►
From YouTube: 9-16-2020: Environmental Planning Commission Meeting
Description
Video Conference: YouTube, mountainview.legistar.com, and Comcast Channel 26
7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting
A
B
A
A
A
This
meeting
will
be
conducted
in
accordance
with
state
of
california
executive
order.
N2920
dated
march
17
2020.,
all
members
of
the
epc
are
participating
in
this
meeting
by
video
conference
with
no
physical
meeting
location
members
of
the
public
wishing
to
observe
the
meeting
live,
may
do
so
at
mountainview.legistar.com
on
youtube
at
mountainview.gov,
slash
youtube
and
on
comcast
channel
26.
A
As
noted
on
the
meeting
agenda,
members
of
the
public
may
provide
oral
public
comments
during
the
public
comment
period
for
an
item
by
signing
up
at
mountainview.gov,
slash,
epc,
underscore
speakers,
emails
and
voice
mail
messages
received
by
5
pm
today
were
forwarded
to
the
epc.
All
votes
will
be
taken
by
roll
call
vote.
Now
I
will
ask
epc
clerk
to
proceed
with
the
roll
call.
D
E
C
A
A
A
B
F
B
F
A
H
C
A
All
right,
okay,
so
we
will
now
move
on
to
item
number
four.
Thank
you.
Soroush
oral
communications
from
the
public.
This
portion
of
the
meeting
is
reserved
for
persons
wishing
to
address
the
epc
on
any
matter
not
on
the
agenda.
Speakers
are
allowed
to
speak
on
any
topic
for
up
to
three
minutes
during
the
session.
This
section
state
law
prohibits
the
commission
from
acting
on
non-agenda
items.
Would
any
member
of
the
public
on
the
line
like
to
provide
comment
on
non-agenda
items?
A
C
A
E
B
A
A
A
E
J
All
right,
thank
you
good
evening,
chair
and
members
of
the
commission.
My
name
is
brittany,
whitehill
and
I
am
joined
tonight
by
planning
manager
and
zoning
administrator,
stephanie
williams.
The
item
in
front
of
you
consists
of
zoning
ordinance
amendments
pertaining
to
accessory
dwelling
units
and
junior
accessory
dwelling
units.
J
In
fall
of
2019,
the
governor
signed
into
law,
several
bills
amending
multiple
government
code,
sections
related
to
accessory
dwelling
units,
adus
and
junior
accessory
dwelling
units.
J-80
news.
This
legislation
became
effective
january
1st
2020.
in
spring
of
2020
staff,
brought
proposed
zoning
ordinance
amendments
related
to
adus
to
the
epc
for
recommendation
and
a
city
council
for
adoption.
J
Zoning
ordinance
amendments
are
required
to
be
reviewed
by
the
santa
clara
county
airport
land
use.
Commission,
the
aluc
on
september,
9th
of
2020
staff,
presented
the
draft
adu
code
amendments
to
the
aluc,
the
aluc
determined
that
the
proposed
amendments
are
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
land
use
plan
for
moffett
federal
airfield.
J
Since
this
item
was
last
reviewed
by
the
epc
staff
has
made
several
revisions,
definition
section
has
been
added
to
define
terms
specific
to
adus
and
jadus
for
the
single
family.
Adu
standards
staff
has
added
a
requirement
that
the
front
setback
of
an
adu
be
consistent
with
the
front
setback
of
the
underlying
zone
and
eliminated
the
10-foot
separation
requirement
between
adus
and
other
structures,
the
30
maximum
rear
yard
coverage
requirement
and
the
requirement
for
adus
to
be
constructed
in
the
same
architectural
style
and
with
the
same
materials
as
the
primary
residence
for
the
jadu
standards.
J
J
J
A
I
J
J
A
J
A
F
Right,
you
sorry
my
mouse
vote
for
a
second.
Thank
you
so
much
brittany.
For
that
great
presentation.
I
have
two
general
adu
questions
and
they
won't
influence
what
I
vote
on
tonight,
but
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
just
as
context
and
is
there
any
trends.
I
know
the
last
time
this
came
before
us
in
march
and
before
that
we
had
only
seen,
I
think
it
was
under
under
a
dozen
adu
applications
has.
Has
there
been
any
general
trend
or
uptick
in
the
number
of
homeowners
who
are
building
these.
J
Yeah,
I
believe
in
2019
there
was
about
15
adus
constructed
and
I
know
just
within
you
know
the
the
seven
months
of
2020
we've
had
a
substantial
number
of
adu
applications.
I
can't
give
you
a
specific
number.
I
can
definitely
look
into
that
and
report
back,
but
I
would
say,
there's
definitely
an
increase
in
adu
applications.
We
have
also
received
a
couple
applications
for
adus
and
multi-family
developments.
F
J
F
D
J
J
A
Okay
and
then
another
follow-up
question
I
mean
before
the
regulations
on
edu's
adus
started,
become
relaxed.
It
seemed
like
a
lot
of
the
adus
that
were
being
built
in
mountain
view.
Were,
I
guess
we
would
call
them
non-conforming
or
non-permitted
adus
are
we?
Are
we
seeing?
It
sounds
like
we're,
seeing
more
interest
and
having
people
come
forward
to
the
city
and
actually
get
permit
permits
for
adus?
Now
that
the
regulations
are
being
relaxed,
would
you
agree.
H
All
right,
just
one
more
general
question,
it
looks
like
this
whole.
The
section
on
short-term
rentals
was
added
in
the
interim
and
there's
specifications
around
which
adas
qualify
as
short-term
rentals
and
which
are
prohibited
from
that.
Would
you
mind
just
elaborating
a
little
bit
on
the
process
of
deciding
which
adus
to
include
in
that
list
and
how
that
came
about
so
the.
J
A
I
don't
see
any
more
hands,
and
so
I
think
we
need
to
ask
for
public
input
on
this
right.
So
would
any
member
of
the
public
on
the
line
like
to
provide
comment
on
this
item?
If
so,
please
click
the
raise
hand,
button
and
zoom
or
press
star
9
on
your
phone
phone
users
can
mute
and
unmute
themselves
with
star
6..
