►
From YouTube: AUG 27, 2021 | City Council Study Session - Parking and Transportation Demand Management
Description
City of San José, California
City Council Study Session - Parking and Transportation Demand Management .
August 27, 2021
Pre-meeting citizen input on Agenda via eComment at https://sanjose.granicusideas.com/meetings.
This public meeting will be held at San José City Hall and also accessible via Zoom Webinar. For information on public participation via Zoom, please refer to the linked meeting agenda below.
Agenda https://sanjose.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=872334&GUID=72778F88-A985-4572-B9FE-47BC73778B3F
A
A
A
A
Thank
you,
mayor
city,
council,
members
of
the
public,
I'm
rosalyn
huey,
deputy
city
manager,
and
we
are
pleased
to
be
with
you
this
morning
to
share
our
work
on
reforming
the
city's
parking
and
transportation
demand
management
zoning
code.
Today's
study
session
aims
to
provide
contacts,
research
and
community
viewpoints.
A
B
A
I
especially
want
to
acknowledge
the
leadership
of
john
risto
jessica,
zinke,
ramses
madhu,
emily
breslin
chris
burton
michael
brio,
jarrett,
hart
and
ed
schreiner.
You
will
hear
from
many
of
these
staff
in
today's
presentation
and
additionally,
I
want
to
thank
our
partners
involved
in
this
effort,
including
the
greenbelt
alliance,
spur
bloomberg
and
the
american
cities,
climate
change,
the
urban
land
institute
and
resolution.
A
So
next
slide
we're
going
to
share
the
agenda
for
this
morning,
we'll
start
off
with
an
introduction
and
providing
some
contacts.
Then
we'll
provide
an
update
on
the
policy
work,
we'll
share
about
the
programmatic
details,
as
well
as
the
community
engagement
process
and
the
feedback
that
we've
received
so
far
and
then,
after
the
staff.
Recent,
the
presentation
staff
will
answer
any
clarifying
questions
of
the
mayor
and
council.
A
F
Thank
you,
rosalind
ramses,
madhu,
division
manager,
planning
policy
and
sustainability
for
the
department
of
transportation
good
morning,
council
and
mayor
really
excited
to
be
presenting
this
today,
so
I
get
to
introduce
the
topic
here
kind
of
get
us
on
track.
We're
really
talking
about
two
sides
of
the
same
coin.
Here,
starting
with
right
sizing,
parking
we'll
be
talking
about
why
we
should
be
doing
this
and
what
the
actual
action
we're
looking
at
is
we're
going
to
be
talking
about
reducing
or
taking
away
sorry
minimum
parking
requirements.
F
We
are
not
talking
about
maximum
parking
or
any
other
kinds
of
restrictions
on
parking.
What
we're
doing
is
opening
up
the
possibility
for
the
city
to
have
engaging
conversations
with
developers
in
the
community
about
the
right
size
of
market.
The
other
part
of
the
discussion
today
will
be
focused
on
increasing
opportunities
for
sustainable
transportation
choices.
F
This
is
going
to
be
done
through
transportation
demand
management
requirements,
at
least
that's
the
proposal,
and
these
requirements
would
add
elements
to
developments
that
would
induce
things
like
more
biking,
more
walking,
more
transit
travel
all
right.
So,
what's
motivating
this
work
in
the
world,
we
have
seen
that
development
costs
are
very
high,
especially
in
our
area.
We
all
know
we're
struggling
with
this
and
what
we
have
heard
from
the
development
community.
F
We
also
know
that
this
is
specifically
the
case
for
housing,
development
and
also,
we
know
that
parking
is
one
of
the
major
elements
that
drive
people
to
drive
that
motivate
people
to
drive
and
as
we
can,
if
we
can
right-size
parking,
we
can
start
really
talking
about
reducing
the
motivation
to
drive
now
within
the
city
code.
This
has
this
is
not
a
new
idea,
all
the
way
back
in
our
in
our
general
plan.
