
were
raised
over
the
last
couple
of
evenings.
B
Of
course,
Mr
Mayor
before
I
start
can
I
ask
for
a
favor
to
get
Chris
back
in
I.
Think
he's
stuck
in
la
la
land
somewhere.
A
A
I
put
them
into
the
attendees
and
and
for
some
reason
we
kept
hearing
him
I,
don't
know
why
that
was
but.
B
So,
thank
you
mayor.
So
what
we
want
to
do
is
for
we're
gonna
attempt
this,
and
hopefully
this
will
work.
So
staff
has
been
consolidating
all
the
comments
and
recommendations
in
a
document
we're
going
to
put
it
on
the
screen
and
we're
also
going
to
be
live.
Taking
notes
as
a
council
going
into
visual
item
and
Ben
will
walk
you
through
in
terms
of
where
we
need
counsel,
to
take
a
vote
on
certain
comments
or
recommendation
or
Direction
we'll,
let
you
know
so
staff.
B
C
A
You,
madam
Ben,
if
you
can
maybe
zoom
in
a
little
bit
on
your
screen,
to
know
why.
A
E
A
Yeah
and
understood
understood,
but
is
there
any
way
that
we
can
also
get
it
so
that
we
can
yeah
sort
of
yeah
follow
along
on
our
own
on
our
own
windows?
A
If
not
understandable,
we
can
take
it
through
the
exercise
as
well.
I.
B
B
So
what
we
want
to
do
is
we
like,
like
we
said
we
Consolidated
a
comments.
We
try
to
summarize
the
questions.
The
comments
recommendation
in
a
fashion-
that's
more
comprehensible,
so
it's
not
verbatim
minutes,
but
we
also
put
the
council
member's
last
name
and
apprentices
to
recognize.
You
know
where
the
recommendation
and
comments
are
coming
from
and
then
we'll
you'll
notice
that
some
comments
and
recommendations
are
highlighted
in
red.
This
is
where
we
need
mayor
your
help
to
facilitate
motion
and
also
maybe
to
vote
on.
B
Those
are
the
ground
rules
if
there
are
no
further
questions.
I'll
turn
it
over
to
Ben.
C
Yes,
let's
scroll
up
a
little
bit,
thank
you.
Madam
city
manager,
Mr
Mayor
city
council,
so
we'll
go
through
one
map
at
a
time
like
Madam
city
manager,
mentioned
this.
C
The
generalization
of
comments
that
we
received
and
a
very
brief
staff
clarification
or
response
so
sort
of
math,
a
the
north,
Valco
Park
and
we'll
tend
to
edit
and
add
comments
as
you
speak,
so
we'll
see
how
that
goes,
map
a
on
North,
Valco
Park,
and
we
hear
a
Commons
about
from
from
vice
mayor
child,
maintaining
to
maintain
the
existing
retail
square
footage
while
we
add
residential
units
as
well
and
our
response
or
response
that
we
could
certainly
make
make
these
zoning
recommendations
a
part
of
the
subsequent
process.
C
As
we
mentioned
before,
you
know
zoning
all
this
come
after
this.
This
process,
we'll
certainly
make
sure
we
that
that
gets
gets
gets
done.
There
was
a
dry,
cleaner
concern
expressed
by
councilman
Moore,
so,
like
we
mentioned
before,
with
some
of
the
soil,
cleanup
is
required
as
part
of
the
the
permit
review
and
issuance
process,
and
it's
we'll
make
sure
that
it's
just
done
pursuant
to
to
to
the
municipal
code.
C
So
that's
what
we
heard
for
for
map
a
velcro
Park
wanted
to
take
any
feedback
or
comments
at
this
point.
If
not,
we
can
certainly
move
on
to
Matt
B
Mr
Mayor.
A
C
Sir,
it
might
be,
this
is
specifically
for
the
velcro
shopping
district
of
Simeon
property.
There
was
a
step
down
or
increased
setback
on
the
West
Side,
the
residential
side,
assuming
a
site.
We
heard
that
from
from
Miss
America
Salva
and
councilman
Moore,
as
well
as
Vice
Mary
Chow.
We
again
it's
similar
to
our
common
for
for
the
last
map,
a
that
we
can
propose
these
zoning
recommendations.
Change
is
a
part
of
the
subsequent
process
to
address
is
concerned.
Make
sure
there's
concern
is
addressed
similarly
to
the
Sam
wall.
C
C
F
Not
particularly
on
this
comment,
but
I
want
to
have
an
understanding
of
the
total
that
that
we
have
in
the
recommended
sites
inventory
at
at
this
point
and
what,
as
what
is
our
goal
number
and
with
that
in
mind,
I
share
that
and
then
I
want
to
perhaps
make
a
recommendation.
Once
we've
heard
it.
A
Chris,
did
you
want
to
speak
to
that?
It
looks
like
your
videos
on.
F
Well,
what
the
total
is
So
I've
got.
The
I've
got
the
previous
recommended
sites
inventory,
which
has
a
total
saying
that
we're
at
119
of
the
the
arena
on
the
last
page,
I'm
gonna
assume.
That
is
that
that
is
correct.
G
So
the
the
the
so
the
so
the
recommended
hcd's
recommended
buffer
is
15
to
30,
so
we
should
so.
If
we
follow
hct's
recommendation,
we
should
be
within
a
you
know,
115
to
130
percent
of
our
Arena.
That
is
just
a
recommendation.
G
If
you
go
too
much
lower
than
that,
you
risk
potentially
having
to
rezone
before
the
end
of
the
the
sixth
cycle,
because
of
you
might
have
a
shortfall
of
units,
if
you
don't
have
the
production
from
of
certain
properties,
certain
properties
that
you
expect.
Okay,.
F
So
please
don't,
in
my
opinion,
don't
don't
make
a
suggestion
to
to
to
drop
the
units
if
you
don't
have
an
idea
of
where
those
numbers
are
going
to
get
made
up
somewhere
else.
Otherwise
this
is
going
to
be
a
4
a.m.
Meeting
all
right
thanks!
That's
it.
A
C
Matt
C
is
North
Blaney
Mini
Storage,
and
this
is
where
we
encounter
our
first
recommend
action.
First,
one
is
remove
single
family
lot
due
to
a
negative
owner
response,
I
believe
that
was
proposed,
a
rough
Language
by
councilman
way
and
the
second
one
is
to
remove
both
mini
storage
and
a
single
family
lot.
I
believe,
that's
also,
that's
roughly
reflective
of
what
Vice
marriage
Hall
had
expressed
I'm
happy
to
take
any
comments
or
edits
for
these
or
additions.
A
Okay,
well,
it
looks
like
you're
asking
us
for
guidance
as
to
removal
of
one
or
both
of
those
Parcels.
So
let's
go
to
council
member
Moore.
Thank.
F
You
mayor
Paul,
so
my
suggestion
actually
was
to
agree
with
the
removal
of
the
the
residential
home
because
there
was
an
interest
but
I
actually
wanted
it
to
go
from
30
to
40
dwelling
units
per
acre
with
40
dwelling
units
per
acre
against
the
the
walls
similar
to
what
we're
looking
at
at
the
the
public
storage.
So
you'd
have
a
little
bit
more
height
there,
so
I
I
I
did
not
want
to
have
that
removed.
The
1.76
Acres
I
wanted
it
actually
to
be
stepped
stepped
up
to
the
freeway
sound
wall.
A
How
would
you
conduct
the
calculation
there
staff
with
regard
to
the
recalculated
number
of
units?
This
would
this
would
generate
potentially.
H
H
A
Okay,
I
think
that's
fairly
reasonable.
So,
okay,
let's
check
in
with
our
other
council
members
as
to
what's
supported,
I
guess
we
have
council
members
way
and
vice
mayor
Chao
and
councilman
Moore.
Let
me
check
in
with
councilmember
Willie
John.
Do
you
have
a
particular
leaning
among
these
options
here.
I
A
I
A
Okay,
so
so
just
to
clarify
there
are
two
sites
on
map
C
and
so
you're.
Okay,
with
keeping
both
sites.
You
would
be
okay
with
removing
the
single
family
lot.
You
would
be
okay
with
removing
both
of
them,
and
then
you
would
also
be
okay
with
having
kind
of
a
step
up
towards
a
sound
wall
too.
A
40
dwelling
unit
per
acre
density.
Is
that
correct?
A
Okay?
Well,
let
me
be
the
type
breaker
here.
I
would
be
fine
with
removing
the
residential
home
because
of
the
response
from
the
owner,
and
that
doesn't
really,
you
know,
confer
a
lot
of
a
lot
a
lot
of
units
anyway
and
so
I
I
think
it's
interesting.
This
idea
about
stepping
up
to
go
towards
the
sound
wall.
A
Now,
if
we're
going
40
dwelling
units
an
acre
up
against
the
sound
wall,
I
know
that
few
you're
talking
about
having
maybe
triple
or
quadruple
pain
Windows.
Is
that
basically,
what
would
be
applied
in
this
kind
of
situation
where
you
would
be
right
next
to
right.
H
Have
to
rely
on
the
noise
consultant
to
see
what
the
mitigations
would
be,
but
there
are
a
number
of
developments
that
happen
routinely
up
against
freeways,
including
up
against
680
and
other
freeways.
So,
but
but
that
would
be
dependent
on
what
the
consultant
comes
up
with,
and
the
analysis
comes
out
with
right.
A
I
mean
we
have
multiple
I,
think
townhome
units
up
against
Highway
280,
so,
okay,
all
right
I
would
be
okay
with
supporting
that
as
reflected
clairvoyantly
on
that
yeah.
That
was
highlighted
a
moment
ago.
I
think
I
that
that
basically
makes
it
a
tie
breaker
because
councilmember
Willie
said
he
would
support
any
of
those.
Anyone
want
to
make
any
further
comments.
I
see
Vice
merchao
as
well
as
councilmember
way
have
hands
up.
So
let's
call
on
my
smart
child
at
councilman
away.
D
Yeah
I
think
at
the
time
yeah
at
the
time,
I
I
was
the
first
property
I
thought.
Oh,
there
is
no
owner
interest.
Why
are
we
identifying
it,
but
then
I
realized?
We
are
doing
a
lot
of
those
and
then
the
staff
did
say
that
there
are
multiple
other
Mini
Storages
and
then
they
have
increased
the
number
of
units
they
provide.
So
if
we
include
this
site,
it's
fine.
However
I
just
want
to
make
a
comment.
D
This
is
in
the
Collins
Elementary
area
and
basketball
is
consistently
the
most
crowded
School
in
cusd,
even
though
the
Denver
is
a
little
is
lower
now
because
of
the
pandemic.
But
that's
going
to
continue
to
be
one
of
the
most
crowded,
School
and
plus
alcohol
is
going
to
generate
a
lot
more
students
who
which
will
attend
that
school.
J
I
will
I
will
second,
the
the
more
Paul
Willey
in
ciao
too,
so
we
are
on
board
and
I
want
to
say
that
you
know
these
housing
are
not
come
up
until
five
to
eight
years,
so
I
think
cusd
would
have
time
to
adjust
at
that
time.
J
A
K
Mr
Mayor,
you
were
looking
at
51
and
just
a
quick
calculation.
If
you
delete
the
home,
yes,
but
you
have
an
average
density
of
35,
it
will
even
out
perfectly
so
there
were.
There
were
61
tier
one
units
in
the
north
Blaney
area
and
at
35
per
acre
over
the
Mini
Storage
site,
subtracting
out
the
house.
You
stay
at
slightly
over
61..
It
comes
out
to
61.6,
okay,.
A
So
pretty
much
even
there,
okay,
so
it
sounds
like
we
have
consensus
at
this
last
proposal:
remove
the
single
family
a
lot
and
essentially
make
an
average
of
35
dollar
units
break
or
for
the
for
the
storage
site.
Let's
go
on
to
South
Blaney
on
map
D.
Please
may
and
mayor
go
ahead
by
smear,
so.
D
For
map
A
and
B
right
now,
because
specific
comments
are
only
like
council
member
Moore,
or
should
we
try
to
get
consensus
on
those
I
mean
other
council
members
who
did
not
speak
likely
agree?
They
just
did
not
voice
their
agreement,
because
if
we
don't
do
it
now,
it's
going
to
be
only
one
council
members
said
that.
G
A
Well,
I
also
I'm,
going
to
point
out
if
you
look
at
the
language
of
if
you
want
to
scroll
up
whoever's
controlling
the
document
there
on
the
zoom,
so
so,
for
example,
I
mean
you
have
you
have
some
concerns
listed
and
those
are
responded
to.
So
those
aren't
really,
you
know
I
think
actionable
anyway.
A
Well,
let
me
finish:
please
thank
you.
So
this
first
bullet
point
under
map
a
says:
maintain
existing
retail
square
footage.
The
way
the
language
is
couched
just
simply
says:
staff
can
make
zoning
recommendations
as
part
it
doesn't
say:
staff
will
make
the
zoning
regulations.
So
you
know
I
I,
think
we're
at
a
point
right
now,
where
we're
we're
being
provided
information,
which
is
good,
but
as
our
City
attorney
points
out,
we're
not
properly
noticed
to
go
and
grab
feedback
and
and
Direction.
You
know
so.
I
I
think
we've
hit
a
legitimate
balance
here.
A
Vice
mayor
child
respectfully
and
I
think
we
should.
You
know
one
with
regard
to
the
the
allocation
exercise
here.
So.
D
Okay,
I
just
want
to
encourage
everyone
to
voice
your
consent
agreement
so
that
the
staff
has
a
better
picture.
Thank
you.
A
Okay,
thanks:
let's
move
on
to
map
D
South
Bellini
thank.
C
C
Right
so
we'll
move
on
to
to
D,
which
is
self-blaning.
This
one
has
a
couple
comma,
a
few
comments,
and
that
is
the
that
is
to
I'm.
So
sorry,
it
has
two
recommendations,
plus
a
comment
so
for
the
first
recommendation
is
to
for
Action
is
to
increase
density
for
PSI
11a,
which
also
known
as
tinted
market
and
the
adjacent
store
mole,
the
20,
the
30
20th
per
acre.
This
was
proposed,
I
believe
from
mayor
and
vice
mayor.
C
Our
response
is,
as
previously
mentioned,
the
20
to
100
20
dollars
per
year
would
invite
Town
Hall
style
development.
If
you
recall
hearing
from
from
David
or
the
architect
with
no
real
retail
development,
higher
density
is
my
innocent
advice,
provision
of
a
commercial
component
within
a
project.
You
wish
to
consider
that
the
second
recommendation
or
action
item
is
to
increase
11b,
also
known
as
a
formal
former
Taco
Bell
and
the
adjacent
presidential
site
from
30
to
50
going
to
break
her.
C
This
was
from
vice
mayor
chow
and,
finally,
the
the
comments
who
for
mice
married
child
to
to
maintain
the
buffer
with
the
residential
section.
A
Okay:
let's
go
to
councilman
Moore.
F
I
concur
with
both
of
the
increases
to
the
30
and
the
50
dwelling
units,
so
30
for
11a
50
for
11b.