The
epc
clerk
will
start
the
timer
and
let
you
know
when
your
time
is
up.
A
F
I'm
encouraged
to
hear
that
the
trajectory
is
is
moving
in
the
direction
and
with
more
adus,
and
we
only
have
infill
development,
so
this
is
a
great
way
to
intensify
existing
land
use,
and
one
piece
I
particularly
like
is
that
the
state
restrictions
have
relaxed
the
parking
standards
for
garage
conversions.
I
think
that
is
often
a
barrier,
and-
and
so
I
I
will
be
supporting
the
staff
recommendation
and
I'm
happy
to
make
a
mission
and
would
love
to
hear
what
the
other
commissioners
have
to
say.
I
And
I
I
agree,
I
think
that
it's
good
to
see
the
relaxed
approach
to
the
adus.
I
think
it's
something
that
people
have
been
holding
back
on
because
of
the
more
restrictive
requirements.
So
I
think
this
makes
a
whole
lot
of
sense
and
appreciate
the
staff's
effort
to
clarify
all
of
that
for
us.
Sometimes
it's
hard
when
things
are
moving
forward
from
the
state
and
then
we
have
to
kind
of
change
gears
so
appreciate
the
staff's
work
in
trying
to
clarify
all
that
for
us.
I
So
we
can
move
forward
and
have
this
ordinance
in
place,
so
people
will
respond
to
it
and
so
glad
to
know
that
a
number
of
people
are
already
responding.
So
that's
a
really
good
sign
that
we
can
add
those
additional
units
in
in
the
city.
So
thanks
for
your
good
work-
and
I
will
be
supporting
this
as
well.
H
I
just
want
to
echo
what
my
fellow
commissioners
have
said.
I'm
definitely
in
support
of
this
as
a
way
of
increasing
the
housing
stock
in
the
city
and
the
changes
that
staff
have
made.
Since
we
first
reviewed
this,
I
think,
are
definitely
steps
in
the
right
direction
in
terms
of
making
it
easier
and
also
just
I
really
appreciated
the
tables.
The
consolidation
of
information
was
really
easy
to
digest
for
me
and
definitely
think
that
that
will
be
helpful
for
people
looking
to
to
construct
an
edu
in
the
future.
A
A
A
Okay,
I
don't
see
hand
up
so
I
will
just
I'll
say.
Yes,
I
also
support
this.
I
think
it's
a
good
idea.
You
know
in
the
past,
I
would
have
you
know
like
the
stricter
regulations,
but
we
do
have
a
housing
crisis
and
in
particular
I
mean
you
know
the
fact
that
you
know.
As
commissioner
hey
meyer
mentioned,
you
know
there
are
new
companies
that
are
helping,
enable
people
make
adus
much
more
easily
than
they
would
have
been
able
to
do
in
the
past.
A
You
know
responding
to
this
crisis
with
a
good
solution,
and
so
I
mean
you
know,
keeping
up
with
the
technology
to
help
solve
the
problem
is
always
a
good
thing,
so
I'm
supportive
of
that.
I
also
you
know
before
sb
330
was
passed,
I
would
have.
I
would
have
wondered
about
you
know
putting
adus
and
multi-family
units,
but
it
makes
sense
to
me
now
that
you
know
planner
wide
hill
has
you
know
expressed
that
some
of
the
older
complexes
are
moving
to
do
this,
because
you
know
there's
they.
A
They
usually
have
a
lot
more
open
space
than
is
normally
required
for
the
newer
complexes
and
since
sb
330
is
enabling
many
cities
to
retain
it's
naturally
affordable
housing.
This
is
a
way
to
add
housing
stock,
while
still
retaining
the
naturally
affording
affordable
housing
that
was
enabled
through
sb
330,
so
I'm
in
favor
of
it,
too,
and
and
also
thank
the
staff,
for
you
know
the
additional
ideas
beyond
the
state
regulation
that
help
enable
more
housing.
F
Great,
I
that
the
environmental
planning
commission
adopt
a
resolution
recommending
city
council
approve
the
zoning
text,
amendments
to
chapter
36
of
the
zoning
ordinance,
the
zoning
ordinance
of
the
city
code
to
update
accessory
dwelling
unit
regulations
to
align
with
the
new
state
regulations
to
be
read
entitled
only
further.
Reading
waves
exhibit
one
to
the
epc
staff
report.
A
A
B
B
B
B
B
Also,
as
a
result
of
this
council
meeting
council
directed
staff
to
go
back
to
the
precise
plans
and
refine
them
in
light
of
this
city-wide
school
strategy,
we
are
removing
the
school
strategy.
The
individual
developer
school
strategy
requirements
we're
removing
direct
community
benefits,
since
that
would
be
a
condition
of
approval
on
development
that
they
provide
that
to
schools.
We
are
removing
the
overlap
between
the
city-wide
school
strategy
and
the
language
in
the
individual,
precise
plans.
B
So
the
sequa
findings
for
this,
the
the
eirs
that
we
did
for
the
east
wismen
and
north
basial
precise
plans
did
not
include
specific
new
facilities
in
either
the
analysis
or
as
mitigations
or
responses
to
impacts.
We
could
not
have
under
state
law
and
we
did
not
so
there
are
no
new,
unidentified
impacts
from
those
eirs.
So
this
this
action
would
be
sql
exempt.
B
A
F
B
D
D
B
You
know,
outside
of
kind
of
general
discussions
that
we
might
have
in
general
support
that
we
might
have
for
the
school
districts
so
as
soon
as
it
applies
to
a
specific
development.
The
city
can't
advocate
for
that
in
any
way.
So
certainly
there
are
developers
out
there
who
recognize
that
you
know
the
amount
of
growth
that
we
need.
A
B
Is
significant
and
the
amount
of
growth
that
that
is
being
planned
for
is
significant.
They
recognize
the
political
issue
and
they
recognize
that,
especially
in
these
areas
like
north
bay
shore,
there
may
be
a
marketing
value
to
to
having
a
school
near
their
residences.
So
all
of
those
things
can
kind
of
help
spur
an
applicant
to
reach
out
to
the
school
districts.