F
10
years
ago
now
we
adopted
in
their
policies
that
speak
to
both
of
these
elements
to
addressing
parking
minimums,
as
well
as
adding
more
gdm
or
transportation
demand
management
to
the
development
review
policy
stack
climate,
smart,
san
jose
policies
also
looked
at
the
same
kinds
of
policies
and
we
even
kind
of
tripled
down
on
the
effort.
Now
when
we
adopted
the
race
to
zero
pledge
all
right,
so
this
piece
of
work
fits
into
a
larger
body
of
work.
F
What's
going
on
this
effort
is
one
small
piece
of
a
much
larger
set
of
actions
that
the
city
should
be
looking
at
to
try
to
figure
out
if
we
can
actually
meet
the
general
plans
goals
right-
and
this
includes
here,
the
kind
of
three-legged
stool
of
land
use
and
design
right,
making
sure
that
we're
getting
the
urban
villages
built
that
we're
getting
density
throughout
the
city
that
we're
getting
the
kind
of
landforms
that
enable
a
greener,
more
equitable
style
of
life.
The
next
part
is
infrastructure
investment.
F
All
right,
we
got
bart
coming,
we
got
eastridge
light
rail.
We
need
to
do
a
lot
more
right.
We
need
a
lot
more
transportation
investment
to
enable
again
folks
to
be
able
to
travel
in
this
way,
and
we
need
to
create
here
development
and
transportation
demand
management
policies
to
enable
this
as
well.
F
Now
we're
going
to
touch
on
a
couple
things
that
we're
not
going
to
dive
in
today.
They
are
not
the
topic
for
today,
but
want
to
make
sure
they're
on
your
radar,
and
so
you
know
we're
also
considering
them.
These
are
about
public
parking
policies
versus
what
we're
talking
about
today,
which
is
about
private
parking
right.
So
we
are
looking
at
in
a
parallel
effort,
an
update
to
the
residential
permit
program,
modernizing
that
looking
at
how
we
can
better
align
it
with
the
general
pam.
F
Sorry,
the
general
plans
policies
and
we're
also
looking
at
downtown
shared
parking
agreements
that
we
want
to
use
this
public
good
for
the
best
effect
to
help
us
get
through
this
period.
Right
we're
going
through
this.
Some
people
are
calling
it
the
juvenile
period
or
the
adolescent
period
of
going
from
a
car
focused
city
to
one
that
enables
other
styles
of
life
and
transportation
and
we're
trying
to
figure
out
how
do
we?
How
do
we
go
from
here
to
there?
E
All
right,
thank
you.
Ramses
good
morning,
mayor
and
council
jared
hart
division
manager
for
citywide
planning
and
pvc-e
all
right.
So
with
the
with
the
context
in
mind
that
rams
displayed
out
two
ordinance
changes
are
under
consideration
as
part
of
this
work.
The
first
is
to
eliminate
minimum
parking
requirements.
City-Wide
zoning
code,
except
for
areas
with
existing
contractual
agreements
like
endeared
on
the
second
change,
is
to
require
that
new
development
invest
in
transportation,
demand
management
measures
in
their
project.
E
So,
san
jose,
we
were
not
alone
in
this
policy
shift,
including
some
of
our
neighboring
cities
being
out
in
front
of
us.
For
instance,
over
the
last
five
years,
oakland
seattle
and
san,
diego
have
all
eliminated
parking
minimums
near
transit,
buffalo
eliminated
parking,
minimums,
city-wide
and
san
francisco
and
st
paul.
E
G
Thank
you
jared
good
morning,
mayor
and
city
council
members,
I'm
ed
shriner,
a
supervising
planner
for
the
climate,
smart
team
in
citywide
planning
and
I'm
just
gonna
kind
of
do
a
quick
run
through
of
the
rationale
for
the
proposed
ordinance
change,
looking
at
eliminating
minimum
parking
requirements,
citywide
and
again
to
emphasize
that
the
elimination
of
minimum
park
requirements
doesn't
mean
the
elimination
of
men
of
parking
it
all
together.
It
just
means
the
removal
of
an
artificial
minimum.