Also
just
a
side
note
owner
needs
to
know
that
there's
graffiti,
if
they
haven't
already
been
notified
and
have
it
removed.
Thank
you
at
Taco,
Bell
thanks.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Councilman
Moore,
yeah
I,
don't
know
about
the
graffiti
comment,
making
it
into
the
the
bullets
here,
but
but
fair
enough
thanks
for
the
the
observation,
so,
let's
go
to
since
Vice
Murray
you're
you're,
essentially
making
both
of
them.
Well,
let's
go
to
council
member
way
and
then
we'll
go
to
the
vice
America.
J
I
I
am
core
with
the
zoning.
The
density
too.
A
Okay,
great
and
then
Steph
can
reflect
that
in
the
running
notes.
Here,
let's
go
to
council
member
Willie
well
back
to
the
vice
mayor,
actually
we'll
go
to
me
before
yeah,
so
council,
member
Willie.
I
Yeah
both
of
these
areas
don't
have
existing
structures
that
are
that
I
I'd
like
to
you,
know:
okay,
increase
it
from
what
we've
got,
but
I
would
say:
let's
split
it.
Rather
than
going
20
to
30,
okay,
25
30
to
50.
I'd
say
you
know:
35,
maybe
40.
A
Okay,
fair
enough
and
let's
give
let's
give
staff
a
moment
to
reflect
that.
I
I
might
also
say
if
I
can
mayor,
please
go
ahead,
realize
that
this
is
gonna,
be
increased
with
the
State
density
bonus
or
you
know
we're
putting
out
these
numbers,
but
in
some
regards
they're
meaningless,
because
the
developers
are
going
to
take
the
density
increases.
C
I
I
I
prefer
35,
but
if
we
really
draw
it
down
the
middle
it'd
be
40,
but
I
think
you
know,
like
I'm
saying
you
know,
when
the
developer
puts
the
density
bonus
on
it,
he's
going
to
be
increasing
it
Beyond
these.
So.
A
Okay,
so
with
regard
to
the
11
11b
site,
how
many
more
units
are
we
talking
about
here
or
11b?
Let's
see
if
I
can
pull
this
up
here,
so
I
think
something
like
two-thirds
more
right,
so
yeah.
K
A
K
Would
have
42
additional
units
under
this
scenario
just
described
by
council
member
Willie.
A
But
that
includes
11b
with
one
so
this
yeah.
Maybe
you
probably
need
to
break
it
out
between
11
and
11b,
because
you
have
the
parenthetical
behind
just
the
11a
bullet
point
there
right.
H
I'm
sorry
I
mean
I
missed
what
the
increase
was.
Look
for
11b.
A
It
seems
like
the
11b
unit
folds
into
at
the
61
units,
so
so
somewhere
within
the
61.
That's
where
you
find
your
11b
numbers,
so
11b
is
going
up
by
60,
like
so
two-thirds
of
37.
It
sounds
like
roughly
12.
K
A
Okay,
you
can
go
ahead
and
add
my
name
to
11b
as
well.
A
All
right,
so
that
is,
map
D.
Let
us
go
to
let's
go
to
map
e,
so
yeah,
let's
let's
okay,
so
so
just
to
set
some
expectations
here,
we'll
go
through
the
16
Maps
in
addition
to
I
believe
it
was
map
22
originally
with
Outback
Steakhouse
site,
and
then
then,
after
that
we
can
take
public
comment
and
then
we
can
go
back
and
try
to
entertain
a
motion.
If
that's,
if
that's
forthcoming
at
that
time,
so.
D
Yeah,
thank
you
for
supporting
my
proposal.
The
the
rationale
is
when
I
I
was
trying
to
be
consistent
and
I,
see
that
similar
sites
on
Stevens
Creek
and
the
answer
and
the
homestead
are
zoned
15
units
per
acre.
That's
why
I
thought
that
this
Taco
Bell
is
right
down
the
answer,
so
it
should
be
consistent
there
and
then
for
the
South
blenny
home
Bollinger
site
I,
see
that
there
are
other
sites
like
McLaren
and
other
areas,
that
more
neighborhood,
but
still
major
interception.
D
A
Okay,
thank
you
vice
mayor,
let's
go
to
council
member
Moore
councilman
Moore.
Did
you
want
to
speak
on
map
D
or
were
you
I'm.
A
Let's
go
to
map
e
director
Foo.
C
C
Number
one
remove
sites
18a,
which
is
a
United
Furniture
site,
also
known
and
also
18b,
is
a
gas
station
from
inventory
that
is
proposed
by
Vice
Mary
Chao
Mr
Richard
also
has
a
second
recommended
action
to
move
tier
two
office
sites,
18
c
and
d
to
tier
one,
and
we
have
a
third
recommendation
recommended
action
to
upgrade
site
18c
inside
18d
to
Tier
1,
the
tier
two
that
was
similar
to
Vice
May
child's
recommendation,
but
coming
from
councilman
Moore
and
finally,
we
have
one
from
councilman
Willie
to
remove
the
harder
City
East
altogether
until
an
above
rural
area
is
considered.
C
We
just
have
a
brief
comment
on
that:
one.
It's
just
an
elimination
of
sites,
commandatory
just
precautions
of
course,
have
to
think
about
adequate
replacement,
as
I
think
everyone
Moore
had
mentioned
before
we
started
this
exercise
to
make
sure
that
we
have
the
appropriate
level
of
realistic
capacity
from
these
sites.
So
but
with
that
I'll
hand
it
back
to
you,
Mr
Mayor,.
A
Okay,
not
to
not
to
jump
around
too
much
director
Phil,
but
in
the
Parcels
that
you
will
be
bringing
forth
to
us
for
map
22.
Has
a
calculation
been
done
as
to
number
of
units
based
upon
a
projected
or
proposed
set
of
densities?.
K
I
looking
at
this,
if
we
assumed
the
same
densities
for
the
18,
C
and
D
sites
that
18
A
and
B
had
since
they're
along
Stevens
Creek.
So
if
you
took
50
units
per
acre,
we
had
currently
165
units
between
a
and
b.
K
K
Are
we
I'm
not
sure
what
density
we
would
be
assuming
for
that
whole
area?
I
thought.
K
A
See:
okay,
okay,
so
between
those
four
four
Parcels
that
were
described
or
are
you
talking
about
the
entire
bub
root
corridor?.
A
See
I
see
okay,
so
let's
take
these
bullet
pointed
areas
in
order.
We
have
removed
sites
18a
and
18b
from
the
inventory,
so
that
would
be.
A
165
units
into
one
let's
go
ahead
and
take
a
take.
A
straw
poll
of
this
I've
got
some
other
more
council
member
way:
council,
member
Willie
and
director
food.
Did
you
want
to
here
hands
down
now?
Okay,
so
councilmember
Moore,
so.
J
Okay,
a
has
owner
interest,
so
I
am
very
concerned
that
removing
something
was
only
interest
and
also
it
is
right
across
from
the
rice
and
the
rice.
There's
a
lot
of
commercial
I
do
think
developing
residential
right
to
compensate
for
the
workforce.
That's
going
to
come
into
the
rice
will
be
a
good
policy.
So
I,
you
know,
I
know
number
18c,
18d
all
have
owner
interest.
My
really
night
recommendation
is
to
keep
them
but
remove
B
for
sure
that
doesn't
have
only
interest
as
a
gas
station.
J
To
keep
the
commercial
keep
the
you
know,
retail,
but
at
housing
to
supplement
the
housing
that
needed
across
street.
A
I
guess
have
a
higher
have
a
higher
height
limit
in
a
sincere
okay.
So
that's
customer
Way's
suggestion,
council,
member
Willie.
I
So
the
reference
to
Bob
road
is
not
what
my
intention
was
and
I
thought.
I
explained
it
that
we
identify
one
at
least
one
of
the
sites
on
bub
road
so
that
we're
planting
the
seed,
the
the
site
that
has
been
vacant
for
the
duration
of
the
pandemic
is
0.87
Acres
times
30
units
per
acre
is
26
units
20
years
from
now.
I
You
know
if
all
the
office
has
been
replaced,
yeah
600
unit-
you
know,
councilman
Moore,
said
the
next
housing
cycle
is
going
to
be
impossible
unless
we
start
planting
some
seeds
so
26
units.
So
if
we
go
from
site,
18,
A
and
B
to
site
18
d
and
c
I
think
I'm
only
talking
about
adjusting
by
about
26
units
which
would
decrease
those
densities
from
50
to
say.
45.
I
every
little
bit
helps
it'll
allow
a
little
bit
of
a
building
plane
rather
than
square
boxes
straight
up.
I
see
that,
as
you
know,
we're
trying
to
do
a
little
something
there.
We
also
just
got
a
considerable
number
from
Bollinger
and
the
Blaney
and
Bollinger
and
the
Stevens
Creek
and
Bollinger,
where
it
went
from
one
o
two
up
to
160..
So
we
already
got.
You
know
a
lot
of
extra
unit,
so
I
would
even
say
we
could
drop
these
from
from
40
down
to
30
or
35.
A
I
If
we,
if
we
reduce
the
number
by
26
from
Bob
road,
going
from
50
units
per
acre
down
to
I,
thought
I
said
45
units
per
acre,
and
that
gives
a
little
bit
of
a
a
building
plane.
But
I
said
we
already
got.
You
know
an
additional
close
to
60
units
from
South,
Blaney
and
Bollinger
and
De,
Anza
and
Bollinger,
and
so
at
I.
I
So
we
have
a
19
buffer
and
hcd
wants
somewhere
15
to
30.,
and
so
now
we've
already
increased
our
buffer
from
those
previous
two
sites
and
going
from
18
A
and
B
to
18,
C
and
D
at
the
50
units
per
acre
is
further
increasing
our
buffer,
and
when
we
talk
about
trying
to
plant
the
seed
at
above
Road,
it's
going
to
further
increase,
and
so
maybe
we
come
back
at
the
Tail
land
and
readjust
down
to
what
we
feel
is
a
comfortable
buffer,
because
it
seems
to
me
we're
we're
increasing
stuff
without
decreasing.
I
A
Yeah
I
can
hear
what
you're
saying
councilmemberly,
what
about
18a
and
moving
that
up
to
35
as
well,
because
it
said
25
right
now
and
if
you
put
it
a
35
that
would
impart
credit
for
the
very
low
and
low
income
units.
A
Well,
that
would
be
the
proposal.
Yes,
so
that
yeah.
I
A
I
And
realized
that
the
the
density
bonus
is
going
to
be
added
to
those
numbers.
A
Right
understood,
I
mean
I
I,
suppose
you
could
say
30
dwelling
units
as
well,
but
well,
let's,
let's
go.
Let's
go
to
council
member
Moore
vice
mayor
Chao,
director
Foo,
you
have
your
hand
raised.
Did
you
want
to
make
a
comment
here.
C
Yes,
Mr
I,
don't
want
to
muddy
the
discussion
here,
but
I
I
recall
when
we're
talking
about,
but
there
were
three
properties
north
of
the
Caltrain
site,
and
so
the
the
this
comment
here
from
councilman
Willie
reflects
just
one
of
those,
so
just
want
to
throw
it
out
there.
So
if
you,
if
he.
C
All
three
sites,
depending
on
what
what
density
you're
looking
at
you,
could
be
adding,
maybe
a
little
bit
more
units
to
the
tier
two
sites.
C
C
A
Think
10
100
bub
was
distinct
from
the
three
that
were
north
of
the
Caltrans
Corporation
Yard.
If
I'm
understanding
that
correctly.
A
G
A
And
then,
with
regard
to
the
the
acreage
Ben,
were
you
making
a
a
statement
with
respect
to
the
size
of
the
Consolidated
three
Parcels
on
bud
Road
you're,
referring
to
yeah.
C
Again,
I
apologize
for
reminding
the
discussion
here.
I
just
wanted
to
point
out
that
the
10100
above
there's
two
other
address
to
that
as
well.
So
in
terms
of
following
customer
Willy's
discussion
about
reducing
density
or
increasing
density
for
for
these
sites-
and
you
would
get
a
little
bit
more
than
the
number
of
units
customer
really
was
was
referencing.
A
F
Thank
you,
mayor
Paul,
so
I
am
really
really
against
18a
and
B
being
on
this
at
all.
They
need
to
go
through
the
general
plan.
Amendment
process
maybe
put
that
as
well.
They
can.
They
can
certainly
put
housing
on
it,
but
go
through
the
general
plan.
F
Amendment
process
and
we'll
have
a
discussion
about
what
ends
up
there
and
I
have
a
problem
with
them
essentially
being
used
to
fix
the
problem
that
the
SB
35
pro
project
is
making
I
think
it
I
think
that
really
really
makes
a
fine
point
of
the
fact
that
the
developer
used
a
housing
law
to
worse
in
the
housing
shortage.
F
I
mean
I,
think
I
think
everybody
gets
that
now
now
going
back
to
18,
c
and
d,
if
you
make
18
c
and
d
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
move
them
up
to
tier
one,
we're
still
ahead,
so
you
can
remove
a
and
b
let
the
developer
go
through
the
general
plan
amendment
process.
They
can
have
the
housing
units
and
then
and
then
they'll,
go
through
the
process
and
the
the
community
gets
to
have
have
involvement
in
discussion
about
what
goes
on
at
that.
F
At
those
particular
sites
and
we're
still
ahead-
and
we
have
all
of
that
part
of
the
city,
Crossroads
and
Central
area
that
had
zero
units
on
it.
So
when
you
talk
about
equity
and
we're
looking
at
these
right
right
at
the
get-go
and
sure
you
want
to,
you
know,
keep
the
numbers
ahead,
but
remember
that
you've
got
areas
that
we
put
nothing
in,
and
there
was
owner
interest
moving
to
the
West.
So
I
I
think
looking
at
this
without
balancing
elsewhere.
All
the
way
out
to
bub
road
is,
is
it's
unfair
and
I?
F
A
Yeah,
there
are
a
lot
of
units
here
too
right
I
mean
so
like
sites
are
not
really
reflective
of
the
amount
of
density
that's
being
imposed
so
well.
Let
me
ask
you
this
staff,
so
so,
with
regard
to
the
notion
of
going
from
25
units
to
30
units
as
opposed
to
50.,
you
know
I'm,
looking
at
your
guideline
here
on
the
new
presentations
it
looks
like
18c
and
18d
together
would
have
had
194.
A
Well,
that's
194
extra
units
had
we
essentially
doubled
the
density
right
from
25.50,
but
if
we're
basically
taking
one-fifth
of
that
Delta
okay,
so
so,
instead
of
adding
25
dollar
units
break
or
you're,
adding
five
Dolan
units
per
acre
you're,
basically
getting
an
extra
one-fifth
of
that
194
number,
which,
if,
if
I'm
doing
the
calculation
right,
it
should
come
out
too
Thirty
I'm.
Sorry
how
much.
A
A
Looking
at
the
part
of
the
city
east
special
area,
map
e,
so
it
looks
like
you're,
providing
totally
new
units
and
so
yeah.