L
As
you
know,
land
is
expensive
and
it's
very
hard
for
school
districts
to
purchase
land,
but
allowing
them
to
sell
development
rights
on
that
land
gives
them
an
additional.
You
know,
source
of
money,
to
pay
for
that
land
and
the
council,
as
part
of
the
policy,
has
committed
to
doing
that.
So
that
takes
part
of
approximately
is
that
40
percent
of
the
cost
eric
we
estimated.
L
Beyond
that.
I
think
the
the
role
that
the
city
played
was
to
bring
a
little
bit
of
what
we
call
shared
information
because
of
a
lot
of
discussions
and
and
different
kinds
of
thinking
about
student
generation
rates
and
a
whole
lot
of
other
information.
So
we
brought
all
these
together
and
created
that
shared
information
and
what
you
see
as
as
that
funding
gap
is
is,
is
basically
based
on
that
shared
information.
L
So
we
wouldn't
have
sort
of
a
back
and
forth,
even
if
a
developer
or
applicant
did
want
to
contribute
that
information
was
clearly
presented
to
them.
So
that
was
about
as
far
as
we
could
go
as
we're
being
told
legally
and
so
we're
trying
to
do
our
best
as
a
city
to
to
help
with
the
funding
strategy
by
taking
sort
of
the
land
strategy
portion
of
it
and
and
creating
an
incentive
to
donate
land.
L
L
H
As
a
bit
of
a
follow-up
to
commissioner
lowe's
question
and
then
also
the
letter
we
received
from
the
school
district
questioning
why
the
language
on
school
strategy
was
removed
from
the
two
precise
plans,
is
it
to
your
point?
Eric
was
the
that
language
removed,
because
that
would
be
in
a
way
the
city
getting
involved
in
like
specific
requirements
for
developers
around
the
school
strategy.
So
it
had
to
be
removed.
B
Yes,
exactly
so
that's
the
one
part
of
why
it
had
to
be
removed,
and
then
the
other
part
is,
of
course
you
know
just
long-term
information
management.
You
don't
want
to
have.
You
know
repeated
information
where
it
might
be
changed
in
one
place
and
then
it
might
not
apply.
You
know
in
the
way
intended
when
it's
changed
in
one
place,
but
not
the
other.
You
have
one
resource
for
for
that
information.
H
Okay,
thank
you
and
then
question
from
the
staff
presentation.
It
talked
about
council
policy
looking
at
shared,
open
space,
tdr
and
then
incentives
for
dedication,
and
I
was
wondering
if
you
could
expand
a
little
bit
more
on
the
incentives
for
dedication,
because
I
you
know,
staff
presenting
to
the
epc
and
then
presenting
to
council
who
then
votes
right.
What
are
the
restrictions
on
council
in
in
looking
at
the
school
strategy?
B
So
how
that
would
work
is
obviously
the
the
developer
would
have
to
be
voluntarily
dedicating
and
sort
of
moving
forward,
an
application
that
includes
that.
But
the
city
council
and
you
know
the
epc
in
their
recommending
role-
can
use
the
flexibility
inherent
in
the
planned
community
permit
process
and
the
precise
plan
process,
as
well
as
the
the
council
policy,
to
allow,
for
example,
a
developer
to
concentrate
more
of
their
allowed
far
on
a
smaller
land
area,
and
so
they
may
need
height
exceptions
or
they
may
need
setback
exception.
L
L
You
know
some
of
this.
The
state
supplements
with
matching
funding,
but
funding
is
hard
to
get
and
the
state
consistently
goes
up
and
down
based
on
its.
You
know,
based
on
the
economy
and
it's
very
clear,
having
talked
to
a
number
of
school
districts
that
that
is
a
big
hole
that
it's
going
to
be
harder
to
fill,
but
that
question
can
may
be
answered
by
you
know
by
one
of
the
school
district
representatives.
K
Then
I
guess,
with
that
in
mind,
I
went
through
dr
meyer
and
dr
rudolph's
markup
in
its
entirety,
one
of
the
things
that
they
include
in
several
places,
and
I
don't
know
if
there's
a
way
to
pull
it
up,
but
they
they
suggest
replacements
of
some
language.
With
the
statement
that
says:
review
import
to
the
city,
all
actions
taken
pursuant
to
the
city-wide
school
strategy.
K
B
L
I
I
would
agree-
and
I
think
it
it's
something
that
we
might
have
to
look
at
in
order
to
in
order
to
in
order
to
tell
you
one
way
or
the
other,
but
I
could.
I
could
assure
you
that
I
think
the
goal
of
this
is
to
have
the
city
work
with
the
school
districts
on
many
different
levels,
and
we
are
the
city
managers
office
is
working
on
other
initiatives
with
the
school
district.
L
So
we
have
many
other
venues
and
the
idea
really
was
to
separate
the
land
use
documents
from
these
initiatives
and
make
it
very
clear
that
not
cloud
the
land
use
process
with
it.
But
the
city
continues
to
be
committed
and
there
are
many
initiatives
that
are
outside
of
this
device
plans.
Also,
so
I
don't
think
that
commitment
goes
away
either
way.
L
Yeah-
and
I
think
we
have
talked
about
this-
that
we
have
been
told-
there
needs
to
be
a
bright
line
between
the
land,
use
that
the
planning
commission,
the
council,
does
and
anything
the
city
might
want
to
do
outside
of
the
land
use
strategy.
So
that's
that's
essentially
why
those
precise
plan
documents
were
revised
to
do
that.
But,
of
course,
as
as
you
know,
if
there
there
are
folks
who
are
willing
to
donate
land,
those
decisions
will
come
to
you
and
the
council
to
to
look
at.
K
K
That
was
my
impression
was
that
every
reference
to
school
was
removed
and
the
fact
that
there
was
no
even
mention
that
hey,
we
have
a
strategy
that
you
need
to
at
least
go
be
aware
of,
was
removed
completely,
and
that's
was
that.
Did
I
miss
that?
Was
there
any
edition
of
the
law
that
says
it?
It
may
not
say
this
you
have
to
do,
but
at
least
one
exists
go
look
at.