G
G
In
most
cases,
the
existing
minimum
parking
requirements
essentially
require
more
area
to
be
dedicated
for
the
parking
itself
than
the
actual
main
use
of
the
land.
Restaurants
have
one
of
the
highest
parking
requirements
in
the
city.
So,
as
you
can
see
here,
just
40
square
feet
of
dining
area
actually
requires
330
square
feet
of
parking
area.
G
G
G
There's
a
number
of
other
costs
to
minimum
parking
requirements,
substantial
environmental
costs
related
to
air
quality,
water
quality
and
heat
island
effects
from
massive
expansive
asphalt.
Parking
lots,
there's,
obviously,
also
the
inefficiency
of
land
use,
as
well
as
just
general
quality
of
life
issues.
As
far
as
urban
aesthetics
and
neighborhood
walkability.
G
So
a
recent
study
done
by
a
santa
clara
university
professor,
took
a
case
study
look
at
seattle
which,
as
we
mentioned,
has
has
eliminated
parking
minimums
in
the
past
few
years
and
research
that
was
shown
from
the
study
showed
that,
with
the
elimination
of
minimum
parking
requirements,
the
the
price
savings
was
passed
on
to
tenants
and
buyers.
So
it
did,
it
did
actually
lower
prices
for
the
end
users.
G
G
G
One
major
benefit
of
this
is
for
small
businesses,
especially
restaurants,
can
often
will
be
able
to
move
into
older
commercial
buildings
that
may
not
meet
our
current
parking
requirements.
You
know
I've
been
with
the
city
for
almost
two
decades
now,
and
I've
certainly
run
into
this
a
number
of
times
where
I
you
know
perspective.
Business
operator
has
been
looking
to
move
into
a
site,
and
I've
had
to
tell
them,
unfortunately,
because
the
site
doesn't
have
enough
parking.
G
You
wouldn't
be
able
to
operate
your
your
specific
use
on
this
site,
and
that's
not
you
know,
that's
not
a
situation
we
want
to
be
in.
We
want
to
give
every
opportunity
we
can
to
these
business
operators
to
to
run
their
businesses
and
not
be
concerned
about
whether
there's
enough
parking
or
not
on
site,
there's
also
the
ability
to
convert
parking
into
outdoor
dining
and
landscaped
areas
on
a
more
permanent
basis.
H
Good
morning,
mayor
and
city
councilors,
my
name
is
emily.
Breslin
with
the
city
department
of
transportation
I'll
be
walking
through
the
second
component
of
the
city's
ordinance
update,
which
proposes
changes
to
our
transportation
demand
management
requirements
for
new
developments
citywide
and
in
the
last
few
slides
I'll
also
be
talking
about
our
team's
engagement
process,
including
key
stakeholder
questions
and
feedback.
H
H
H
Tdm
also
encompasses
program-based
services
and
amenities,
including
bicycle
parking
in
the
basements
of
buildings.
Car
share
services
like
zipcar,
which
we
have
here
in
san
jose,
as
well
as
public
bike
share
systems
such
as
lyft,
which
you
all
are
familiar
with,
each
of
which
has
been
studied
and
proven
again
to
take
cars
off
the
road.
H
This
strategy
could
be
especially
impactful
for
the
nearly
10
percent
of
households
in
san
jose
that
actually
do
not
own
a
car
or
for
those,
perhaps
households
that
are
considering
opting
out
of
owning
a
second
or
third
car
on
the
right-hand
side
is
the
strategy
of
crediting
or
cashing
out
individuals
who
don't
use
their
parking
space
at
work?
The
idea
here
being
to
incentivize
commuters,
to
take
public
transit
to
walk
by
or
take
other
alternatives
to
driving
alone.
H
So
requiring
new
development
to
incorporate
sustainable
travel
options
into
their
designs
is
critically
important
when
we
consider
the
significant
amount
of
growth
that's
expected
to
occur
in
san
jose
over
the
next
several
decades,
and
in
this
respect,
the
aim
of
the
tdm
requirements
is
to
make
it
again
easy
for
residents,
employees
and
visitors
traveling
to
and
from
new
development
to
do
so
sustainably
and
to
minimize
the
number
of
new
car
trips.