It
looks
like
you're
providing
total
new
units,
but
I
I'm
getting
a
little
bit
thrown
off
by
the
math
here.
A
A
Okay.
So
so
you
have
a
column
at
the
very
right
that
says
total
new
units
and
so
that
the
the
and
I
think
that
total
new
units
includes
the
original
25
dwelling
units
per
acre.
So
so.
H
H
Oh,
we
could,
if
it's
identified
as
one
of
the
inventory
sites,
if
we
didn't
want
to
change
the
density,
we
could
just
look
at
the
density
at
25,
drawing
a
speaker
which
is
Town,
Home
Development
and
we're
probably
not
yield
much
commercial
development.
In
addition
to
it,
and.
H
Sorry
so,
but
but
there
are
harder,
the
city
requirements,
but
you
know
they're
not
very
there's
ways
to
get
around
that.
There's
waivers
and
other
things.
Okay,.
A
Got
it
got
it,
so
we
should
be
able
to
get
credit
for
these
units
if
we
don't
right,
if
we
don't
I
would
still
I
would
still
want
to
get
the
30
threshold
for
whatever
you
know,
kind
of
consensus
we
can
reach,
or
at
least
majority
we
can
reach
for
any
of
the
sites.
It
seems
like
18c
and
18d.
Have
some
support
to
get
up
to
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
I
would
support
that
as
a
minimum
threshold.
A
If
that's
what
we
need
to
get
to
a
majority,
if
not,
you
know
unanimity
on
that
notion,
so
I
I,
I,
heard
I
think
it
was
councilmember
Moore.
You
know
asking
something,
but
we
have
hands
rights
from
vice
mayor,
Chao
and
council
member
way
vice
mayor
child.
Did
you
want
to
weigh
in
on
what
we
have
in
front
of
us
here
in
red.
D
The
first
is
a
new
staff
member
keeping
a
spreadsheet
with
units
and
density
change.
So
we
have.
We
can
see
a
total
that
maybe
we
can,
the
spreadsheet
can
be
shared
a
little
later,
I
think
as
we
change
site,
we
want.
You
need
to
know
how
many
we
can,
how
how
many
we've
lost
and
and
then
yeah.
Thank
you
for
clarifying
that
I
think
this
I
think
we
need
to
really
people
really
need
to
know
the
sites
who
are
which
are
not
added
as
housing
on
site.
D
They
can
still
propose
in
The
Proposal
today
at
the
currently
Zone
density
of
25
units
plus
density
bonus
on
this
site,
but
if
they
are
included
then,
and
then,
if
they
want
higher
density,
they
can
also
go
through
the
general
plan.
Amendment
process
that
we
have
available
twice
a
year
to
request
more
change.
The
reason
that
I
think
these
two
sites,
A
and
B,
should
be
removed.
D
Is
we
really
have
a
huge
amount
of
involvement
to
absorb
a
local
which
likely
will
be
built
in
the
next
eight
to
ten
years
that
we
should
now
overload
more
on
this
area?
We
should
let
it
rest
a
bit
and
then
we
can
see
that's
why
and
also
I
would
like
to
really
keep
the
residential.
So
that's
not
I
hope
that
whoever
developed
that
won't
take
the
waiver
on
the
residential
area
that
should
be
strongly
strongly
discouraged.
I'm
around
the
retail
space,
that's
required
that
I
should
be
strongly
discouraged.
D
We
we
made
those
rules
for
a
reason:
that's
not
encouraged
people
to
take
away
first
to
reduce
the
amount
of
retail.
Thank
you.
A
Okay,
my
smart
child.
You
had
originally
indicated
that
you
would
be
agreeable
to
moving
sites
1860
and
18d
to
tier
one.
A
D
Yeah
I
think
lower
density
is
okay,
but
I
think
I
wanted
to
move
them
to
tier
one,
because
it's
rare
on
office
development
is
willing
to
develop
for
residential,
and
we
are
going
to
have
a
lot
more
office
at
vocal,
so
I
think
we.
This
is
a
good
compensation
for
that.
A
Okay,
so
councilmember
Rowley
had
it
from
what
it
was
previously
to
35
dwelling
units
per
acre,
and
so
would
you
prefer
that
or
the
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
that
was
identified
by
councilmember
Moore
I'm
also.
D
J
Okay,
first
procedure,
wise
I,
think
we
are
doing
this,
but
we
can
still
come
back
and
after
we
get
the
total
and
readjust
it
right
is
that
okay,
so
and
I
am
okay
with
having
B
and
C
as
tier
one
and
having
18
a
as
tr2,
because
there
is
only
interest
in
keep
it
as
don't
remove
it,
because
we
can
get
it
a
environmental
report
on
it.
J
It
doesn't
have
to
be
done,
but
it's
good
to
keep
it
there
as
18a
as
a
tier
2.,
and
to
be
consistent
as
a
vice
mayor
says.
This
is
on
a
Heart
of
the
City
Major
Street.
So
if
we
are
doing
the
corner
of
Bollinger,
The
End
Zone
50
unit
per
acre,
I
I
do
think
this
belongs
to
the
50
unit
per
acre
size
and
keep
in
mind
that
whatever
decision
we
make
and
it
does
if
it
does
being
built,
it's
going
to
be
last
50
80
years.
J
So
we
it'll
be
very
hard
to
add
units
to
it,
if
necessary.
So
to
be
consistent.
I
like
to
ask
if
my
vice
mayor
child
believes
that
if
this
would
be
consistent,
it
should
stay
at
50
per
acre
because
Heart
of
the
City
so
but
I'm,
okay
with
being
flexible,
just
a
question
so
I'm,
okay,
with
the
proposed
moving
C
and
D
to
tier
one,
but
I
would
suggest
we
keep
the
18a
as
tier
2.
So
we
get
a
environmental
report
with
it.
A
Okay,
we'll
go
to
councilmember
more
after
this
councilman
Moore
and
then
vice
versa.
Then
councilman
Willie
actually
will
go
to
councilmember
Willie
before
voicemail,
since
yeah.
F
So
yeah
I'm
completely
opposed
to
the
40.
The
50
valcos
is
a
little
just
under
48
dwelling
units
per
acre,
and
this
this
part
of
town
is,
is
just
had
everything
happen
to
it.
Between
the
Apple
headquarters,
we
haven't
ever
experienced
the
entire
headquarters
being
occupied
because
the
pandemic
happened.
We've
never
experienced
all
of
that
traffic,
we're
talking
and
putting
in
2
million
square
feet
of
office
and
and
the
the
the
residential
component
and
the
retail
component.
It's
completely
unfair.
F
A
Okay,
council,
member
Willie.
I
I
I
Echo
councilman
Moore
I
mean
trying
to
bring
bub
Road
into
a
housing
Corridor
and
being.
I
Reserved
and
saying
30
units,
but
if
there
is
a
push
to
make
the
the
starting
point
50
units
and
then
the
developer
adds
the
density
bonus
on
top,
then
I
think
we
need
to
do
the
same
thing
to
bub,
wrote
50
units
rather
than
30
and
let
the
developer
add
the
density
bonus
and
he's
going
to
get
more
excited
and
faster.
I
D
Oh
yeah,
oh
yeah,
so
counting
to
council
member
was
trying
to
be
consistent.
How
I,
therefore,
if
velco,
doesn't
feel
to
that
density,
extremely
high
density?
It's
doing
now.
Definitely
the
suicide
should
be
15
units.
So
it's
consistent,
but
this
area
is
very
different.
Therefore,
we
we
need
to
balance
that
out
and
that's
why?
Actually,
at
the
time
I
commented
when
we
gave
one
particular
property
owner,
a
lot
of
stuff
is
actually
taking
away
from
other
people,
so
these
Property
Owners.
D
D
The
city
needs
to
be
developed
equally,
so
that
Services
could
be
made
available
to
more
people.
For
example,
website
do
need
more
retail,
so
that's
more
walkable
people
can
walk
and
bike
to
those
retails,
rather
than
all
the
way
come
to
the
other
side,
and
also
we
don't
want
bus
lines
to
stop
at
the
answer.
If
we
want
to
encourage
more
bus
lives
to
go
through
the
answer
to
the
Foothill
Boulevard,
we
need
to
have
more
vibrant
development
over
there.
A
Every
one
of
the
rationales
that
we
support
I
mean
this
is
really
a.
This
is
a
numbering
exercise
at
the
end
of
the
day,
so
so
18c
and
18d,
we
seem
to
have
a
majority
for
up
zoning.
The
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
or
35
dwelling
units
per
acre,
I
I,
would
suggest
35
if
we're
going
to
leave
off
18a
and
18b
at
35,
we
basically
get
to
where
we
were
at
at
18a.
A
If
you
consolidate
18c
and
18d
a
few
few
units
more
and
then
we
basically
lose
the
number
of
units
from
18b,
which
is
only
32
units,
so
I
I
think
we
we
are
essentially
still
you
know
ahead,
so
to
speak
for
for
the
exercise.
So
are
we?
Okay
with
that?
A
Having
18c
and
18d
at
35
dwelling
units
per
acre,
I
see
a
head
nod,
but
okay,
all
right
and
a
thumbs
up
all
right.
So,
let's,
let's
proceed
with
that
and
I'll
go
ahead
and
say
I'm
agreeable
to
removing
18a
and
18b.
Although
I
will
make
a
note,
18a
I
think
because
it's
already
at
25
dwelling
units
breaker
at
a
minimum,
we
should
be
trying
to
claim
that
because
that's
what
we
already
have
a
zoned
for
I
mean
just
in
my
mind.
A
But
if
it's
you
know
just
something
to
think
about
I
I.
Think
if
you
know
we
need
more
of
the
units
through
this
okay
having
no
further
hands
raised
on
this
one.
Let's
go
on
to
map
f
and
I
might
suggest
whoever's
controlling
the
document.
If
you
want
to
go
to
view
and
go
to
I,
think
web
webview,
or
something
like
that
web
layout,
that
might
kind
of
help
and
then
maybe
zoom
in
to
like,
let's
say
130
percent
yeah
okay
map
is
it.
C
Sorry
I
was
just:
are
you
ready
for
f?
Yes,
please,
okay!
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
sir.
So
mapath
similar
comment
to
math
E
from
council
member
Willie
to
come
sit
above
ahead
of
the
hoc,
Central
and
I.
Think
Council
has
done
an
excellent
job
here
tonight,
balancing
all
the
units,
so
you
can
disregard
the
staff
coming
here
with
this
particular
item,
but
that
was
a
comment
made
by
customer
Lily.
A
Okay,
so
that
was
the
map
of
three
tier
two
sites.
I,
don't
see
Hands
raised
for
commentary.
Let's
go
on
to
map
G
right,
Matt
G,
that's
the
hardest
thing.
Also
remember
more
you're
raising.
Are
you
anticipating
map
G,
or
did
you
want
to
speak
on
map
f.
A
This
is
the
central
special
area.
It
looks
like
it's
founded,
yeah.
F
This
was
this
was
something
I.
I
did
want
us
to
talk
about
yeah
Heart
of
the
City
Central.
F
Right
and
there
there
was,
there-
was
owner
interest
at
16b
and
16
C
I
I,
don't
agree
with
the
future
density
at
50,
but
I
am
curious
about
16,
B
and
C
at
a
30
density
to
see.
If
anyone
is
there
any
any
support
for
that
in
moving
it
to
tier
one.
A
There's
owner
interest,
I
thought
was
there
another
interest
yesterday
when
we
saw
this
I?
Yes,
16b?
Isn't
that
isn't
that
the
old
Coconut
Cafe
and
now
it's
a
breakfast
place
correct,
okay
and
I'm?
Assuming
can
you
release
and.
F
16C
is
the
the
sunshine
I
don't
know
it's.
E
E
F
I
mean
you
could
or
just
do
one
16
16
c,
it's
pretty
pretty
decent
sized
I
just
want
to
see.
If
there's
any
support
there
might
not
be,
but.
A
I
would
I
would
support
a
30,
certainly
because
it
does
give
a
give
us
more
of
the
units
at
you
know:
presumptively,
very
low
and
low
low
income.
You
know
levels
so
mayor.
A
A
Okay,
Council
council
member,
so
so
this
is
for
30
dwellings,
breaker
vice
mayor
Chow,
you
have
your
hand
raised.
D
Yeah
I
would
support
the
16c.
16B
is
an
existing
commercial
site.
D
Yeah,
it's
the
coconut,
and
now
they
have
another
paper.
One
Maple.
A
Yeah,
so,
okay,
so
you
would
support
16c,
but
not
necessarily
16b.
It
sounds
like
vice
mayor.
D
A
H
You
the
density,
was
20
is
25
drawings
to
the
acre.
However,
they
were
unable
to
build
it
out
to
their
maximum
density.
At
that
time,.
E
H
No,
these
are
minimum
densities
that
we're
looking
at
in
those.
In
that
case,
the
25
volumes
to
the
acre
is
a
maximum
density,
and
so
they
did
not
need
a
general
fundament.
Oh
those.
H
H
20
25
31
years
to
the
acre
along
Steven's
Creek,
though,
is,
is
very
hard
for
development
to
occur,
given
our
land
costs
at
this
point
in
time.
D
And
then
they
could
still
do
something
like
Westport.
Westport
is
35
units
per
acre
right.
D
H
H
F
I
don't
know
through
the
mayor,
I,
don't
know
when
these
properties
traded
hands.
Last
yeah
I
think
it's
been
a
while.
A
That's
fair,
okay,
let's
go
and
was
that
your
comment
council
member
more
so
so
where
we're
at
right
now
is
that
we
do
have
three
four
site:
B
16b
and
16c
at
30
Dolan
units
per
acre.
A
So
so
Pew
was
the
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
at
Westport
before
or
after
the
density.
I.
Think
that's
before
the
density
bonus.
A
A
That's
right:
that's
what
it
meant
yeah!
They
didn't
take
all
of
their
units,
so,
okay,
okay,
so
it
seems
like
we
do
have
a
majority
here.
Let's
go
to
council
member
Willie
just
to
round
it
out
in
terms
of
you
know
where
we're
at
on
the
on
on
this,
you
know:
I
haven't,
read
councilor
Willie.
Are
you
right
there
yeah.
I
I
I'm
fine
with
what's
been
put
forth.
E
A
There's
a
suggestion
to
perhaps
try
to
move
to
35,
for
instance,
but
well:
let's
try
the
30.
Pamela
your
hand
is
up
city
manager.
Yes,.
B
Mr
Mayor.
Thank
you
very
much.
Just
you
know.
I
love
the
conversation,
I
love
the
energy.
Just
do
a
quick
time
change
check.
So
word
about
page
one
of
the
three
and
I
was
reminded
by
planning
staff.
As
we
were
kind
of
bluffing
the
numbers
up
and
down,
we
will
need
another
recess
to
kind
of
calculate
and
bring
back
the
council,
as
vice
mayor,
requested,
Where
We,
Are
Tonight,
with
the
consolidation
and
the
removal
and
the
adding
so
again
look
I
hate
to
pause.
A
I
got
it
I
think
we
all
got
it
you're,
basically
telling
us
to
hurry
up.