It
was
that
added
someplace.
A
B
I
Well,
nobody
lives
out
there,
so
the
schools
don't
have
any
way
to
you
know,
put
up
a
bond
or
getting
any
funding
from
that.
So
I
that's
that's
kind
of
what
I
would
be
looking
for
is
to
get
that
point
of
clarity,
including
included
in
this,
so
it
isn't
quite
so
confusing.
So
that
might
be
where
the
disconnect
might
be
any
any
comments
from
from
any
of
you.
Am
I
just
off
base
here?
If
you're
do.
L
In
addition,
the
city
has
bought
two
acres
worth
of
property
there,
and
so
we've
been
able
to
increase
the
area
so
that
we
can
have
shared
open
space.
So
that's
exactly
what
is
in
the
policy
that
the
council
adopted,
and
so
we
wouldn't
see
it
in
on
a
precise
plan
basis.
It
lives
outside
the
land
use
in
outside
the
precise
plan,
but
we
could
apply
it
anywhere
and
not
just
in
in
one
precise
plan
or
the
other.
L
I
I
So
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
had
some
clarification
around
that
I
know
the
details
are,
you
know,
go
go
a
little
bit
below
the
precise
plane,
but
it
was
my
thought
that
we
could
use
that
kind
of
as
an
example
to
try
to
come
up
with
some
sort
of
verbiage
that
would
at
least
indicate
cooperation
between
the
school
district
and
the
city.
But
not
you
know,
tie
it
so
closely.
A
D
A
B
B
I
A
L
D
A
Okay,
so
I
wrote
in
a
question
and
I
had
asked
about
our
neighboring
cities.
You
know
you
know:
are
they
using
these
kind
of
strategies
to
help
enable
their
school
systems?
You
know,
buy
more
property
and
the
answer
I
got
back
was
they're
not
and
in
particular
maybe
I'm
I'm
not
as
surprised
that
that
might
be
true
with
los
altos
and
palo
alto.
But
sunnyvale
is
a
city,
that's
you
know
twice
our
size
and
has
also
seen
considerable
residential
growth
over
the
last
five
years
or
so
so.
A
Okay,
those
are
all
my
questions
last
chance
for
questions
here.
Commissioners,
before
I
give
the
public
a
chance
to
weigh
in
on
this
item,
all
right,
not
seeing
any
other
hands
raised,
we
will
take
this
over
for
public
comment.
Would
any
member
of
the
public
on
the
line
like
to
provide
comment
on
this
item?
I
C
C
C
A
A
A
A
A
C
A
A
C
M
Hear
me:
yes,
all
right
so
good
evening,
commissioners,
good
evening,
artie
eric
city
staff.
Thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
talk
today.
I
just
want
to
point
out
one
point
before
I
say
my
my
piece
for
this.
Unlike
sunnyvale
mountain
view,
has
a
redevelopment
district
where
I'm
not
advocating
for
its
removal.
M
That
does
mean
that
all
all
development
and
all
the
property
taxes
from
new
development
goes
directly
to
the
school
district,
whereas
the
redevelopment
district
in
north
bay
shore
actually
goes
directly
to
the
city
and
then
there's
a
jpa
that
that
serves
as
an
agreement.
I
think
that's
a
fundamental
difference
between
the
two
cities,
but
I
do
want
to
say
that
the
precise
plants
that's
a
vision
for
the
for
the
community.
M
It
does
not
in
every
instance,
mandate
actions.
Removal
of
the
importance
of
any
notion
of
schools
eliminates
the
needs
for
any
developer,
to
focus
on
it
case
in
point.
Several
recent
proposals
from
that
have
received
approval
from
large
combinations
with
over
a
couple
billion
dollars
in
assets
have
moved
forward
without
any
conversation
between
the
schools,
district
and
a
developer.
M
Instead,
the
those
vectors
simply
met
with
the
city
to
determine
what
needs
need
to
be
met
and
and
had
their
projects
approved.
Contrast
this
to
before
the
revision
of
the
north
side,
no
facial,
precise
plan
developers,
even
without
language,
reached
out
to
both
school
districts
that
address
concerns
from
the
proposed
and
the
total
number
of
students.
Removal
of
the
importance
of
schools
completely
signals
to
developers
that
schools
are
not
important.
M
In
fact,
it
specified
that
the
language
only
means
it
specifies
that
what
must
be
done
is
that
there
is
some
type
of
conversation
between
the
schools
as
opposed
to
simply
reaching
out
to
the
city
directly
to
the
city.
We
require
our
developers
to
meet
with
our
communities
with
all
stakeholders
to
address
the
concerns
and
report
out
how
they
plan
to
address
those
that
same
expectations
should
be
afforded
to
school
districts
moving
forward.
M
N
My
new
zoom
talent
is
to
speak
without
being
unneeded.
Thank
you
good
evening,
everyone
good
evening
cox
vice
chair
cranston
and
commissioners
of
the
environmental
planning,
commission
and
members
of
city
staff.
My
name
is
tamara
wilson.
I'm
the
board,
president
of
the
mountain
view,
whisman
school
district
board
of
trustees.
I
first
want
to
thank
you
all
for
the
work
you
do
on
behalf
of
our
community
and
its
residents
and
for
your
continued
pursuit
of
making
mountain
view
a
better
place
to
live
and
to
build
full
whole
communities
in
all
corners
of
the
city.
N
The
draft
resolution
before
you
takes
out
all
mention
of
schools
and
school
strategy,
which
is
deeply
disheartening
to
our
district.
We
understand
the
rationale
and
legal
reasoning
behind
city
staff,
making
these
significant
changes
to
the
document,
but
do
hope
you
consider
the
joint
letter
sent
to
you
today.
On
behalf
of
the
mountain
view,
business
school
district
and
the
mountain
view
los
altos
high
school
district,
which
includes
edited
suggestions
from
our
legal
team.
N
We
believe
our
suggested
modifications
best
reflect
the
shared
vision
between
mountain
view's,
two
school
districts
and
city
leadership,
while
mvla
and
mountain
v
whistling
school
district
understand
the
legal
restrictions
on
requiring
developers
to
support
schools
beyond
the
insufficient
statutory
fee.