Then
in
san
jose.
H
So
the
city's
ordinance,
as
jared
mentioned
already,
includes
transportation,
demand
management
and
so
I'll
speak
to
how
the
proposed
ordinance
changes
are
different
from
the
city.
The
city's
existing
framework.
The
first
has
to
do
with
the
types
of
development
subjects.
The
requirement
currently
tdm
requirements
are
proposed
only
in
instances
where
development
requests
a
reduction
in
parking
from
the
existing
minimum.
H
Under
the
new
framework,
all
new
non-residential
and
residential
development
would
be
required
to
fulfill
some
level
of
tdm.
The
field
of
tdm
is
rapidly
evolving.
We've
seen
things
like
ride.
Hailing
uber,
lyft
bike
share
systems
that
didn't
exist
10
years
ago,
and
these
changes
are
captured
in
a
significantly
expanded
list
of
tdm
strategies.
H
So,
to
reiterate,
all
projects
are
subject
to
a
baseline,
tdm
point
target.
An
additional
tdm
would
be
required
if
the
parking
proposed
at
the
development
exceeds
a
threshold
set
by
the
city
and
to
note
the
established
threshold
varies
slightly
according
to
a
project
is
located
in
downtown
within
a
half
mile
of
high
quality,
transit
or
areas
beyond
that,
with
the
recognition
that
parking
actually
may
be
appropriate
in
the
cities
where
it
may
not
be
as
appropriate.
You
know
for
downtown
locations
or
high
quality
transit
areas.
H
In
some
cases,
subsidized
transit
passes
may
be
targeted,
for
example,
for
residential
developments
close
to
transit,
while
another
area
may
determine
that
a
car
share
program
is
a
better
fit
based
on
community
input.
Whatever
is
ultimately
selected,
the
idea
is
to
give
both
flexibility
and
choice,
to
developers
to
to
incorporate
a
combination
of
parking
and
tdm
elements
best
suited
to
their
particular
development
project.
H
In
terms
of
the
proposed
monitoring
and
compliance
framework,
there
are
two
levels:
the
first
applying
to
small
and
medium-sized
developments,
which
be
would
be
required
to
submit
compliance
documents,
verifying
that
they
have
carried
out.
The
tdm
measures
outlined
in
their
approved
tdm
plan
for
larger
developments.
The
require
would
be
the
same,
but
also
include
tdm
monitoring
requirements
showing
the
rate
of
vehicles
coming
in
and
out
of
the
development
over
the
last
year,
and
the
main
idea
here
is
that
the
city
is
interested
in
monitoring
the
effects
of
tdm.
H
H
Frequent
questions
that
were
raised
by
our
stakeholders
were
how
these
changes
affect
affordable
housing,
small
businesses
and
existing
neighborhoods.
How
equity
has
been
considered
as
part
of
the
engagement
process
and
the
cost
implications
for
these
types
of
changes,
including
tdm
for
the
development
community?
So
in
the
next
slide,
we'll
address
these
questions.
H
So
one
of
the
key
benefits,
as
was
mentioned
previously,
is
that
it
takes
away
one
of
the
most
significant
factors
that
increases
the
cost
of
housing,
both
in
terms
of
constructing
it,
as
well
as
renting
and
owning
it.
Ultimately,
the
proposal
would
benefit
small
businesses
and
that
it
would
provide
greater
flexibility
when
developing
on
smaller
lots
and
also
in
terms
of
adaptive
reuse
projects
in
terms
of
the
possible
effects
on
existing
neighborhoods.
H
H
Equity
has
been
considered
through
the
engagement
with
underserved
communities,
many
of
which
are
also
experiencing
significant
growth.
Today,
as
it
stands,
we
partnered
with
regulation
to
conduct,
as
I
mentioned,
a
series
of
focus
groups
and
workshops
to
understand,
related
community
issues
and
to
work
together.