So
so,
let's
you
can
go
ahead
and
add
Willy
to
the
site,
16b
and
see,
and
so
with
site
16b.
It
sounded
like
Vice
merch.
How
is
fine
with
it
and
I'm
sorry
site
16c,
my
smart
child
is
fine
with
that
16b
we'll
we'll
just
say
we
have
four
votes
for
C
and
I'm.
Sorry,
five
votes
for
C
and
four
votes
for
B.
A
J
Okay,
just
a
very
quick
comment:
I
am
okay
with,
but
I
just
want
to
say
that
small
loss
for
retail
or
restaurant
is
very
hard
to
survive,
so
I
do
think
it's
okay
to
have
16,
which
one
that
advice
my
child
does
now
that
16b
included.
That
is
the
reason
why
the
restaurant
kept
on
changing
hands.
I,
don't
think
it's
easy
to
survive
with
a
long
restaurants
right
there.
So
I
do
think
we
should
include
16b
and
I
am
very
concerned.
J
We
are
lowering
the
density
because,
just
in
case
Hampton
doesn't
come
through
continue
to
learn,
and
this
is
in
the
heart
of
CD.
This
is
right
on
Stevens,
Creek
Boulevard,
so
I
would
be
more
comfortable
with
a
35
or
40
yeah
unit
per
acre
because
it
is
on
a
Major
Street.
So
that's
just
my
recommendation,
but
I'm
okay
with
as
it
proposed,
but
I
would
really
prefer
it
added
to
35
or
even
40.
H
Mean
I
would
defer
to
David
vassington
on
that
yeah.
A
Hey
David:
what's
what
are
we
looking
at
here?
So
it's
like
per.
E
Unit
the
construction
costs.
Yes,
thank
you.
You
know
if
you're
doing
an
affordable
unit,
you're,
probably
about
you,
know,
450
500,
000
and
you
know
get
into
a
market
rate
unit
depending
on
the
finishes.
You
know
you
can
get
up
to
six:
seven
hundred
fifty
thousand
dollars
a
year:
okay,
okay,
so.
A
D
Yeah
first
Coconut
Cafe
is
right
next
to
a
string
of
other
retail,
it's
now
isolated
and
there
are
retail
on
across
the
street
too
so
and
then
I
would
like
to
get
more
information
from
I
think
a
lot
of
times,
staff
tell
us
this
cannot
be
done.
This
30
units
per
acre
cannot
be
built.
D
So
a
lot
of
these
are
some
things
we
are
using
to
make
this
decision.
I
would
like
to
get
more
data
to
show
me
that
this
is
true
because
I
am
maybe.
This
is
one
example.
Maybe
they're
I,
don't
know
it's
just
okay,
I
find
we
are
give
being
given
certain
things
without
actual
proof
that
they
are
true.
Okay,.
A
Let's
move
on
vice
versa
because
we're
not
we're
not
taking
the
higher
dwelling
unit
per
you
know,
acre
density
here,
and
so
you
know,
I
think
your
points
have
been
made
and
the
votes
are
reflected.
So,
let's,
let's
move
on
to
map
G,
that's
the
crossroads.
Heart
of
the
City.
C
Thank
you,
Mr
Mayor,
yes,
Matt,
G,
Hardesty
Crossroads.
We
have
four
recommended
actions
here.
First,
one
is
to
add
the
site
sites,
15
c
and
e
and
G
that's
inventory
to
tier
one
and
then
remove
the
remaining
and
I
believe
this
was
councilman
Moore
I
apologize,
I'm
perfecting
too
much
because
one
more
and
then
the
the
next
one
is
moving
site
sites,
15
a
b
and
c
to
tier
one.
C
This
is
vice
mayor,
vice
mayor
child,
just
a
side
note
about
the
the
the
property,
the
things
Steve
serving
as
parking
lot.
C
Third
potential
action
item
is
the
remove
site,
15,
B,
sorry,
15,
E
and
F,
and
it's
15
G
from
tier
two
to
preserve
for
The,
Preserve,
retail
and
there's
also
from
vice
mayor
child.
Finally,
we
have
the
increased
density
to
grid
and
35
doing
unit
per
acre
of
site
E5,
which
is
Marina
Food
site,
and
this
is
comes
from
the
way.
D
A
Okay,
councilman
Moore.
F
So
I
I'd
kind
of
like
to
change
my
my
thinking
on
this
I'd
still
like
to
go
with
15a
15b
and
15
C
and
have
those
all
at
30
dwelling
units
per
acre,
and
that's
these
had
zero
units
before
this
whole
area.
There
were
zero
units
coming
out
of
this
whole
map
area,
so
go
with
those
those
three
because
you
have
you
have
owner
interest
from
A
and
B.
F
There
isn't
owner
interest
from
15
C,
but
I
think
it's
oh
gosh
try
to
get
the
what's
on
it,
that
is
the
commercial
offices
shopping
plaza
in
15c
I'm,
not
sure
which
one
it
actually
is
on
the
end.
If,
if
someone
Hannah
is
there
I
think
it
I
think
it
might
be?
It.
F
Yeah
yeah
because
that's
Staples
in
the
backs
it's
Fontana's
on
the
left.
So
so
yes,
it's
Fontana,
it's
15c,
so
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
P5
will
is
going
through
it's
already
a
pipeline
project,
so
I
would
just
stick
with
those
three
personally
and
then,
if
we
could
get
a
calculation
on
how
much
we
would
get,
but
we
so
recalling
that
it
was
completely
zero.
For
this
whole
section.
A
G
A
Okay,
let's,
let's
go
to
council
member
way,
but
before
we
go
to
home,
I
I
would
be
okay
with
15a
and
15b.
At
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
I
was
listening
very
closely
and
intently
for
your
reasons
for
15c,
but
I
just
I'm
not
sure
how
that
would
differentiate
it
from
you
know
all
the
rest
of
these
Crossroads.
F
A
A
Yeah,
well,
it's
a
it's
a
mid
pandemic.
Restaurant
closure
right,
so
yeah,
I
I
would
be
okay
with
A
and
B.
Putting
a
30
dollar
news
breaker.
You
know,
because
of
the
owner
interest
aspect
and
the
fact
that
that.
A
And
we
need
the
sizes
right.
We
need
the
acreage
of
each
of
these
sites,
councilmember
away.
J
Okay,
I
would
like
to
really
ask
a
general
question:
why
are
we
reducing
density?
What
these
properties
are
right
on
Stevens
Creek,
Boulevard,
I
I.
You
know
that
would
then
we
have
to
go
into
the
neighborhood
or
you
know,
to
preserve
our
neighboring
Integrity
I
do
think
we
need
to
have
properties,
that's
facing
Stevens,
Creek
or
De
Anza.
Those
major
properties
have
a
little
more
density
even
up
to
50..
J
That's
just
my
general
question
for
the
council,
my
fellow
council
members,
the
second
I
am
okay
with
A
and
B
Because
owner
interest
is
very,
very
important
as
to
Fontana's.
It
was
one
of
my
favorite
restaurants,
but
I
didn't
go
very
often.
It
really
is
not
working,
and
so
I
am
okay
with
adding
that
too
at
least
give
half
a
General
plan,
not
General,
have
an
environmental
impact
report
and
give
the
owner
an
option
to
develop
it.
Okay,.
A
Thank
you,
councilman
away,
so
question
for
staff.
The
the
owner
interest
on
a
and
b
I
I
noticed
that
the
density
is
at
30
for
all
the
other
sites.
Here
at
the
crossroads,
is
the
owner
interest
tied
to
the
50
dwelling
units
per
acre?
Why
is
the
50
different?
Because
you
know
all
of
these
are
joined
Stevens
Creek
Boulevard,
but
only
these
two
are
the
50
dwelling
units
breaker
as
a
proposed
future
density.
H
If
I
may
I
think
this
was
just
an
option
for
Council
to
consider,
so
we
weren't,
really,
we
weren't
quite
sure
what
density
to
put
in
this,
but
council
is
important
to
decide.
I.
A
Okay,
but
still
I
mean
it's
not
something
that
the
owner
has
said:
okay,
all
right,
so
let's
go
to
I.
Think
Vice
versao
had
her
hand
raised
next
council
member
Moore
and
then
councilmember
Willie,
actually
councilmember
more.
You
made
the
recommendation
for
sites
a
b
and
c
and
let's
go
ahead
and
I
I
guess
vice
mayor
ciao,
I
guess
you
haven't
really
weighed
in
on
it.
Yet
so,
let's
go
to
vice
mayor
chow
and
then
councilmember,
Willie
and
I'll
go
back
councilman.
D
H
Yeah
and
but
they're
looking
for
a
density
bonus
the
full
density
bonus,
so
that
would
get
them
up
to
the
full
I
guess
it'll
be
closer
to.
D
D
Yeah,
okay,
that's
all
but
yeah
I
think,
like
I,
said
earlier,
the
the
rest
of
the
site,
because
they
are
very
vibrant
retail
right
now
and
the
Cupertino
doesn't
have
a
really
need
to
return
those
so
I,
don't
they
should
not
be
at
you,
though,
this
time.
A
Okay,
yeah
I
mean
kind
of
thinking
about
the
fact
that
we've
tied
a
45
foot,
height
restriction
to
the
30
dwelling
unit,
break
or
density,
and
it
gets
me
thinking
that
a
site
like
Fontana's
could
potentially
put
retail
on
the
bottom
of
the
mixed-use
development
with
some
housing
on
top
so
councilmember
Wooley.
We
haven't
heard
you
weigh
in
on
map
G.
Yet.
I
Yeah,
you
know
these
as
I
understand,
they're,
all
tier
two
and
we're
moving
them
to
tier
one
were
increasing
our
total
units
without
adjusting
down
anywhere
else
wow.
I
I
I
78
units
is
going
to
be
85
feet,
I
mean
I
I,
hear
us
taking
tier
two
moving
it
to
tier
one,
going
from
30
up
to
50,
adding
the
state
density
bonus
where,
if,
if
we
had
a
deficiency
across
the
board,
I
could
understand
us
trying
to
get
up
further,
but
when
we
have
our
our
recommendation
with
a
900
with
a
19
density,
19
buffer,
I
I,
just
don't
see
this.
I
Let's
go
back
down
to
the
to
the
Valpo
area,
where
we
were
adding
those
tier
twos
to
take
the
place
of
the
site,
A
and
B,
and
get
those
off,
because
we
know,
as
vice
mayor
said,
that
area
is
going
to
be
under
a
lot
of
pressure
and
let
it
have
some
time
to
get
built
out,
get
the
traffic
to
to
readjust
see
where
it
is.
But
man
I
think
we're
just
overloading
when
I
first
got
on
the
city
council.
Before
the
pandemic,
I
was
saying:
hey
I'm,
getting
emails
from
residents
about
the
congestion.
I
A
John
I
think
so
this
will
help
you
get
your
head
around
it
so
and
and
I'm
not.
You
know
you.
You
know
I'm
not
trying
to
slip
anything
under
the
rug
here,
but
so
you
I
think
you
have
to
keep
it
in
perspective.
The
fact
that
this
is
the
Pre-Sequel
process
right
and
so
we
would
still
have
the
ability
to
pick
and
choose
what
we
put
forward
and
I
I
would
prefer
that
we
we
overshoot
and
the
exercise
you're
talking
about.
Can
we
go
back
to
you
know
the
area
across.
A
You
know
Steven
Street
Boulevard
from
from
the
velcro
project,
I'm,
forgetting
the
specific
name
of
it.
It's
hard
to
say
you
know
something
or
the,
but
can
we
go
back
there
and
pull
back?
You
know
C
and
D
that
we
had
placed
it
over
I
think
the
answer
is
yes,
the
answer
is
yes,
we
can
and
we
can
do
it
after.
We
study
it,
because
if
we
have
more
locations
we
end
up
having
more
options.
I,
you
know,
I
I,
don't
think
we
go
beyond
the
suggested
buffer
percentage.
A
You
know
ultimately-
and
so
you
know
for
me-
I
I-
think
if
we
have
sites
and
hearing
the
spontaneous
has
been
empty
and
thinking
about
the
fact
that
we
might
be
able
to
you
know
kind
of
activate
some
of
it,
and
you
know
thinking
about
retail
being
activated,
it's
probably
good
to
have
some
foot
traffic
right,
I
mean
you
know,
I
I'm,
not
saying
that
these
sites
are
all
going
to
end
up
getting
you
know
populated,
I,
I,
don't
think
they
will.
You
know
we
we
have.
You
know
some
definitive
steric.
A
You
know
steric,
what's
the
word
for
this,
you
know
limitations
as
to
you
know
how
much
you
know.
Construction
can
really
be
be
made,
but
you
know
understanding.
You
know
what
you're
saying
I,
don't
think
we're
in
the
process
right
now
of
selecting
all
these
sites,
you
know
and
and
going
and
saying
that
these
are
these
are
going
to
be.
A
You
know
all
up
zoned
right
now,
it's
it's
something
where
we're
asking
staff
to
go
forward
with
an
evaluation
that
will
allow
us
to
pick
and
choose
from
various
sites.
You
know
nine,
ten
months
down
the
line.
Okay,.
I
I
I
still
yeah
or
okay
I'm
coming
at
it.
From
the
perspective
of
you
know,
tier
two
is
going
to
get
evaluated
in
the
sequel,
no
question
about
it
as
I
understand
it,
and
so,
when
I
hear
that
we
take
something,
that's
already
going
to
be
evaluated
in
the
sequa
and
we're
moving
it
to
tier
one.
That's
kind
of
a
message
to
me
that
it's
not
just
an
about
you
know
a
sequel
evaluation
exercise,
because
that
would
have
been
done
anyway.
I
It's
I.
You
know
the
Optics
to
me,
which
I
think
the
residents
will
see.
Is
that
we're
turning
these
things
from
Orange
to
Yellow
and
that's
going
to
be
the
likely
final
result
when
we
put
a
staple
on
the
package
yeah.
A
F
You
mayor
Paul,
so
I've
kind
of
changed
my
mind
on
this
right
now:
I'm
willing
to
go
with
A
and
B
on
tier
one,
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
and
everything
else
off,
not
even
tier
two.
A
Okay,
I'm
I'm,
fine
with
that,
as
I
stated
before,
vice
mayor
Chao,
you
have
a
comment
here
and
I
think
you
were
okay
with
that
as
well.
D
Yeah
I'm:
okay,
with
that
I
would
like
to
respond
to
council
member
Willie.
Don't
worry
because
I
think
we
are
doing
this
because
on
the
Anza
there
are
a
lot
of
tier
one
with
no
longer
interest.
That's
why
we
are
I'm.
Quite
we
might
need
to
make
space.
So
we
can
take
those
tier
one
off
to
tier
two.
J
So
I
I
am
concerned
that
we're
taking
everything
off
even
after
two
to
even
get
it
studied,
have
environmental
inquiry
for
in
Impact
report.
Just
in
case
that
we
need
more
sites,
we
wouldn't
be
able
to
even
utilize
it.
So
I
I
see
no
setbacks
or
bad.