We
also
understand
that
there
is
no
such
restriction
on
continuing
to
emphasize
and
encourage
developers
to
provide
more
and
to
do
so
in
all
development
documents.
N
I'm
asking
you
today
to
limit
and
modify
the
suggested
changes
for
the
joint
letter
you
received
as
complete.
Removal
of
nearly
all
references
to
school
strategy
needs
in
both
the
east
whistling
and
north
bay
shore
precise
plans.
It
signals
really
that
the
city
is
de-emphasizing,
their
very
unstated
support
for
schools
in
our
community.
N
N
So
I'd
just
like
to
sincerely
thank
you
for
listening
and
for
your
staff's
work
and
for
consideration
of
codifying
a
strong
school
strategy
in
support
of
all
new
development
in
our
community.
This
could
ensure
appropriate
school
capacity
to
support
the
expected
population
growth
and
to
build
complete
whole
communities
such
as
the
ones
that
exist
in
mountain
view.
Today.
Thank
you.
A
C
Mr
sneezing,
chair
cox,
I
I
apologize
for
your
jack,
but
I'm
not
sure
if
ain't
rudolph,
they
still
have
their
hand
raised
in
the
attendees
box,
I'm
not
sure
if
they
had
something
additional
to
say
actually
just
upon
myself
saying
that
they
they
lowered
their
hand.
So
I
just
want
to
make
if
they
had
anything
to
say
they
had
before
so
go
ahead.
Okay,.
H
My
commissioner,
lo
I
was
yeah
disheartened
to
hear
that
developers
had
not
reached
out
to
the
school
as
as
a
stakeholder
in
in
their
development.
I
wanted
to
revisit
what
vice
chair
currentston
have
brought
up.
I
unfortunately
did
not
have
time
between
work
and
in
the
meeting
to
read
through
the
document
all
the
documents
the
school
districts
sent
over,
but
I
certainly
think
if
legal,
at
least
a
reference
or
or
mentioned
to
the
school
strategy
document
in
the
precise
plans
would
be
something
to
at
least
write
point
developers.
H
Okay,
here's
here
is
a
resource
and
here's.
You
know
something
to
consider,
as
as
you
put
together
your
development
plans
again,
you
know
defer
to
city
staff
if
that
would
kind
of
cross
any
any
boundaries
or
anything,
but
I
think
certainly
that
reference
would
would
be
important
yeah
and
certainly
think
that
that
schools
should
be
a
critical
stakeholder
as
we
consider
development
for
our.
O
O
Just
feels
like
it's,
it's
odd
that
it
would
be
an
option,
and
I
know
that
the
staff
wants
to
ensure
that
we
have
great
schools
and
they're
doing
their
part.
I
just
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that,
outside
of
intent,
that
the
process
is
there
by
language
that
ensures
that
we
get
the
great
schools,
does
that
make
sense.
B
You
know
reaching
out
to
the
districts.
You
know
having
a
conversation
with
them.
You
know
we
could
maybe
talk
about
that,
but
but
certainly
any
kind
of
mandate
for
for
action
by
the
developer
as
a
condition
of
approval,
I
think,
would
be.
We
would
not
be
able
to
include
either
in
the
precise
plans
or
the
city-wide
school
strategy.
L
To
add
that
if
we
had
a
reference
to
the
city-wide
school
strategy,
it
that
it
only
outlines
the
city's
role,
and
so
we
could
only
reference
the
city's
role
in
looking
at
tdrs
and-
and
so
we
could
say
that
you
know,
but
but
that's
it,
we
cannot
require
developers
and-
and
that's
really,
I
think,
that's
really
what
what
everyone's
struggling
with,
including
staff
yeah.
The
city
cannot
require
developers
to.
L
But
but
again
you
know
we
are
pointing
them
there.
I
think
I'm
not
sure
about
the
development
specifically,
but
I
I
believe-
and
and
this
is
where
the
city
has
to
be
very
careful
about
housing
developments
right
that
that
that
we
are
we
have.
We
are
compelled
by
state
law
to
be
very
methodical,
very,
very
careful
about
how
we
make
our
findings
for
housing
developments.
L
We
can't
base
it
on
what
they
pay
a
don't
pay
above
the
school
impact
fees.
We
did
share
the
funding
requirements,
the
with
the
two
with
the
two
projects
that
I
believe
dr
rudolph
did
discuss,
and
their
discussion
at
council
was
economic
feasibility
and
they've
done
and
gone
as
far
as
they
possibly
could
to
provide.
L
As
much
as
possible,
but
that
economic
feasibility
didn't
allow
them
to
go
further,
and
so
again
the
city
is
trying
to
bridge
this
gap
by
trying
to
connect
the
information
to
the
developer,
but
I
think
it's
it's
not
possible
for
us
to
require
things
and
the
very
point
about
creating
the
shared
understanding
was
to
was
to
help
developers
have
that
common
understanding,
so
they
didn't
have
to
have
a
project
by
project
discussion
with
the
school
district.
So
we
shared
the
information
and
said
this
is
the
gap.
This
is
the
range
that's
identified.
L
A
F
I
Okay,
I
I
don't
have
a
lot
to
to
comment
on.
It
seems
like
we're
looking
at
some
verbage
that
would
at
least
encourage
or
recommend
the
developers
to
you
know
to
have
a
conversation
with
the
school
districts
and
it
seems
like
there
have
been
some
suggestions.
So
what
I
was
hearing
from
staff
is,
they
may
need
some
time
to
to
look
at
what
was
asked
and
see
what
else
they
could
come
up
with.
So
just
a
question
to
staff
and
legal
as
well.
I
L
I
just
wanted
to
chime
in
nicole
feel
free
having
having
looked
at
this.
We
cannot
have
any
language
that
requires
developers
to
go
meet
with
school
districts.
The
school
strategy
does
not
does
not
have
that
language
either.
For
that
very
reason,
the
school
strategy
has
actions
that
the
city
can
take
on
its
own
and
and
the
only
reference
we
could
have.
There
is
where
we
say:
transfer
of
development
rights
consistent
with
the
school
strategy.