Input
and
recommendations
from
residents
in
these
neighborhoods
and
then
lastly,
with
our
technical
partners,
nelson
nygard,
we
did
a
cost
analysis
that
found
that
tdm
measures
on
a
per
unit
basis
over
a
40
year
period
are
between
3
and
10
times
less
expensive
than
building
parking.
I
Secondly,
the
proposed
framework
also
supports
small
businesses
by
allowing
them
to
occupy
a
wider
breadth
of
commercial
properties
and
select
a
level
of
parking
that
meets
their
and
their
customers
needs.
Thirdly,
the
proposed
framework
furthers
our
climate,
smart
and
general
plan
goals
by
providing
sustainable
transportation
modes
and
helps
to
reduce
san
jose's
carbon
footprint.
I
I
What
we're
going
to
do
is
provide
the
council
an
opportunity
to
ask
clarifying
questions
on
the
materials
that
we
presented.
Thus
far,
the
council
will
have
a
much
more
extensive
opportunity
to
discuss
this
materials
with
staff
and
the
panelists
following
this
brief
20-minute
q,
a
period
so
I'll
turn
it
back
to
you,
mayor.
J
J
Michael
and
thank
you
and
everyone
who
has
spoken
and
been
engaged
in
this
on
the
staff
side,
failure
is
really
to
thank
our
partners,
the
national
resources,
defense,
council
and
bloomberg,
and
in
in
the
partnership
that
we've
had
with
them
and
really
want
to
thank
amanda.
You
can
elizabeth
stamp
and
elaine
almeido
for
their
assistance.
We
know
in
their
prodding.
This
is
something
that
I
know
we've
had
in
mind
for
many
many
years.
I
think
we
took
this
to
the
council
a
decade
ago.
J
K
I
know
we
don't
have
tons
of
time
for
questions,
so
I'm
just
going
to
ask
a
few
and
somehow
ask
offline,
but
I
think
during
the
course
of
the
briefing
and
I'm
not
sure
if
I
missed
it,
because
I
came
in
a
little
late,
but
I
think
it
was.
I
was
told
at
some
point
that
sometimes
lenders
that
are
financing
some
of
these
projects
require
parking,
minimums
and
certain.
You
know
they
view
parking
in
this
particular
way.
How
do
we
overcome
that?
K
I
Yeah,
so
it
is,
it
is
true,
and
I
think
the
seattle
report
showed
that
that-
and
I
know
this-
there's
a
fear
of
residents
about
this,
but
by
eliminating
parking
requirements
is
not
going
to
mean
that
parking
goes
away,
at
least
not
in
the
short
or
medium
term.
So
people
that
finance
projects,
calpers
pension
funds,
reits
other
sources
in
wall
street-
they
they
they're
risk
adverse
and
they
do
want
they
they're.
Not.
I
So
you
know
that's
that's
sort
of
the
reality
for
those
who
are
trying
to
get
projects
down
to
zero.
However,
what
we
are
seeing
is
we
are
seeing
projects
more
and
more
projects,
looking
at
providing
less
parking
and
asking
for
parking
reductions
through
our
existing
tdm
program.
So
the
level
of
parking
is
starting
to
drop
and
I
think,
as
more
as
it
continues
to
drop
we'll
start
to
see
more
comfort
in
the
marketplace
and
with
the
finance
capital
markets
to
actually
finance
less
parking.
So
it's
not
going
to
happen
overnight.
I
K
You,
the
other
question
I
had
is
related
to.
I
think
a
comment
was
made
as
it
relates
to
what's
being
done
in
seattle.
I
think
the
comment
was
something
or
you
know
I'm
trying
to
encapsulate
it.
It
was
the
the
cost
essentially
went
down.
It
was
the
cost.
Savings
were
passed
down
to
the
renters
or
the
tenants
or
whatever
it
may
be,
and
so
you
know
one
thing:
I've
learned
from
some
developers
that
I've
talked
to
in
the
past
is
when
we
implement
fees
and
we
say,
go
pay
park
fees,
go
pay,
construction,
conveyance
fees.