You
know
drawbacks
in
including
them
in
Q2
just
to
have
a
study
on
it
as
backups.
That
would
be
my
comment.
A
Okay,
yeah
and
just
to
verify
this
with
staff
tier
two
is
getting
studied
right
for
SQL
and
eir
purposes.
Yes,
okay,
councilman,
Moore,.
F
When
I
said
that
I
only
wanted
when
I,
just
when
I
said
that
I've
changed
changed,
my
thinking,
I
just
want
15,
A
and
B
on
tier
one.
I
want
all
of
the
rest
of
it
off
of
tier
tier
two.
That
is
a
very
very
except
for
that.
Fontana
is
down
in
the
end,
it's
a
very
active
Center
in
the
in
the
city,
and
it's
it's
really
one
of
the
last,
the
last
ones
that
we've
got
so
I.
Don't
I,
definitely
don't
want
to
see
15D
looked
at
yeah
yeah.
F
A
Okay,
so
that's
actually
a
new
proposal
to
move
d,
e,
f
and
g
off
the
list
altogether
on
tier
two:
let's
okay,
so
we
have
two
things
that
are,
you
know
basically
on
the
table
right
now:
A
and
B,
the
tier
one
at
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
I
think
we
have
a
majority
there.
A
Council
member
Willie
has
expressed
reticence
about
putting
you
know
anything
in
tier
one
and
that's
you
know
accepted
and
understandable.
We
can,
you
know,
visit
him
again,
but
with
regard
to
the
other
question
of
Def
and
G
off
the
list,
all
together,
I'm
amenable
to
that.
So
we
have.
We
have
two
and
let's
go
to
our
our
hands
raised.
Vice
versa,
this
is
very
straightforward.
A
The
the
question
is:
are
you?
Okay,
with
removing
d
e,
f
and
g
from
tier
two,
with
the
understanding.
A
D
I
do
want
to
consider
15a
and
B
435
units
per
acre
because
that's
comparable
with
Marina,
so
I
wonder
if
what
people
think
about
that?
Okay,.
A
Let's,
let's
do
one
thing
at
a
time,
but
if
staff
wants
to,
you
know
make
that
35
dwelling
spray,
but
you're
not
withdrawing
your
support
for
30
dwelling
units
break
all
right,
you're,
just
about
30,
five,
okay,
so,
council
member
way,
thoughts
of
removing
d,
e,
f
and
g.
So.
J
Just
a
last
comment:
I
am
not
a
floret,
because
if
you
look
at
range
99
at
wolf
and
and
the
Homestead,
they
are
developing
with
everything
retails
preserved,
Supermarket
proposer
I.
Just
think
that
having
it
then
on
tier
to
have
a
study
does
not
hurt
retail,
we
are
going
to
preserve
retail,
so
I
I
strongly
think
we
should
keep
it
as
backup.
Just
in
case
we
need
something.
So
that
would
be
my
proposal.
I'm,
not
saying
that
you
know
get
rid
of
it
and
you
know:
don't
preserve
the
retail,
don't
don't
preserve.
A
Okay,
got
it
so
I'm.
Just
gonna
make
a
quick
comment
as
to
that.
You
know
I
personally,
I
think
A
and
B
on
at
30
dollar.
Units
per
acre
is
correct,
I'm
gonna
go
ahead
and
you
know
keep
it
at
that
density.
For
my
own,
you
know,
support
I,
think,
studying
fontanas
makes
sense.
It
has
been
empty
and
looking
to
activate
you
know
just
this
contiguous,
you
know.
Essentially
you
know
stretch
of
retail
with,
possibly
you
know
mixed
use
at
the
end.
That's
that's
an
interesting.
You
know.
A
Prospect
Cupertino
Village
is
not
at
the
same
point
that
the
crossroads
shopping
center
is
Cupertino.
Village
has
has
clearly
indicated
that
they
would
like
to.
You
know,
make
it
into
a
different
usage.
So
so,
when
I
look
forward
to
the
next
six
to
eight
years,
I
see
it
much
less
likely
that
you
know
this
particularly
and,
and
you
know
this
is
this
is
I,
think
an
exercise
in
you
know
specifics
as
to
the
conditions
there.
So
so
let
me
let
me
go
back
to
the
rest
of
council.
A
Vice
mayor,
child
has
suggested
35
billion
units
per
acre
over
at
A
and
B
and
so
council.
Member
way
did
you
want
to
talk
about?
Are
you
okay,
with
a
higher
density
at
A
and
B
I'm.
J
Okay,
with
the
how.
A
Yeah
the
customer
always
last
point
was
you
know
you
didn't
want
to
move
things
to
tier
one,
but
councilman
did
you
want
to
well
I
I'm,
assuming
you're,
okay,
with
removing
d
e,
f
and
g
from
tier
two
right,
all
together,
correct,
okay,
so
you're
fine
with
that?
A
I
So
as
I
understand
it,
my
memory,
you
know,
Marina
is
188
units
and
it's
five
acres
and
188
divided
by
five.
I
Is
37.
now
you
said
that
30
with
this
density
bonus
can
go
to
47..
So
when
we
say
35
density
bonus,
add
is
going
to
put
it
at
52.
I,
don't
believe
that
that
matches
Marina
at
188..
Now
it
is
likely
that
Marina
is
going
to
be
coming
back
to
us
where
they
plan
to
go
with
greater
density
bonus
than
what
was
previously
approved.
I
Well,
this
is
actually
encouraging
him.
Well,
you
know
your
your
neighboring
property
got
much
higher,
so
it's
that
much
more
for
them
to
to
be
saying
see
they
they
did
it
I'd
rather
not
see
that
I'd
like
to
keep
it
at
the
30
and
then
they're
fully
able
to
do
the
density
bonus
and
push
it
from
30
to
the
40
47..
So.
A
So
we
have
councilmember
Willie's
support
for
that
that
comprises,
you
know
four
out
of
five
majority,
the
other
one
didn't
achieve
the
three,
so
so
I
would
say
we
have
some
Direction
here.
I
would
yellow,
highlight
the
remove
15
d,
e,
f
and
g
from
the
tier
2
inventory
yeah.
So
that
should
be
also
the
four
out
of
five.
Let's
move
on
to
map
H
and
I
I,
you
know
I
don't
mean
to
make
this
foregone
conclusion,
but
it
is
1105.
I'm.
A
Oh,
the
15c,
oh
right,
thanks
for
pointing
that
out,
the
Fontana's,
so
ciao
supports
15c
study
at
tier.
Two
I
should
check
in
with
council
member
Wayne
councilmember
Willie
Council,
so
councilman
wooly
is
nodding
and
so
I'm
gonna
just
installs
council.
Member
way
that
looks
like
we
have
looks
like
we
have
consensus
there
as
a
tier
two
site.
You
can
add
my
name
to
that
one
as
well
and
councilman.
Moore.
Are
you?
Okay
with
the
tier
2
site,
I
thought
you
were
okay,
yes,.
A
Yeah,
let's,
let's:
let's
do
that!
I
I
think
we're
going
to
have
to
inevitably
continue
this
to
another
date.
Unfortunately,
I'm
not
sure
how
the
six
was
looking
so
I,
don't
wanna
I,
don't
wanna!
You
know
kind
of
jump
to
Fork
on
conclusions
here,
but
let's
move
on
to
map
H
at
this
time
and
I
will
say:
I
I
think
our
discussions
are
are
actually
quite
good
and
it's
quite
difficult
to
compact.
A
You
know
what
would
probably
be
on
any
given
one
of
these
properties,
a
five
or
six
hour
discussion.
You
know,
irrespective
so
so
kind
of
keeping
that
in
perspective
map
H,
it
says
Homestead
Road
here
Ben
did
you
want
to
go.
C
From
there
really
quickly,
thank
you
very
much.
Sorry
I've
been
cut
you
off
there,
but
map
page
Homestead
wrote
just
one
recommended
recommended
action
item
from
Vice
married
Childs
to
move
side
20
b,
which
is
the
bowling
alley,
a
homestead
Bowl
and
the
mall
of
Jason
malt
from
tier
one
and
two.
A
Okay,
so
site
20b
from
Tier,
1
and
tier
two:
that's
ciao,
council
member
Moore.
Your
hand
is
raised.
F
Yes,
thank
you
actually
I'd
like
to
cover
both
H
and
I
at
once.
I
agree
with
vice
mayor
Chow's
suggestion
to
move
tier
one
move
it
from
tier
one
to
tier
two,
the
homestead
Bowl-
and
there
was
a
comment,
I
believe
was
from
Scott
member
of
the
public
about
that
and
the
the
challenges
that
that
particular
site
would
have
so
listening
to
that.
F
If
I'm,
recalling
correctly
and
I,
also
agree
with
the
vice
mayor,
the
30
dwelling
units
to
the
50
dwelling
units
for
the
Mary
Avenue
site
that
results
in
I
believe
there's
33
or
it
might
be
38.
I
think
about
38
dwelling
units
there.
Okay,
so
that's
that's!
It.
A
A
That's
right,
so
two-thirds
of
22
would
be
a
little
more
than
14.
yeah,
actually
I
think
that's
that's
actually
fairly
close.
For
some
reason,
I
was
adding
11
to
22
instead
of
14..
Okay,
so
look
at
earlier
proposal
for
housing
that
showed
more
units.
That's
councilmember,
Willie,
okay,
so
let's
go
to
council
member
way,
we
have
I
think
it's
fine
to
put
two
maps
on
here
since
it
is,
you
know
just
two
two
proposals
right
now,
customer
away,
are
you
yeah.
J
I'm,
okay,
with
the
proposals
I
just
want
to
ask
a
general
question
of
Staff
the
30
per
because
we
want
to
preserve
retail,
is
it
50
per
acre
is
more
likely
the
owner
will
preserve
retail
or
more
easier
to
build
retail.
Is
there
a
difference
between
30
40
50.
E
You
know
I
I,
think
the
retail
has
so
much
to
do
with
location.
You
know,
and
Retail
spaces
are
getting
smaller
generally,
so
less
retail
is
serving
these
areas,
but
I,
don't
think.
There's
a
huge
difference
in
terms
of
30
to
50,
whether
you
know
retail
would
be
more
viable
is
really
more
about
the
location.
Okay,.
J
A
Okay,
thank
you
councilman.
Let's
go
to
council
member
Willie,
so
councilman
Wally,
Maps,
H
and
I.
There
are
two
proposals
on
the
table
here:
yeah.
A
Okay,
I
just
I
I,
just
want
to
ask
a
clarifying
question
here,
since
there
was
and
editing
opportunity.
So
20c
has
owner
interest
correct
because
I'm
not
saying
that
red
dot
on
the
new
presentation-
I
guess
maybe
it
wasn't-
you
know,
attended
to
because
you
had
all
the
other
updates
to
make.
But
20c
just
to
remind
you
20c
is
the
church,
I
think
or
a
couple
of
Church
Lots.
H
Least,
on
20c
I
believe
there
was
honorary
interest
yeah.
A
K
A
Other
interest:
okay
and
then,
if
we,
if
we
move
20b
down
I'm,
seeing
that
we're,
we
were
at
167
units
with
3.38
Acres,
but
the
current
density
is
already
35
dwelling
units
an
acre
in
two
of
those.
Although
I
guess
those
are
two
smaller
addresses.
The
larger
address
looks
like
at
50
dwelling
units
or
an
acre
where
so
so,
I
I
imagine
we
probably
went
over
this,
but
at
20990
Homestead
Road.
There
is
no
current
density.
A
A
Zero,
nine
nine
zero
It's.
All
under
20
b.
There
are
three
addresses
listed
under
20
b:
there's:
two:
zero:
nine
one:
six:
two:
zero:
nine:
five:
six
and
two
zero
nine
nine
zero;
and
that
last
one
doesn't
have
a
current
density
listed
on
the
table,
or
at
least
not
the
one
that
is
on
the
presentation.
K
A
H
A
H
A
I
I
say:
let's
just
put
it
in
the
chair
or
two
and
proceed
accordingly,
because
there
hasn't
been
a
request
to
to
kind
of
kind
of
Pare
down
the
you
know
proposed
density,
so
yeah,
that's
fine.
What
you're
suggesting
so
it
sounds
like
you
have
consensus
unanimity
in
fact
for
all
of
it,
because
councilmember
way
and
councilmember
Bully
both
supported
the
proposed
changes
for
map
agent
map,
I
and
I'll
go
ahead
and
support
as
well.
A
Yeah
and
the
next
one,
so
so
all
five
of
us
there
map
k
for
jollyman.
It
looks
like
you
have
listed
potential
for
additional
units
at
p8
and
so
I'm
sorry
go
ahead.
L
A
Map
k,
so
so
there
was
what
happened
to
map
J
was
there
there
were
no
suggestions,
that's.
C
F
So
I
was
wondering,
since
p8
is
a
pipeline
project.
Is
there
really
anything
we
can
do
about?
That?
Is
that
the
is
that
the
the
same
road
projects
that
we
keep
talking
about.
F
Units,
so
there's
really
nothing.
If
you
can
you
remove
my
name,
we
don't
need
to
talk.
D
Some
map,
J
I,
think
I
had
a
comments
for
the
first
set,
but
then
that
the
I
did
not
share
or
write
down
my
comments
for
the
rest
map.
J.
There
is
a
site
that
has
no
owner
interest,
but
then
we
did
add
that
as
tier
one,
so
I
think
we
should
still
see
do.
Is
that
something
we
want
to
see?
No
other
interest
in
the
way,
our
style?
We
are
adding
it
as
tier
one
and
up
zoning
from
25
to
50
units
per
acre.
A
Let's
see
so
I
see,
23b
is
on
tier
one.
1.32
Acres
is
that
the
one
you're
yeah
yeah,
perhaps
okay,.
D
23A
has
only
a
thirst:
23
C
has
owner
interest,
it's
tier
two,
so
why
is
23
B
tier
one
and
C
was
interested
here
two.
If.
H
I
may
I
can
help
answer
that
I
believe
through
the
mayor
yeah.
The
Planning
Commission
actually
wished
to
include
23b
in
the
inventory.
Does
the
USA
Bank
building
and
there
they
appear
to
believe
that
there
might
be
interest
in
developing
that
because
it
is
west
side.
It's
on
the
west
side
of
De
Anza
Boulevard
23c
is
the
chamber
building,
which
is
a
fairly
small
site,
and
the
applying
commission
did
not
recommend,
including
that
into
the
as
a
tier
one
site
in
the
inventory.
A
Oh
well
interesting,
so
you
have
a
whole
bunch
of
them,
though,
that
don't
have
owner
interest
from
g
h.
I
j
k
and
L
right
and
they're
all
in
tier
one.
Are
they
reason
similar
to
you
or
why
those
are
from
tier
one?
Yes,
which
is
what,
because
again.
H
J
So
I'm
just
curious,
very
likely.
We
should
include
it
even
though
it's
a
small
site,
we
have
including
some
small
sites
with
owner
interest,
so
why?
Why
is
it
because
of
the
chamber
side
they're
interested
with
smaller
debt?