But
then
again
those
are
actions
the
city
can
take
there.
L
I
L
Could
I
see
you
shaking
your
head?
We
would
have
included
that
in
the
school
strategy
if
we
could,
because
that
really
was
the
policy
document
and
we
looked
at
every
which
way
and
it
was
very,
very
clear.
I've
I've
done
this
work
with
another
city
and
I'm
not
hearing
anything
different
than
I
heard
in
that
city
as
well.
So,
okay.
E
I
A
A
I
mean
the
the
city
recognizes
that
that
you
know
schools
are
part
of
any
precise
plan
district
and
this
the
city
encourages.
You
know,
developers
who
put
projects
forward
to
meet
with
the
city
and
with
the
school
board
to
to
understand
or
be
educated
about
the
needs
as
they
plan
their
development
proposals.
L
I
I
don't
believe
it
is.
We
could
always
follow
up.
We
we
went
about
as
far
as
we
could
in
the
city
council
policy,
and
if
you
would
like
to
read
that
it's
it's
there
and
available,
it
recognizes
a
collaborative
partnership,
but
the
only
partnership
we
can
talk
about
is
the
partnership
of
the
city
with
the
schools
and
not
with
the
developers
in
the
schools.
L
L
K
K
100
in
the
east
was
in
the
north
bay
shore,
precise
plan,
the
changes
3.4.5
to
city
wide
school
strategy
and
specifically
says
something
like
new
residential
development
or
facial
result,
additional
school
or
children
in
the
area.
As
a
result,
the
city
of
mountain
view
has
adopted
a
city-wide
school
strategy
which
is
available
wherever
okay.
K
Basically,
where
we're
representing
that
in
that
section
and
then
on
page
41,
which
is
page
13
of
the
stack
report.
The
same
kind
of
language
that
I
discussed
with
the
north
bay
shore,
precise
plan,
could
be
used
here
to
reference.
The
residential
growth
in
the
plan
area,
demanding
mountain
view,
school
district,
blah
blah
blah.
K
Basically,
action
is
the
city
would
follow
through
and
its
actions
associated
with
the
city-wide
school
policy
and
whichever
responsible
party
is
associated
with
that.
That
way,
the
references
that
you've
got
in
here
that
actually
say
if
you're
going
to
want,
you
know
bonus
far
whatever
get
removed.
K
The
specific
dollars
are
tight
removed
from
it,
but
it
ties
these
two
precise
plans
to
the
citywide
school
strategy.
Simply
by
saying
that
the
city
of
mountain
view's
approach
to
this
is
the
city-wide
school
strategy,
and
it
essentially
codifies
that
document
to
make
sure
that
it's
there,
it
ties
in
the
thing.
You've
talked
about
already
the
cooperation
with
it
through
that
other
document,
not
by
saying
it's
in
the
precise
plan
and
the
developers
have
to
do
it,
but
that's
what
I
would
like
to
see.
K
A
Okay,
let
me
ask
you
a
question
vice
chair
cranston,
so
you
know,
I
would
like
you
to
respond
to
ms
srivastava's
comment
that
the
city-wide
school
strategy
has
nothing
to
do
with
what
the
developer
actions
are
and,
if
that's
the
case
and
therefore
cannot
motivate
the
developer
to
do
anything
where,
where
do
you
believe
the
value
is
in
referencing
it
in?
In
the
precise
plan
documents.
K
I
feel
really
positive
about
the
current
city
council
and
what
they
do
when
working
with
the
school
district.
That's
not
to
say
that,
five
years
from
now,
we
don't
have
a
city
council
that
says
by
school
district
you're
on
your
own,
and
so
I
would
like
to
see
something
here
that
basically
says
there
is
a
city-wide
school
strategy.
It
has
to
exist
and
have
to
continue
to
exist
because
it's
tied
into
our
land
use
documents.
A
Okay,
so
I
mean
it
would
it
would
be
useful.
I
think
what
I'm
hearing
you
say
to
have
a
reference
to
a
city-wide
school
strategy,
not
necessarily
as
a
means
of
arm-twisting,
a
developer.
You
know
to
make
non-voluntary
contributions,
but
to
give
recognition
within
the
precise
plan
documents
that
a
city-wide
school
strategy,
like
the
one
that
we
have
is
an
important
part
in
the
planning
process
and
should
be
integral
to
it.
F
Well,
maybe
one
question
for
viceroy
cranston
and
I
can
share
a
couple
of
comments.
I
I
didn't
catch
all
of
the
references
that
you
were
going
through,
but
I
thought
I
heard
you
say
that
the
inclusion
of
language
would
only
be
in
reference
to
the
tdr
strategy
and
the
tdr
and
and
the
strategy
did.
I
miss
that.
K
No,
it
just
references,
the
city,
white
school
strategy,
the
tdr
element
is,
is
brought
in
through
the
city-wide
school
strategy
itself.
It's
not.
We
don't
have
to
call
that
out
separately.
It
points
to
the
city-wide
school
strategy
and
that's
where
the
tdr
options
that
already
and
eric
have
talked
about
come
into
play.
It's
not
forced
to
be
part
of
it.
It's
essentially
included
through
reference.
F
Okay
and-
and
then
maybe
I
guess
before
I
ask
some
other
questions,
so
maybe
eric
and
artsy
can
you
comment?
Does
that
I
mean
I
when
I
originally
read
the
staff
report.
I
saw
this
very
similar
to
the
item
before
us
and
about
80
years.
It
was
about
bringing
the
precise
plans
into
compliance
so
that
they
are
legally
defensible
and
and
wouldn't
be
challenged.
It's
what
vice
chair
cranston
is
suggesting.
Would
that
still
allow
for
that
separation
that
bright
line
that
rt
was
talking
about?
F
L
F
Yeah
I
mean
these
are
the
issues
in
the
academic
literature.
We
call
it
juris
fictional
fracture,
so
in
california
there
are
3
400,
independent
special
districts
and
getting
these
agencies
to
cooperate
is
not
easy,
and
so
I
certainly
share
my
fellow
commissioners
intent
to
to
somehow
signal
that
to
developers
I
I
am
leaning
more
toward
the
staff
recommendation
at
present,
where,
where
we
remove
the
language
and
get
the
commission
were
to
signal
the
direction
that
schools
are
an
important
stakeholder.