K
Whatever
you
know
a
developer
told
me
once
I
never
pay
any
of
those
fees,
those
just
go
down
to
the
folks
that
I'm
leasing
the
land
to
or
the
folks
that
are
renting
the
apartment.
So
what
I'm
curious
about
is
how
do
we
know
that
some
of
the
savings
aren't
necessarily
just
going
to
profit
and
are
trickling
down
to
the
people
that
are
going
to
benefit
from
some
of
these
things?
And
I'm
curious
as
to
how,
in
seattle,
how
that
was
measured
right
because
they're
taking
these
benefits
and
or
passing
down
the
cost
here?
G
I
But
you
know
I
think,
when,
when
developers
are
competing
for
tenants,
you
know
if
they
can
lower
their
price
a
bit
and
be
more
sort
of
if
they
have
lower
costs
and
have
the
ability
to
still
make
a
good
profit
and
lower
the
rents
that
they
charge
they'll
have
a
competitive
advantage
over
other
projects.
So
there
is
a
little.
There
is
a
little
bit
of
incentive
there
until
iran's.
I
don't
know
if
one
of
you
ed
or
emily
can
talk
to
the
seattle
study
and
how
they
measured.
That.
G
Yeah
I
mean,
and
that
was
sort
of
the.
I
think
the
assumption
that
was
going
into
that
study
was
like.
Okay,
there's
these
cost
savings,
but
are
are
they
actually
being
passed
down
the
line,
so
that
was
kind
of
what
was
specifically
being
looked
at
and
and
based
on?
I
mean,
admittedly
in
seattle-
it
hasn't
been
going
on
that
long,
but
for
the
you
know
dozen
plus
projects
that
they
had
seen
develop,
they
were
seeing
lower
rents
or
lower
housing
prices.
Okay,.
K
Okay-
and
I
asked
that
question
knowing
that
there's
obviously
benefit
to
getting
some
of
this
built
right.
That
is
inherently
a
benefit
to
the
community.
You
know,
especially
if
it's
affordable
housing.
So
okay,
thank
you
for
that.
The
the
other
question
I
had
is
who
determines
whether
a
td,
a
particular
tdm
strategy?
That's
on
the
menu,
is
a
legit
tdm
strategy
like
is
there
some
sort
of
organization?
Is
it
within
the
departments
I
mean?
How
do
we
determine
that.
H
H
Those
actually
come
out
of
capcoa
at
the
state
level
and
it's
a
state
academic
institution,
I'm
forgetting
the
what
the
acronym
stands
for,
but
it
does
come
from
that
and
actually
the
similarity
there
between
the
tdm
strategies
for
this
program
and
our
vmt
program,
our
tier
four
tdm
strategies
is
that
those
also
come
from
capcoa.
So
this
is,
you
know,
a
totally
credible
he's
showing
me
what
california,
air
pollution
control
officers,
association
and.
H
K
K
At
it,
we're
looking
at
sort
of
what's
yeah,
what's
what's
possible,
so
so
with
that,
though,
I
suspect
that
there's
some
organization
or
someone
that
determines
that
but
say
we
have
a
developer
that
wants
to
do
something
innovative.
Given
the
silicon
valley
right.
How
do
they
need
to
go
through
approval
through
that
organization
to
actually
get
something
on
the
menu
or.
H
Yeah,
so
we
have
the
first
strategy
that
we
have
is
a
user
defined
tdm
strategy
and
that's
just
in
recognition
one
that
the
developer
may
have
an
idea
that
isn't
captured
by
that
tdm
menu
of
options
and
again
just
to
reiterate
that
tdm
is
a
fast
evolving
field,
and
you
know
there
may
be
instances
where
our
tdm
menu
of
option
is
not
keeping
up
with
the
field.
So
it
just
creates
that
flexibility
to
open
it
up
to
developers
should
they
decide
they
have
something.
That's
not
there.