It's
not
included
I'm
just
curious,
because
I
I
would
think.
If
there's
interest,
we
should
include
it
and
do
we
have
questions
of
including
very
small
sites
with
just
one
adding
one
unit
to
it.
D
H
My
apologies,
that
is
the
well
now
flustered
I,
just
decide
at
the
corner
of
northwest
corner
of
Kerwin
and
De
Anza,
and
there
is
owner
interest
from
that
site.
It
is
a
commercial
building
which
has
a
foot
massage
place
and
it
has
a
small
restaurant,
but
potentially
it's
connected
to
an
office
building
to
the
north
of
it.
J
Sorry,
I
I
would
think
if
it
does
only
interest,
we
should
be
able
to
accommodate
it,
and
at
least
you
know
put
in
have
a
study
on
it.
K
If
I,
if
I,
could
on
that
on
that
site,
it's
also
just
a
quarter
of
an
acre
and
is
it
isn't
contiguous
with
other
sites?
So
we
have
a
lot
of
smaller
properties
that
are
next
to
one
or
two
others
where
they
get
up
to
say
an
acre
or
more.
This
is
freestanding
with
no
other
sites
around
it
that
had
owner
interest
and
I.
Think
it's
just
.26.
So
that
was
a
factor
as
well.
A
I
would
be
totally
okay
with
moving
outside
tier
one.
Okay
I
was
just
a
sport
to
it.
I
I
used
to
actually
yeah
take
my
kids
to
get
taken
care
of
when
their
babies
in
the
house
directly.
Next
to
that-
and
you
know,
I'm
100,
okay
with
that
becoming
housing
just
or
whatever
those
two
cents
were
worth
so
so
I
I'll
go
ahead
and
and
take
that
straw
poll
vice
mayor
Chow.
Are
you,
okay,
with
23c
getting
moved
to
tier
one.
D
D
A
A
Councilmember
Willie
23
C
up
to
tier
one
sure:
okay,
that's
yeah,
all
right,
let's
Circle
back
is
there
a
an
appetite,
I
I
think
we
should
ask
just
generally
on
the
west
side
of
De
Anza
Boulevard
for
those
currently
designated
tier
one
sites
that
have
no
owner
interest.
Are
we
are
we
willing
to
visit
the
idea
of
redesignated
any
any
of
them?
So
let's
go
to
council
member
Moore,
first
you're
shaking
your
head.
J
Criteria
right,
it's
whether
we
think
it
would
be
a
good
place
to
develop.
So
do
we
think
it's
a
good
place
for
potential
development
and
with
eir
and
my
attract
on
an
interest.
I
would
think
that's
a
good
corner
to
to
give
the
owners
interest
for
potential
in
a
study.
Yeah.
J
D
D
So
I
think
the
all
these
tier
one
sites
should
be
moved
to
tier
two,
and
then
we
should
Identify
some
sites
from
the
pub
Road
and
Monta
Vista
area
which
I
shared
yesterday,
but
not
showed
in
the
staff
slide.
Today
they
should
be
considered
for
on
tier
one.
If
we
are
saying
okay,
oh
no,
not
interest,
we
are
adding
to
tier
one.
We
should
add
those
size
on
Bob,
Road
and
besides
across
and
next
to
us
office,
which
I
shared
yesterday.
A
Okay-
okay,
it's
just
so
so
staff
on
on
what
you're
writing
down
I
think
any
should
we
know
no
further
discussion
on
and
just
get
rid
of.
The
word
required.
That's
a
little
confusing
in
this
instance.
Now
so,
and
then
more
more
actually
supported
this
as
well.
She
might
have
been
the
first
so
we'll
move
on
to
map
k.
At
this
point
it
doesn't
look
like
there
were
follow
up
actionables
from
map
k.
A
Does
anyone
have
anything
that
they'd
like
to
bring
up
here
on
map
k,
jollyman
I,
don't
vice
versa?
Your
hand
is
up.
Did
you
want
to
talk
about
map
k.
A
Map
L
the
Monte
Vista
South,
neighborhood
viability
of
Dorothy
and
way
property
potential
historical
resources
issue.
You
know
you
can
put
that
in
as
a
as
a
commentary.
That's
fine,
but
it
doesn't
look
like
map.
L
has
follow-ups
either
I,
don't
see.
Hands
raised
map
M
the
Monte,
Vista
North,
neighborhood.
A
Okay,
let's
go
to
this
one
then.
A
And
so
oh,
this
is
the
Linda
Vista
one
okay,
so
councilman
Moore
had
suggested
kind
of
kind
of
grading
it
upwards
towards
the
the
golf
course
I
think
the
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
more
on
one
of
the
parcels.
A
Why
don't
we
go
through
Council
and
see
what
the
sentiment
is
on
that
that
purple?
So,
okay,
we'll
start
with
vice
mayor,
Chow
or
council
member
Lord?
Did
you
want
to
say
something
briefly
on
this,
since
this
is
your
suggestion.
F
Well,
if,
if
I
don't
have
support
on
this,
then
then
we're
at
the
20
dwelling
units
per
acre.
We
have
added
some
other
sites
and
I
believe
we
are
going
to
be
looking
at
having
something
in
the
bub
Road
area.
So
I'd
be
interested
to
hear
what.
A
Okay,
anyone
else
customer
away.
J
So
I
did
say
that
I
did
talk
to
the
owners
by
phone
this
afternoon
and
that
they
are
pretty
adamant
that
they
would
like
to
develop
it
at
20
per
unit
per
acre,
but
they
are
open
to
Future
investigations
or
possibilities
of
adding
it.
So
my
question
is:
when
we
say
20,
it's
minimal
right.
If
they
want
to
go
with
like
what.
E
J
More
suggests,
closing
to
the
community
pools
Cupertino
record
world
record,
doing
record
Club
more
densely
for
Teacher
housing.
Those
can
be
discussed
later
on,
as
when
a
developer
sure.
A
Sure,
okay
and
you
make
a
good
point:
let's
go
ahead
and
consider
both
of
them
at
the
same
time,
so
you're
so
you're,
basically
supporting
your
suggestion,
which
is
to
reduce
the
density
throughout
the
2012
English
maker.
Just
you
know
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
let's
let's
go
on
to
with.
A
Well,
you
know
that
that's
that's
a
given
right,
I
mean
you
can
always
try
to
ask
for
more
right,
but
I
mean
for
the
purposes
of
this
exercise,
we're
you
know,
yeah
yeah,
because
basically
they
just
yeah
I
I,
understand
the
sentiment
but
yeah
so
we're
doing
a
reduction,
so
vice
mayor
Chao.
Where
are
you
on
this?
In
terms
of
the
two
proposal.
D
A
A
K
A
A
Yeah,
okay,
so
Chow's
at
20.,
I'm
at
20
as
well,
so
I
think
that
pretty
much
keep
density,
the
same
design,
oh
no,
okay!
So
so
Chow's
at
this
7
May
reduce
it
to
20
dollars
per
acre.
Okay,
so
councilmember
Moore!
You
have
your
answer:
we're
gonna
go
ahead
and
reduce
it
to
2012
units
per
acre.
A
Okay,
so
let's
go
to
the
bubs
special
area
map
looks
like
we
have
another
four
NOP
and
and
map
22.
A
all
right.
Let's
see
what
we
have
here
include
empty
office
building
is
tier
one
10
100,
remove
Esa,
okay,
well,
I
think
that
second
part
from
council
member
Willie's,
you
know
proposal.
We
probably
just
need
to
do
some
math
and
then
figure
out
where
we're
at
at
the
you
know
end
of
this.
Maybe
we
can,
you
know,
do
some
cleanup.
A
Boy
all
right
so
I
think
we
probably
are
down
to
those
four.
Those
three
addresses
10040
1080
and
10
100.
It
seems
and
then
the
only
one,
that's
a
little
bit
different
I
think
is
15
to
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
with
a
higher
density
closer
to
Highway
85,
although
I
guess
councilmember,
Moyer
you're,
really
referring
to
more
of
the
entirety
of
what
like
the
east
side
of
bub
Road
is
that
is
that
correct,
where's,
councilman,
Moore
and.
F
Yeah
I'm
here
so
I
I
actually
would
consider
well
you're
you're
trying
to
use
certain
certain
addresses.
F
I'm
assuming
I
was
thinking
just
take
the
entire.
You
know
30
30
acres
and
have
only
a
quarter
of
it
to
be
included
and
choose
a
density
for
that.
But
if
you
wanted
to
I,
you
need
to
know
what
the
acreage
is
for,
10o40
and
and
10080
and
10
100.
A
F
A
Acceptable:
okay,
councilmember
wooly!
Are
you
okay
with
that.
I
A
I
Equivalent,
we
don't
know
how
how
it's
going
to
play
out
I
would
also
go
on
to
just
kind
of
flavor
it
that
this
has
not
been
previously
part
of
the
overall
picture,
and
so
this
is
kind
of
new
I'd
like
to
suggest
you
know.
I
I
do
feel
strongly
about
having
a
vision
very
similar
to
what
has
played
out
in
Milpitas
on
McCandless
to
me.
Changing
this
from
Office
to
residential
wow,
help
our
jobs
to
housing,
balance
and
stuff.
I
So
I
would
like
to
suggest
that
we
have
a
subcommittee
that
reaches
out
to
the
building
owners,
the
Caltrans
and
to
Apple,
so
that
we
really
do
get
a
clear
understanding,
just
asking
them
interest
or
no
interest.
No,
that
that
that
that
doesn't
doesn't
do
it.
But
if
the
mayor
is
part
of
the
subcommittee
and
we
reach
out
to
Apple
who,
who
has
this
multi-billion
dollar
housing
proposal
out
there
and
say
gee
whiz,
let's,
let's
work
together
on
this
I
think
we're
going
to
get
hopefully
some
positive
vibes
out
of
it.
I
A
Yeah,
you
know
councilman
wooly,
I,
I,
think
you're
speaking
wisdom
based
upon
you
know
what
I've,
what
I've,
what
I've,
seen
and
heard
I
I,
you
know
frankly,
I
think
it's
much
closer
to
reality
than
this
whole
idea
of
well.
You
know
they
have
all
these
like
secret
Laboratories,
and
you
know
they
absolutely
must
keep.
You
know
Bub
for
this
kind
of
thing,
or
else
you
know
so
so
so
I
think
there's
definitely
willingness
to
keep
an
open
mind
at
10040,
10
or
80
and
10
100,
bub
I.
Think
it's
an
excellent.
A
You
know
Toe
Hold
into
the
conversation
and
so
I'm
100
with
what
you're
saying
yeah.
That's
what
I'm
saying
you
know
I
think
it's
a
it's
a
good!
It's
it's
a
reasonable
amount
of
acreage
too,
and
probably
the
right
place
to
put
it
right
off:
Stevens,
Creek
Boulevard,
also
vice
mayor
chow
and
then
council,
member
Willie,
council,
member
Moore.
Sorry,
actually,
no
councilman,
Memorial
you're
already
in
support
of
this,
so
vice
mayor,
chow
and
then
we'll
go
to
councilmember
way.
D
Okay
so
I
Envision
this
area
that
we
are
not
just
building
housing.
We
should
also
introduce
retail,
that's
excess,
easily
accessible
by
the
neighborhood
and
the
students.
But
right
now
the
three
sites
picked
are
all
on
the
very
North
as
they're
really
walkable.
I
would
rather
pick
size
that
closer
to
the
neighborhood
so
that
we
can
develop
mixed
use
there
and
then
on
13
units
per
acre,
I'm
confused,
because
we
were
told
you
next
breaker
is
town
home
development,
but
then
we
were
thinking
since
it's
back
right
to
the
highway,
so
it
could
go
higher.
D
They
always
mix
use
retail
shouldn't
it
have
more
units
so
that,
since
there
is
no
thing
for
neighborhood
around
so
I'm.
Looking
at
the
map,
you
have
other
similar
sites
that
south
of
the
Caltrain
site
on
shouldn't
those
be
considered.
That's
10,
2,
4,
0.
10
to
60.,
tend
to
10
300
and
10
340.
Is
there
any
reason
these
four
or
less
desirable
than
the
other
three?
On
top.
A
You
know,
frankly,
I
think
you
make
a
good
point
because
of
the
fact
that
the
one
parcel
that's
on
map
n
is
proposed
for
a
future
density
of
50
dwelling
units
per
acre,
given
the
fact
that
you're
still
along
Highway,
85
I
think
it's
probably
reasonable
to
you,
know
kind
of
put
the
put
the
50
on
there
for
the
purpose
of
the
study.
A
So
you
know
I
frankly,
I
I
think
you
wouldn't
be.
You
wouldn't
be
stepping
on
toes.
You
know
painfully
or
even
you
know,
in
any
kind
of
sense
that
that
would
create
like
a
you
know,
umbrage
if
you
put
it
on
tier
two,
it's
it's
a
fair
examination
to
see.
You
know
what's
going
on,
if
you
want
to
add
those
four
Parcels
I
see,
there's
one
more
and
it's
labeled
bub14
or
possibly
one
more
on
the
very
bottom
next
to
13A,
which
is
the
one
tier
one
parcel
there.
A
So,
okay.
L
A
So
so
let
me
let
me
let
me
ask
this
of
staff.
So
all
the
properties,
with
the
exception
of
the
of
the
Caltrans
Corporation,
Yard
and
I,
think
there
was
a
couple
of
direct.
A
You
know,
buildings
or
Parcels
that
that
Pew
was
referring
to
all
of
those
are
those
possible
to
look
at
at
the
50
dwelling
units
breaker
under
the
idea
that
they're
right
next
to
85
and
the
other
one
that
you
have
right
next
to
85
on
the
far
south
of
this
map
is
at
50
dwellings
breaker?
Is
there
a
possibility
to
put
these
on
tier
two
yeah
and
Pew
you're
yeah
I
know
you're
talking,
but
you're,
not
sounding.
H
It
could
be
studied
at
a
higher
density
too,
but
from
a
planning
perspective,
there
is
a
one-lane
road
that
serves
this
area,
and
I
will
remind
the
council
that
there
is
a
you
know.
Mcclellan
is
also
one
lane
in
that
area.
Well,.
A
You
know
I
would
say
at
50,
I
I
mean
I
I.
Don't
think
that
it's
in
you
know
non-legitimate.
You
know
exercise,
especially
if
you're
kind
of
looking
at
the
85
side
of
things.
So
how
long
do
you
think
it
would
take
for
for
staff
to
turn
this
around
in
terms
of
those
those
extra
Parcels
along
85.
A
Well,
yeah
the.
D
G
Yeah
so
we'll
be
able
to
deal
with
the
retail
without
that
level
of
detail
in
the
eir
I
would
say
just
for
purposes
of
of
just
kind
of
keeping
things
moving
and
that
and
thus
council's
planning
on
on
adding
additional
sites
to
tier
one.
G
You
know
we
could
take
direction
to
include
sites
in
tier
two,
and
you
know
we
wouldn't
necessarily
need
to
to
have
unit
counts.
To
do
that
if
they
have,
council
is
interested
in
going
that
direction.