F
This
project
will
generate-
and
I
think
that's
something-
that's
really
tangible
at
the
epc
and
as
an
advisory
body,
can
ask
developers
and
push
and
make
sure
that
the
developer
is
aware
that
that
the
commission
feels
that
the
school
district
is
an
important
strategy
or
an
important
stakeholder.
Even
if
we
can't
spell
it
out
directly
in
a
precise
plan.
F
K
Clarified
response
to
artie's
question
the
two
section:
the
the
two
documents,
both
the
north
face
of
faith
short,
precise
plan
and
the
east
western
precise
plan
have
generous
sections
on
school
policy.
They
have
different
names
in
the
case
of
the
swiss
of
north
bay
shore,
it
looks
like
it's
section
3.4.5
and
the
east
listement
precise
plan.
K
It
doesn't
have
a
number.
It
just
happens
to
be
in
page
41..
Those
were
the
two
sections
that
I
was
looking
at
simply
be
hey.
We
have
a
policy,
we
have
we're
aware
of
the
schools
and
we
have
a
policy,
and
here
it
is
both.
Documents
also
have
a
corresponding
definition
section,
and
I
was
proposing
that
the
with
those
sections
where
it
referred
to
the
previous
school
strategy
that
basically
those
definition
sections
be
changed
to
refer
to
the
city,
light
school
city
of
light
school
strategy.
K
I
was.
I
was
concerned
that
some
of
the
language,
my
question
earlier
on
the
language
that
the
that
the
school
boards
proposed
on
that
we
have
to
the
using
the
we've
considered
and
have
the
developer
report,
how
they've
gone
against
that
strategy
might
cross
that
line.
That
commissioner
hamer
is
talking
about
that.
If
we're
not
supposed
to
be
requiring
those
things,
if
they
tell
us,
hey
we're
being
good
little
boys
and
doing
this,
and
then
we
hear
that
they're
not
that
and
we
decide.
K
Oh
bad
developer,
we're
not
going
to
let
you
do
this
and
we
then
cross
the
line
into
what
we're
not
supposed
to
be
crossing
line
into.
So
that's
why
I'm
I'm
back
originally.
I
was
intrigued
by
that
language,
but
from
what
I've
heard
from
marty
and
eric
that
seems
like
that
might
be,
that
might
be
crossing
a
line.
So
I'm
at
least
looking
for
a
reference
and
it's
those
two
sections.
Thanks.
L
L
A
Yeah
so
I'll
interject,
something
here
I
mean
I
want
to
support
what
vice
chair
cranston
is
saying
about.
You
know
not
completely
wiping
clean
from
the
documents
any
references
to
this
school.
I
do
believe,
as
he
says
that
there's
some
value
in
at
least
you
know
mentioning
the
school
strategy
in
the
documents,
even
if
it
only
refers
to
what
the
city's
action
is
and
what
the
intent
of
of
the
city
is
to
support
the
schools
you
know
having
having
the
schools
mentioned
there
at
least
puts
it.
A
You
know
in
front
of
people
to
show
that
schools
matter
to
the
city.
It's
it's
kind
of
a
clue
that
you
know
I
mean
like
here
are
our
values,
just
as
when
we
put
together,
like
our
land,
use
general
plan
guidelines.
These
are
things
that
that
matter
to
us,
and
you
know
we,
then
you
know
you
know
we
often
reference
them,
but
I
think
that
you
know
just
just
having
the
language
in
there
does
have
some
value.
A
So
I
think
that
it
would
be
worthwhile
that
before
this
goes
to
council
that
you
know
they
would
give
it
some
thought
and
more
thought
than
they've
had
a
chance
to
yet
and
also
the
fact
that,
because
the
school's
legal
team
looked
at
this,
you
know
I
think
there
could
be
some
value
of
legal
teams.
You
know
at
least
meeting
and
trying
to
understand
you
know
I
mean
whether
there
can
be
a
meeting
of
the
minds
about.
You
know
some
kind
of
joint,
legally
defensible
statement.
A
So
those
are
just
my
thoughts,
so
you
know
I
guess
I
don't
want
to
go
directly
with
purely
the
staff
recommendation,
but
I
would
like
us
to
add
some
things
along
that
line.
In
order
to
you
know,
because
I
had
a
couple
people
talk
to
me
today
and
I
have
reason
to
believe
that
that
you
know
there's
concern
among
people
who
live
in
my
neighborhood
and
people
in
you
know
the
leadership
of
our
city,
that
you
know
they
would
like
to
respond
to
what
the
school
district
has
said.
I
You
know
in
adjacent
cities,
and
so
I
think
it's
important
that
we
just
find
to
find
a
way
to
bring
that
out
in
the
document
and
hopefully
satisfy
all
the
legal
concerns,
and
that
sort
of
thing
without
directly
saying
if
a
project
or
a
developer
doesn't
consider
that
that
would
impact
a
project
that
they're
proposing
to
the
city.
So
if
there's
some
way,
we
can
get
verbiage
that
would
be
acceptable
to
just
reference
that.
I
think
that
in
and
of
itself
to
me
says
that's
important
to
us.
I
I
mean
it.
You
know
it
kind
of
seems
to
me
a
similar
conversation.
We
had
about
the
the
housing
work
balance
type
of
thing.
This
is
like
a
housing
school
balance
to
me.
So
if
you're
going
to
build
housing
and
bring
in
more
students,
then
we
need
to
think
about
that.
So
if
we
have
that
school
strategy
and
the
developers
are
aware,
I
think
the
message
will
be
sent
without
we
having
to
legally
put
it
into
land
use.
A
A
That
is
legally
defensible
right,
I
mean
you
know,
can
I
mean
can,
and
I
just
have
people
put
their
hands
up
just
so
I
would
so
we
can
see.
Is
that?
Okay,
because
it's
just
a
straw,
vote
we're
trying
to
get
okay,
I
see
three
hands.