K
Okay
and
then
another
question,
I
think
it's
something
that
came
up
during
the
course
of
the
briefing,
but
the
the
thought
is
that
if
it's
we're
going
to
be
monitoring,
I
assume
there's
going
to
be
some
fees
associated
with
that,
and
so
what
I'm
curious
about
is
the
balance
of
those
fees.
Right,
saying
pay
this,
so
we
can
monitor
you
as
it
relates
to
the
cost
of
some
of
these
tdm
strategies
and
how
we
balance
that.
G
All
right
so
obviously
to
be
able
to
do.
You
know
ongoing
compliance.
It
does
require
city
staffing
so
that
city
staffing
needs
to
be
funded
somehow,
so
the
idea
is
that
there'd
be
an
annual
fee
for
projects
just
essentially
based
on
the
hourly
staffing
time
it
would
take
to
to
just
review
the
documents
required.
So
not
a
you
know,
not
a
not
a
really
high
fee,
but
it'd,
be
you
know,
roughly
somewhere
under
probably
a
thousand
fifteen
hundred
dollars,
something
like
that
on
an
annual
basis.
H
I'll
also
just
jump
off
of
what
ed
was
saying.
Is
you
know,
one
of
the
things
that
we
shared
in
that
last
slide
was
the
cost
savings,
that's
actually
associated
with
transportation,
demand
management
measures
versus
constructing
parking
and
again,
what
we
were
finding
is
that
tdm
measures
are
three
to
time
more
cost
efficient
or
less
expensive
than
building
a.
You
know
single
parking
space,
so
you
know
there's
saving
that
is
being
created
by
the
elimination
of
minimum
parking
requirements
as
well.
K
B
I
I
We
still
need
to
do
this
work,
to
figure
out
how
many
staff
and
we're
going
to
need
to
pre-fund
somebody
for
at
least
a
year
to
get
them
up
and
running
right,
so
yeah,
okay,
so
we're
that's
a
body
of
work
that
we're
still
digging
into
and
we
need
to
do
before.
We
come
back
to
council
right
next
year.
K
All
right,
thank
you,
and
the
very
last
question
I
have
is
you
know
I
can
think
of.
I
represent
a
part
of
the
city
where
there's
a
lot
of
strip
malls
and
such
a
lot
of
unused
parking,
and
so
what
I'm
curious
about
is,
if
just
to
help
me
better
understand
this
say:
there's
a
strip
mall
that
was
built,
the
1980s
1970s,
whatever
it
may
be,
there's
a
bunch
of
leftover
parking.
They
want
to
do
something
with
the
parking
spaces.
K
G
I
guess
essentially,
what
the
process
would
be
is
again
if,
if
you,
the
current
vmt
model,
has
for
kind
of
neighborhood
serving
retail,
which
I
think
is
kind
of
what
you're
talking
about
is
basically
the
threshold
for
that
is
actually
100
000
square
feet.
So
I'm
assuming
most
likely
what
what
we'd
be
talking
about.
New
construction
in
in
a
parking
lot
would
probably
be
less
than
that.
G
So
would
therefore
be
exempt
from
being
required
to
do
any
tdm,
but
they'd,
essentially
just
have
to
go
through
a
standard
development
permitting
process
like
a
site
development
permit,
for
example,
but
they
would
be
able
to
proceed
with
doing
that
and
not
have
to
worry
about.
You
know:
constructing
additional
parking
or
or
meeting
the
the
old
parking
requirement.
I
I
Basically,
you
can
take
advantage
now
of
the
no
parking
requirements
and
they
could
re
they
could
you
know
they
can
fill
it
up
with
restaurants
if
they
want
where
they
couldn't
do
before,
because
there's
not
enough
parking,
they
could
put
outdoor
seating
areas,
al
fresco
and
part
of
the
parking
or
or
not.
They
may
need
all
the
parking.
That's
really
up
for
the
the
owner
and
the
tenants
to
figure
that
out
now.
I
In
some
cases
it
will
just
refer
to
the
city's
code,
which
is
probably
most,
I
think
many
cases
I
don't
know
how
many
but
many
cases,
so
that's
good
for
them,
because
our
code
will
say
no
parking
required,
but
there
could
be
cases
where
there
were
specific
parking
requirements
established
in
the
pd
zoning
specific
to
that
property,
and
that
would
we're
still
trying
to
unwind
that.