That's
certainly
an
option.
Yeah.
A
A
Well,
I
mean
the
understanding
of
this
entire
thing,
maybe
I'm
accepting
the
Caltrain
compost
sites,
okay,
I'm,
accepting
the
except
for
the
Caltrans
and
the
two
direct.
You
know
buildings
were
they
buildings
or
were
they
were
they
Parcels
or
both
both.
H
I
I
did
want
to
clarify,
so
you
want
to
exclude
the
Caltrans
and
the
two
direct
sites,
but
include
everything
else.
Yeah.
A
J
So
I
am
just
very
curious.
We
are
keeping
30
per
acre
on
the
heart
of
city
and
on
Stevens
Creek
Boulevard,
but
we
are
going
to
increase
this
to
50
on
a
McLaren
and
above
Road,
one
lane
street,
with
with
a
big,
deep
neighborhood
right
behind
it.
That's
my
question
to
Michael
council
members:
I
have
no
objection,
put
it
on
tier
two
and
study
it,
but
to
have
it
at
50
per
acre
here
and
put
30
for
the
hardest
City
and
on
Stevens
Creek
Boulevard
Major
Boulevard.
That
puzzles
me.
That's
my
first
question.
J
The
second
question
is:
did
some
of
these
a
lot
of
them
have
long-term
leads
I,
really,
don't
think
they
are
viable
site.
I
am
thinking.
J
We
have
preserved
all
the
retails
on
Crossroads
took
it
off
even
off
here
too,
why
are
we
looking
at
retail
in
a
neighborhood?
That's
my
first
question.
Second
I
do
like
the
first
three
sizes
outside
close
to
the
adjacent
retails
on
Stevens,
Creek,
Boulevard
I,
think
that
could
be
potential
to
extend
retail
because
retail
needs
to
be
together
not
just
of
one
site.
So
my
question
is:
we
are
putting
50
for
either
on
this
narrow
road
with
a
big
neighborhood
behind
it,
we're
on
the
Stevens,
Creek
Boulevard
part
of
the
city.
It's
30.
J
that
really
is
very
puzzle.
So
I
just
want
to
point
this
out.
I
have
no
objection.
Put
it
on
tier
2
have
studied
it
so
that
we
need
to
have
potential
like
1000
ways
that
maybe
there's
a
potential
for
the
next
cycle
or
something
but
to
to
do
this
drastically
like
this
I
am
not
in
favor,
okay,.
A
Well,
thank
you,
councilman
I
appreciate
it
and
you
know
I
I,
don't
think
it's
drastic.
You
know
we
do
have
a
site
at
the
very,
very,
very
southern
tip
of
this
map
that
that
is
at
50
dwelling
units
per
occurred
as
a
tier
one
project,
I
I
will
note
I
think
that
all
of
us
have
received
somewhere
on
the
order
of
about
70
emails
from
deanza
college
students,
and
this
is
all
within
the
last
24
hours.
A
The
end
of
college
is
right
next
to
this
right
and
so
I
would
say
that
it's
really
it's
it's
not
a
bad
possibility.
You
know
if
you're,
if
you're
looking
to
go,
you
know
and
and
do
something
about
you
know
some
of
these,
like
really
you
know
vociferously
and
passionately
stated
you
know,
concerns
and
so
through.
J
A
Yeah
I
mean
I
I
I
would
take
exception
to
your
characterization,
about
being
right.
Next
to
the
neighborhood
right,
I
mean
on
the
on
the
direct
East.
You've
got
a
highway
on
the
on
the
west,
we're
not
touching
anything
west
of
bub,
Road,
right
and
but
Road
has
absolutely
no.
You
know
housing
coming
off
of
it,
so
I
mean
I
would
just
well
in
the
north.
You
actually
have
some.
You
know
Services
there.
You
know
some
shops,
some.
You
know
like
the
post
office
close
by
it's
really
not
it's
really
not
a
bad
notion.
A
Frankly,
okay,
so
you're
good
with
it
I'm
good
with
it.
I
think
Vice.
Versao
is
all
right
with
it,
without
understanding
that
we're
not
doing
anything
which
is
stipulated,
but
council,
member,
Willie,
I'm,
sorry,
councilman,
Moore
and
then
councilmember
Willie,
I'm,
sorry
councilman
did
you
have
something
else?
A
I
I
I'm
perfectly
fine
and
studying
it
and
reminding
us
about
the
proximity
to
De
Anza
College
on
the
farmers
market.
Talking
with
Patrick
aherns.
You
know:
they've
got
890
million
dollars
of
bond
money
and
he
said
200
million
of
that
is
slated
for
off-campus
housing.
He
says
we
don't
want
that
housing
on
campus.
I
It
requires
Supportive
Services
that
cannot
be
charged
to
the
bond
money
and
so
there's
another
opportunity
for
a
source
of
funds
to
build
housing
or
De
Anza
College
student
multi
types
of
housing
along
this
row,
houses,
townhouses
apartment
buildings,
student,
housing,
teacher
housing,
it's
27,
Acres,
so
I'll
leave
it
at
that.
I.
A
F
M
D
F
A
Sounded
like
oh
well
to
me,
you
know
it
sounded
like
we
have
four
in
favor
of
the
tier
two
at
50,
and
vice
versa
was
indicating
some
possible
second
thoughts.
J
Actually,
through
the
mayor,
no
because
come
back
to
council
with
memorabilities
comment,
50
per
acre,
you
add
bonus
a
density
bonus
that
that
tells
me
how
many
it's
a
30,
it's
48
already,
so
I
am
not
comfortable
with
at
50,
but
I'm
comfortable
with
30,
because
30
give
is
a
flexibility
to
go
higher
but
to
minimum
50.
That
makes
me
very
a
wary
of
I.
Think
it's
just
that's
why
I
said
it's
a
little
drastic
all.
A
F
F
A
E
N
D
So,
first
of
all
to
the
north
of
Bob
Road,
there
are
no
other
joining
commercial
sites,
I
think
it's
always
building
on
the
Arts
side
of
a
nice,
Highway
and
I.
Think
the
idea
of
putting
commercial
near
the
South
is
because
it's
a
walking
distance
from
the
schools
from
the
neighborhood
I.
Think
no
Monta
Vista
neighborhood
has
a
lot
of
people
who
really
like
to
walk
and
bike,
and
now
they
there
are
stores
they
can
walk
and
bike
too
I
think
that's
really
adds
to
the
the
neighborhood
benefit,
and
it's
not
right.
D
Next
to
the
neighborhood,
it's
across
the
street
and
at
a
certain
distance
and
and
I
think
initially
and
yeah
I
think
yeah,
30,
50
units
per
acre
seems
to
be
pretty
high,
I
agree,
but
at
first
I
thought
30
units
per
acre
according
to
the
staff,
and
it
will
be
all-time
homes.
That's
what
not
what
I
envisioned
of
this
strip,
because
it's
right
next
to
highway!
It's
where
we
could
have
three
four
stories:
even
five
stories.
D
A
Me
propose
this
thing
instead
of
kind
of
giving
us
the
whole
snapshot
of
your
thinking
process
like
maybe
we
can
just
do
it
at
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
and
maybe
look
at
onp
and
the
other
one
on
map
22.
What
do
you
think?
Because
we
got
10
minutes
left
and
you
know
I
think
we're
gravitating
towards
30
dwelling
units
breaker
and
just
kind
of
suspecting.
We
can
get
all
five
of
us
for
that.
We're
good,
okay,.
D
A
40.,
that's
okay,
yeah
I
mean
obviously
I'd,
be
okay
with
personally
I'd
be
okay
with
40.
If
I
was
okay
with
50.
and
I.
Think
that
gets
us
closer
to
you
know,
consistency
with
you
know
the
13A.
It
is
right
next
to
the
highway.
You
know
so,
let's,
let's
I
hate,
to
go
through
this
again.
But
where
are
we
here?
The
council
member
way,
you're
you're
shaking
your.
J
When
people
drop
kids
at
Kennedy,
Monte,
Vista
and
Lincoln,
and
want
to
go
out
on
that
one
street
with
this
high
density
plus
bonus,
you
have
to
remember
that
councilman
really
continues
to
remind
us.
There
is
density
bonus
at
40
at
50.
Imagine
what's
the
density
bonus
I
just
want
to
say:
when
we
do
30,
it
doesn't
mean
we
cannot
do
higher,
but
when
we
set
40
or
50,
that's
minimal,
so
you
have
to
remember
that
minimum
plus
density
bonus,
let's
think
it
through
okay,
well,.
A
Yes,
of
course,
but
again,
council
member
way
I
mean
these
types
of
envisioning
processes.
Don't
just
apply
to
one
area
of
town
right
so
I
mean
just
like
everyone
else
says
you
know.
If
you're
near
tantel
and
wolf
say
well,
you've
got
2400
housing
units
got
2
million
square
feet
of
office.
You've
got
a
bunch,
you
know
summary
tell
I
mean,
let's
imagine
that
right
and
then
you
put
all
the
stuff
across
the
street.
I
mean
it's
not
happening
tomorrow.
Right,
we're
gonna
have
some
progression
time
to
you
know
kind
of
deal
with
it.
F
F
Mayor
we're
up
we're
up
against
midnight,
it's
11
53..
What
are
you
hoping
to
accomplish
in
the
next
seven
minutes?
I'm.
F
A
F
A
Me,
let
me
Monitor
and
and
have
this
meeting
please
so
let
me
check
in
with
councilmember
Willie.
Okay
he's
just
a
kind
of
complete
this
process.
Are
you
good
with
30
dwelling
units
per
acre,
councilman,
you're,
good?
Okay,
please!
Oh
okay,
you
put
your
thumbs
up
all
right
and
vice
mayor
ciao,
you
know
it
looks
like
40's
voted
down.
I'm
gonna
put
my
support
on
30..
A
Do
you
want
for
the
record
Put
your
support
behind
30
to
make
it
a
unanimous
okay
somewhere
you
can
get
rid
of
the
40
and
the
50
and
just
put
all
of
our
votes
in
for
30
dwelling
units
per
acre
I
will
go
ahead
and
check
in
with
staff.
Are
you
keeping
a
running
total
of
where
our
numbers
are
looking
at
at
this
point?
Before
we
get
to
the
last
three
Maps
here.
C
D
A
So
and
then-
and
then
22
was
the
Outback
Steakhouse
site
so
include
farmer
has
a
tier
two
site.
You
already
have
focused
that
here,
one
two,
one,
okay,
so
map,
oh
I,
think
we're
all
agreed.
We're
not
gonna
go
over.
It.
B
Through
to
Mayor,
if
I
may,
we
did
not
get
consensus
from
the
council
to
go
ahead
and
include
those
as
I
noted
to
the
council
last
night
we
will
come
back
with
the
Outback
side
and
Bob
wrote
and
that's
it.
A
Okay,
so
vice
mayor
you
had
some
other.
It
seems
like
other
I.
A
Okay,
if
you
want
the
poll,
we
can
try
to
achieve
it.
Councilmar
Moore
did
you
want
to
speak
to
vice
mayor
child's
proposals
along
the
post
office,
North
of
Steve.
F
Well,
my
my
Tally
has
a
has
us
ahead
of
what
the
original
with
the
19
buffer
had
so
I'd
like
to
hear
from
I'd
like
to
hear
from
from
staff
about
that,
because
okay.
F
G
Mayor,
if,
if
I
may,
I
think
I
I
mean
I
think
we're
you
know,
as
as
the
city
manager
indicated,
I
think
we
might
want
to
double
check
to
get
an
exact
number,
but
I
think
you
know,
based
on
stats
calculation,
we're
down
about
50
units
over
from
where
we
started
yeah,
even
with
the
bub
units,
the
bub
units
are
tier
two,
so
we're
not
counting
those
okay,
so
we're
overall.
A
Down
above
50.,
okay,
okay,
let's
go
and
well.
Let's
do
this
I
want
to
verify
that
we
don't
have
any
interest
in
an
O
and
then
P.
We
had
a
pending
request
from
vice
mayor
Chow
to
move
those
sites
from
tier
one
to
tier
two
I'll
note
that
those
actually
have
something
like
31
units
there
and
the
current
units
were
three,
so
we
lose
another
28
I
think
possibly
so
Pew
you
have
your
hand
raised
and
then
we'll
go
to
councilman
Moore.
Yes,.
H
Sir
I
mean
even
though
we
are
down
you
know,
50
units
I
from
a
buffer
perspective,
I
think
we're
still.
Okay,
we
have
you,
know
the
tier
two
sites
that
we'll
be
studying
and
then,
when
we
do
do
the
final
Shakedown
with
the
housing
element,
I
think
we
would
be
fine.
A
F
What
was
the
total
for
the
tier
two
projects
and
you
know
at
the
at
the
11th
Hour
truly,
would
we
want
to
put
out
back
at
tier
one
and
that
would
that
would
put
you
ahead?
I
believe.
H
A
Okay,
Steph
did
you
want
to?
Were
there
any
follow-ups
from
your
perspective
on
op
and
the
map
22
site,
I.
H
Did
have
a
follow-up
on
p
was
the
final
consensus
to
remove
all
the
tier
one
sites
and
map
B?
No.
A
We
haven't
gone
through
on
that
one
that
was
yeah
but
councilmember
Moore
says
she's
fine,
with
the
way
the
way
it
is
I'm
fine,
with
the
way
it
is
so
I
can
ask
councilmember
Wayne
councilmember
Willie
councilmember
Boy.
Did
you
want
to
redesignate
the
tier
one
sites
on
map
P
to
either
tier
two
or
take
it
off
altogether?.
J
A
I
A
Well,
the
one
thing
I
would
do
I
would
suggest
to
staff.
You
know.
Vice
versa
did
have
a
couple
of
sites
right
next
to
the
post
office
and
I
will
point
out
that
we
have
instructed
staff
to
proceed
with
trying
to
purchase
an
office
building
right
there
as
well
for
the
purpose
of
examining
whether
we
could,
potentially
you
know,
get
some
affordable
housing
made
ourselves.
So
it's
not
running
far
afield
from
what
we're
actually
actually
doing
ourselves.
A
So
you
know,
I
I
would
suggest
that
you
go
back,
take
the
guidance
that
we've
gotten
and
then
we
do
two
things
to
start
the
continued
meeting.
We
consider
those
sites
that
Vice
marchiao
has
pointed
out.
A
You
could
do
a
little
bit
more
diligence,
given
you
know
more
than
18
hours
to
turn
around,
and
then
we
can
take
some
public
comment
on
what
you
know.
We've
heard
and
hopefully
you'll
have
a
a
written
and
published
report
that
people
can
absorb
based
upon
what
you
know.
They've
we've
gone
through
here
and
we
can
start
the
meeting
that
way
and
get
a
sense
of
whether
we
can
get
that
Omnibus
motion
going.
A
So
so
that's
my
proposal
on
the
next
step
council.
Member,
more,
you
have
your
hand
raised,
but
I
do
want
to
check
in
with
the
city
manager,
to
get
Pamela's
thoughts
on
how
that
sounds
in
terms
of
next
steps.