Oh,
I
see
people
putting
little
literal
hands
up
too.
So,
let's
see
one
two,
three,
four,
five,
six!
Okay,
so
I
see
all
of
the
commissioners
supporting
that
idea,
including
myself
yep
my
hand
up
there.
A
Okay,
so
right
now,
I'm
I'm
thinking
that
we're
leaning
toward
the
staff
recommendation,
plus
a
request
to
put
some
language,
retain
some
language
about
the
school
strategy
and
the
precise
planned
documents.
And
my
question
is:
are
we
looking
for
something
beyond
that
and
if
there
is,
I
want
to
hear
something
explicit.
A
H
I've
been
I'm
fairly
new
to
this
whole
process,
but
I've
been
looking
at
the
language
and
it
does
say,
adopt
a
resolution
recommending
that
the
city
council
amend
the
the
precise
plans,
but
it
doesn't
specify
how
they're
going
to
amend
the
precise
plans.
So
I
don't
do
we
need
to
add
in,
like
you
know,
with
with
reference
to
the
city-wide
school
strategy
as
legally
appropriate.
H
I
I
L
G
And
just
and
just
to
add
in
to
to
what
are
you
thinking,
I
was
going
to
say
something
along
similar
lines,
but
yes,
so
then
it
could
be
just
kind
of
further
direction
to
staff
to
kind
of
look
into
that
further
and
as
rt
said,
you
know
generally
reference
if
it
can
be
if
it
can
be
done
or
appropriate
to
do
so
in
a
legally
defensible
manner
and
just
provide
that
additional
recommendation
and
direction.
Basically
is
one
way
of
doing
that.
Okay,.
H
So
I
made
so
I
put
adopt
a
resolution
recommending
that
the
city
council
amend
the
bay
shore
and
eastwood
precise
plans
with
reference
to
the
city-wide
school
strategy
as
appropriate
to
do
so
in
a
legally
defensible
manner,
consistent
with
the
city-wide
school
strategy
to
be
read
in
title.
Only
further
reading
waived
does
that
make
sense
so.
G
G
So
if
you're
trying
to
incorporate
kind
of
what
I
was
just
setting
forth
with
the
direction
of
and
kind
of
that
that
further
for
staff
to
review
and
incorporate
you
know
as
legally
defensible
verbiage
to
give
reference
to
the
city-wide
school
strategy,
then
then
I
would
suggest
you
know
you
could
do
the
staff's
recommendation
as
written
and
then
just
in
addition
provide
that
further.
Okay,
okay.
G
H
I
move
that
the
environmental
planning
commission
adopt
a
resolution
recommending
that
the
city
council
amend
the
p-39
north
bay
shore
and
p-41
east
wisman
precise
plans
consistent
with
the
city-wide
school
strategy
to
be
read
in
title.
Only
further
reading
waived
exhibit
1
to
the
staff
report
with
additional
direction
to
reference.
A
G
And
I'm
sorry
just
before
the
roll
call,
I'm
sorry
just
to
clarify,
because
I
think
what
was
read
was
just
slightly
different.
So
I
just
want
to
clarify
so
it's
direction
for
to
reference
the
city-wide
school
strategy
in
a
legally
defensible
manner,
if
appropriate,
to
do
so
or
is
that
the
full
recommendation
just
to
the
direction
from
the
epc
would
be
to
do
so.
I
F
O
A
Okay,
so
yep,
so
that
passes
7-0
all
right.
So
thank
you
all
I'll
close
item
5.2
and
we
can
move
on
to
item
six
commission
and
also
thank
you
to
the
representatives
from
the
school
districts
that
have
come
to
speak
to
us
tonight.
We
appreciate
your
input
on
these
important
joint
issues,
all
right
commissions,
staff,
announcements,
updates
requests
and
committee
reports.
B
Thank
you,
chair
cox,
so
we
actually
don't
have
the
next
regularly
scheduled
meeting
is
october
7th
and
we
actually
don't
have
anything
gearing
up
to
be
heard
on
that
date.
I
will
confirm
with
a
formal
cancellation
if
it
happens
in
the
next
week,
or
so
we
do
have
several
items
that
are
looking
like
they're
moving
forward.
You
know
in
in
the
subsequent
meetings
october,
21st
and
november,
including
several
projects
that
I've
already
listed
office
project
on
fairchild
housing
project
on
fayette.
B
The
other
announcement
that
I
wanted
to
highlight
was
that
we
actually
missed
during
this
meeting
the
awards
ceremony
for
the
california
american
planning
association,
california,
chapter
american
planning,
association
and
east
was
one
precise
plan
was
awarded
one
of
the
wow,
the
best
comprehensive
plan
for
a
small
jurisdiction.
So
congratulations.
I
L
A
I
don't
see
any
so
I
guess
I
have
some
so
the
first
one
was.
I
want
to
thank
commissioner,
hey
meyer
and
also
those
members
of
the
city
council
who
attended
our
mountain
view,
historical
association
meeting
on
on
the
history
of
castro
street
and
and
what
caster
street
is
going
through
now,
so
so
kudos
back
to
city
staff
also
for
helping
support
us
in
that
by
bringing
their
people
to
help.
Let
us
understand
more
about
what's
happening
with
the
restaurants
and
retails
in
in
downtown
right
now.
A
I
wanted
to
remind
you
that,
on
the
the
two
weeks
from
today,
the
old
mountain
view,
neighborhood
association,
is
sponsoring
a
city
council,
candidate
forum
on
zoom,
and
so
you
know,
look
around
you'll
find
the
detailed
information
on
how
to
log
in.
If
it's
not
that
easy
to
find,
you
can
write
to
me
and
I
will
send
it
to
you
and
let's
see
what
else.
K
This
is
the
question
for
eric
or
someone
priming.
I
understand
that
that
council
is
looking
expanding
the
state
parking
program
and
I
just
would
be
interested
in
if,
in
a
future
meeting
staff
could
come
back
and
say
kind
of
what
that
is,
since
that
original
program
had
come
to
us
to
take
a
look
at
it,
be
interested
in
kind
of
an
update
on
how
it's
progressing
thanks.