B
Mr
mayor's
show,
at
this
late
hour,
I
understand
that
we
have
a
time
frame.
I
just
want
to
remind
the
council
that
I
totally
I'm
in
support
of
that
proposal.
In
a
way
we
cannot
start
the
eir
so
we're
pushing
that
timeline
another
two
weeks.
The
consultant
cannot
finish
the
draft.
We
cannot
release
the
public
draft
so
just
want
to
put
out
there.
The
timeline
is
getting
extended.
B
If
there's
enough
confidence
in
council
tonight,
you
can't
you
can't
take
a
motion
with
what
we
discussed
and
we'll
come
back
with
that
tallied
up
numbers
to
you,
but
not
in
a
public
hearing
format.
We
can
come
back
as
another
study
session
I'm
hoping
to
walk
away
with
the
motion
tonight.
If
that's
possible.
A
Okay,
well,
thank
you
Pamela
and
let's
go
to
councilmember
Moore,
okay,.
F
So
I
would
I
would
move
the
the
site
list
that
we
have
currently
adding
the
one
site
that
we
have
just
on
Stevens
Creek
Boulevard,
that
we
have
just
looked
into
as
a
tier
two
site,
so
it
gets
studied
and
and
and
that
would
that
would
be
the
motion
and
that
we
don't
and
then
we
don't
continue
that
we
just
take
take
what
we've
got
add
that
one
site.
A
So
that's
the
motion
and
council
member
way,
you
have
your
hand
raised.
Would
you
like
the
second.
A
You
have
your
hand
raised
before
I
go
back
to.
A
Yes,
that's
correct,
thank
you
for
providing
that
address
Okay,
so
we've
got
a
motion
on
the
table
and
a
second
any
call
for
deliberation
at
this
point.
A
I
don't
see
any
hands
raised.
So
that's
that's
that
that's
I,
guess
calling
the
question
is
cue.
Your
hand
is
actually
right,
so
you
might
want
to
lower
that
and
just
you
know,
I'm
gonna
keep
that
off
all
right.
So
let's
go
ahead,
and
so
does
anyone
want
to
take
the
participants
with
the
raised
hands
since
they've
been
here?
You
know
I
know
it's
past
midnight,
but
you
know
we've
got
a
couple
of.
A
You
know
people
that
that
have
been
waiting
and
you
know
would
anyone
like
to
take
that
comment.
I
mean
I,
see
one
head
nod
from
councilmember
Willie,
okay,
I'm
gonna
go
ahead
and
do
this
okay,
I'll
I'll
ask
for
people
that
are
wanting
to
speak
on
this,
and
so
we
have
Jennifer
and
Lisa
Warren
and
the
same
parameters
apply.
A
You
know
if
you're
wanting
to
speak,
please
raise
your
hand
by
the
time
the
first
person
is
done
and
you
can
also
email
City
clerk
at
cupertino.org
during
the
first
person.
Speaking
welcome
Jennifer
you'll
have
three
minutes.
M
Thank
you,
mayor
Darcy.
You
guys
are
doing
the
best
you
can
considering
at
this
point.
Please
do
not
vote
for
Banta
or
the
governor
I'm
voting
for
anyone
else.
I
feel
like
the
quality
of
life.
In
my
city,
which
I
have
invested
my
time
and
energy
and
for
the
amount
of
time
I've
lived
here,
has
gone
to
Rock
Bottom
zero.
It's
not
your
fault,
it's
not
the
stats.
It's
not!
The
consultant.
I
lay
the
blame
straight
at
the
governor
and
what
he
has
allowed
to
happen
to
this
state.
M
I
am
a
Paul
50
unit
and
15
dwelling
units
in
my
city.
There
is
no
way
this
thing
is
going
down.
We
have
the
initiative
that
is
coming
in
in
2020
for
our
our
neighbors.
What
I
forgot
what
the
name
is,
but
this
stuff
cannot
continue.
M
There
is
I
know
where
the
money's
coming
from
and
we
are
so
close
to
divulging
it.
I
I
am
sick
of
this
I.
Don't
you
know
I
feel
like
we're
living
in
the
ultimate
totalitarian
system.
I,
don't
like
to
see
this
stuff
happen.
I'm
sure
you
guys
hate
to
rezone.
I
have
spent
hours
of
my
life
I
miscarried
the
day
after
we
went
through
the
Florida
area
ratio
drama.
15
years
ago,
I
sat
in
here
on
Tuesday
night
and
I
missed
Terry
the
next
day.
M
How
many
people
right
now
in
this
state
are
going
through
times
in
their
lives.
You
know,
I
had
a
sick,
mother,
I,
okay,
my
brother
died
of
cancer
in
2015..
We
were
fighting
about
junk
in
this
city
with.
If
the
governor
is
letting
people
in
this
state
get
to
this
point,
then
he
should
he's
not
fit
to
be
Governor
he's
not
fit
for
the
White
House.
So
that's
my
comment
because
our
our
quality
of
life
is
going
a
big,
zero
and
I
I'm.
M
A
Thank
you
Jennifer,
and
we
have
Scott
Connolly
with
a
hand
raised
as
well
after
Lisa
Warren.
Obviously,
clerk
did
any
emails
come
in
during
this
time.
N
Hi
so
I'm
going
to
turn
this
off
to
now
had
I
not
heard
that
there
was
every
time
for
public
comment
and
I
started.
Listening
to
you
go
through
these
things
and
I
can
tell
you.
This
was
absolutely
not
the
kind
of
meeting
that
should
have
been
Zoom
only
I'm
sitting
here,
disabled
in
effect,
because
all
I
can
see
is
a
screen
that
I
can't
maneuver
with
typing
going
on.
N
N
N
N
A
Thank
you
Lisa
Scott
Connolly's
hand
is
no
longer
raised
and
so
I'll
go
and
bring
this
back
to
council
and
so
Council.
A
I
And
just
a
quick
one:
when
would
we
decide
on
a
subcommittee
for
the
bub
Road.
A
Or
bub
Road
Outreach.
Well,
so
we
have
a
regular
council
meeting
next
Tuesday
and
we
do
have
an
agenda
item
where
we
have
subcommittee
report
outs
and
so
I
can
check
in
with
the
City
attorney
and
city
manager
offline,
to
see
whether
it
would
be
appropriate
to
bring
up
the
formation
of
a
subcommittee.
Then.
But
that's
what
comes
to
my
mind
as
probably
the
right
place
to
have
that
discussion.
A
Okay,
Vice
Merchant.
D
Yeah
I
think
the
I
think
it's
Lisa,
who
brought
up
a
point.
When
will
the
public
get
a
a
good
summary
of
the
result
we
wrote
on
today
so
which
would
we
get
these
maps
that
we
have
updated
so
that
we
have
the
Tyrant?
Here
too?
That's
the
result
of
the
motion
and
the
spreadsheet
could
that
be
posted
on?
Maybe
the
housing
element
site.
B
I
think
we're
getting
a
head
a
thumbs
up
around
the
consultant,
but
I
just
kind
of
want
to
walk
briefly
of
the
process.
This
com,
this
exercise,
that
you're
doing,
is
going
to
be
included
in
a
draft,
a
housing
element
and
that
entirety
document
will
be
posted
on
the
website.
And
then
there
will
be
additional
opportunities
for
the
public
to
comment.
D
B
A
Andy
had
your
hand
up,
did
you
want
to
say
something?
Oh.
O
Just
to
mention
that
there
will
also
most
likely
be
a
scoping
meeting
related
to
the
sequel
as
we
do
the
kickoff,
so
the
sites
will
also
be
discussed
there.
Okay,.
F
I
just
want
to
thank
everyone
for
going
through
all
this.
So
that's
that's
like
12
to
14
hours
in
the
last
two
days,
so
we
we
have
have
a
list
we're
going
to
be
voting
on
and
we
I
think
we
all
knew
that
before
we
started.
This
was
going
to
be
a
tough,
tough
road
to
go
down,
and
so
anyway,
good
job.
A
Okay
and
I'm,
sorry,
vice
versa.
What
I,
what
I
meant
was
I
wanted
to
do
a
check
in
with
the
other
council
members
as
well
that
I
haven't
had
a
chance
to
spoke
speak,
which
is
councilman
boy
councilman
away.
Did
you.
J
Yes,
Echo
Echo.
What
council
member
Moore
said
thanks
everyone
thanks
Steph
and
thanks
for
the
residents
who
listened
so
late.
D
Yeah
first,
a
question
that
I
think
we
the
base
condition
for
the
eir.
It's
still
confusing.
This
condition
should
be
the
existing
condition
because
we
are
going
to
be
looking
at
the
traffic
and
everything
based
on
the
existing
housing
situation,
and
then
we
will
have
this
condition
with
pipeline
units
added
and
I
would
think
that's
option
one
and
then
with
the
Tier
1
units
added
that
might
be
option
two
and
then,
with
tier
two
option:
edges
that
might
be
option.
D
Three,
that's
what
I
thought
the
ER
should
be,
but
what
I
heard
I've
heard
from
staff
is,
there
won't
be
a
base
condition
the
the
base
they
consider
is
the
option,
one
which
is
existing
plus
pipeline
units
which
have
not
been
built,
and
there
is
no
way
to
know
what
their
existing
traffic
or
any
other
resource.
That's
current
state.
So
how
are
you
going
to
have
a
face
that
doesn't
exist?
G
G
Baseline
Baseline
problems
are,
you
know,
Baseline
analysis
for
an
eir
is
confusing
and
you
know
it's
pretty
it.
It
can
be
pretty
difficult
to
deal
with
in
a
case-by-case
basis,
but
we'll
come
up
with
something.
That's
that's
defensible.
A
I
I
think
probably
a
better
way
of
getting
at
this
and
I
appreciate
your
your
point,
Chris
and,
and
that
did
go
through
my
mind
as
vice
mayor
Charles
speaking,
but
then
on
the
flip
side
of
it.
A
I
thought
well
what
better
opportunity
or
other
opportunity
for
that
matter
might
might
there
be
to
bring
this
up,
because
once
we
vote
on
this,
you
know
when
the
football
is
you
know
taken
and
run
with,
and
you
may
not
put
it
back
right,
so
I
I
think
what
might
be
really
you
know
most
comforting
and
useful,
is
to
give
us
a
very
quick
sketch,
like
the
30-second
rundown
of
what
are
we
looking
at.
A
You
know
if
this
motion
passes
procedurally,
what
what
does
the
opportunity
to
check
and
understand
what's
happening
and
and
evaluate
you
know,
what's
going
on
from
the
perspective
of
the
public?
What
does
that
look
like
in
the
next
month
or
two
and
Andy?
You
have
your
camera
on
and
I
think.
That's
probably
the
best.
A
You
know
you're,
probably
the
best
person
to
answer
that
question.
Since
you
know
it
seems,
like
you,
guys,
are
very
much
looking
at
giving
us.
You
know
excellent
service.
You
know
going
forward
with
the
eir,
which
you
know
you're
from
all
indicators.
You
know
looking
forward
to
getting
into
that
nine
month.
You
know
ambitious
time
period.
So
so
what?
What
do
we
have?
You
know
prospectively
looking
forward
in
the
next
month
or
two.
O
Who
will
be
working
closely
with
Chris
Jensen
and
staff,
of
course,
and
and
I
I
am
not
the
lead
for
the
eir
piece
of
of
this
project.
So
I
hesitate
to
speak
ahead
of
all
the
discussions
that
we'll
have
going
forward,
but
I'm
certain
that
Mr
Jensen
will
keep
you
abreast
of
our
of
our
progress
and
and
and
opportunities
for
Council
to
not
be
surprised
by
our
way
forward
as
we
progress.
But.
A
You're
a
very
important
link
of
the
chain,
and
just
let
me
clarify
the
question
to
give
some
comfort
to
Council
in
the
public.
What
are
our
opportunities
in
the
next
four
to
eight
weeks
to
you
know,
give
some
input,
because
vice
versa
was
asking
a
question
about
hey
look:
how
are
you
going
to
conduct
the
CIO
right.
G
So
yeah
so
I'm
so
I
mean
is,
as
Andy
said,
There
usually
is
a
scoping
session
at
the
outside
of
an
eir,
so
that
will
be
an
opportunity
not
just
for
Council
but
for
public
the
public
to
provide
comments.
You
know
that
said
you
know,
sort
of
you
know
how
we
structure
the
the
alternative
to
Baseline
analysis.
G
You
know
that
that
that's,
that's
primarily,
you
know
a
staff
and
a
legal
decision
that
we'll
be
making
in
a
way
that
that
you
know
provides
for
the
most
defensible
eir,
certainly
substantive
comments,
particularly
about
impacts
that
people
have
concerns
about.
You
know
that's
that
that's
the
kind
of
input
that
we
would
take
seriously
in
the
scoping
session
and
other
opportunities
for
public
comment.
A
Okay,
well,
let's,
let's
check
in
with
our
recent
planning
director
and
now
city
manager,
Pamela
yeah,.
B
Sure,
Mr
Mayor,
so
I'll
do
a
quick
snapshot
and
Andy
correct
them
if
I'm
wrong.
So
after
tonight
we
are
able
to
wrap
up
the
inventory
and
then
this
will
give
the
eir
consultant
a
green
light
to
start
preparing
the
eir,
as
Andy
mentioned,
we'll
also
do
a
public
scoping
meeting.
This
is
where
we
invite
the
public
to
come
and
comment
on
the
eir
scope
separately.
B
This
housing
element
draft,
including
the
inventory,
will
also
be
provided
on
the
website
when
it's
ready,
as
Chris
mentioned
there
will
be
a
30-day
mandatory
public
comment
period
for
anyone
to
comment.
Once
we
generate
that
we
have
the
comments,
we'll
revise
it
and
hopefully
we
can
bring
it
back
to
council
to
review
it
one
more
time
before
we
send
it
to
hcd.
B
D
D
Okay,
final
comment:
I
really
really
want
to
thank
all
the
staff
for
this.
This
is
really
tough
project,
a
tongue
of
information,
so
many
sites
really
appreciate
all
the
work
that
you
have
done
and
for
the
public
and
I
I
have
to
say
a
lot
of
comments.
D
I
really
am,
as
I
was
suggesting
things
I'm
I
feel
sickening
so,
but
we
we
unfortunately
that's
way
what
we
have
to
do
so.
A
K
A
Vice
mayor,
seeing
no
further
hands
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
call
the
question
Madam
city
clerk.
Would
you
please
conduct
a
roll
call
vote
on
the
motion
on
the
table
council.
A
Thank
you
very
much
Madam
City
Clerk,
and
we
have
nothing
else
on
the
agenda.
Folks,
I
apologize
for
being
22
minutes
over
my
stated
goal.
Hopefully
this
would
be
perceived
as
something
that
was
worth
that
extra
time.
So
we
will
see
you
at
our
regular
council
meeting.
We
wish
everyone
a
very
happy
labor
day
and
we'll
see
you
the
day
after
that
on
September
6th.
If.
B
A
You,
madam
city
manager
and
everyone
have
a
great
night
all
right.