But
at
this
point
it
may
it
looks
like
they
may
have
to
re-zone
their
property
to
take
advantage
of
this.
But
we're
still
working
through
that
correct
ed.
K
G
Yes,
I
guess,
as
part
of
the
ordinance
we're
putting
together,
we
have
crafted
a
pipeline
provision
which
would
essentially
allow
a
project.
That's
been
deemed
complete
to
proceed
through
the
entitlement
process.
You
know
under
our
existing
zoning
code
if
desired
or
obviously
they
would
also
be
able
to
to
opt
into
the
new
the
new,
updated
code.
But
I
guess
I
mean
most
most
development
projects.
K
Okay,
well,
thank
you
for
all
the
work.
I
appreciate
it
and
I
appreciate
during
the
course
of
the
briefing
I
shared
and
I'll
share
publicly,
that
some
of
this
stuff
gets
a
little
confusing
for
folks
like
myself,
that
maybe
aren't
as
as
in
tune
with
a
lot
of
transportation
related
policy
areas,
but
I
very
appreciate
very
much
appreciate
you
all
making
it
easier
to
understand.
So.
Thank
you.
K
A
A
Great
question
jessica,
zanck,
deputy
director
for
d.o.t,
and
I
definitely
have
enjoyed
spending
a
great
deal
of
time
with,
with
vice
mayor
jones,
in
west
san
jose
working
on
these
issues.
We
do
have
a
number
of
cases
and
ed
referenced
this.
I
don't
know
if
we
want
to
go
back
to
the
slide
about
in
these
new
multi-family
developments.
Specifically
when
they've
been
conforming
with
our
parking
requirements,
they
actually
end
up
with
parking
that
is
unused
statistically
and
proven
right
up
to
25
percent
of
parking
is
unused
during
that
peak
night
time
period.
A
So
we
know-
and
we
understand
the
concerns
that
neighborhoods
have
that
people.
You
know
if
it's
under
parked
on
site
that
people
will
spill
out.
The
evidence
in
san
jose
is,
you
know,
does
point
to
the
contrary,
which
is
that
you
know
we're
not
seeing
people
even
fill
up
that
parking
that
is
provided
in
the
multi-family
units.
A
J
D
You
yes
councilman!
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
councilmember
foley.
Thank
you
mayor.
I
first
I
want
to
say
I
I
agree
with
all
of
the
and
support
all
the
goals
that
we're
trying
to
achieve
that
were
listed
on
slide
40..
I
do
have
a
lot
of
questions
and
I'm
happy
to
take
some
of
them
offline,
as
I'm
cognizant
that
we
said
20
minutes
for
this
question
and
answer,
but
along
the
lines
of
what
the
vice
mayor
had
asked
about
some
results
of
what
we're
already
seeing
I
on
this
slide.
D
F
D
Thank
you
I
I
suspect,
that
closer
closer
in
to
toward
downtown
and
that
where
there
is
more
frequent
transit
and
more
options
that
that
those
are
the
more
the
areas
more
likely
to
be
under
parked.
I
also
know
that
that
the
deeper
the
level
of
affordability
in
housing,
the
less
parking
that
is
utilized
so
especially
in
the
30
and
below
ami.
We
I
have
a
couple
of
those
in
my
district
and
there's.
D
There
are
unused
parking
spaces
there,
but
that's
not
the
case
when
you
get
into
around
60
ami
and
people
are
traveling
distances
to
get
to
their
to
get
to
their
work.
So
I'm
a
little
bit
I
feel
like.
There
are
some
details
missing
here
that
I
need
to
know
before
before
we
can
make
an
informed
decision-
and
I
I
heard
sort
of
I
have
a
couple
of
other
questions,
but
the
the
other
one
on
on
kind
of
the
results
is
on
the
next
slide.
D
13
or
I
guess
that's
a
few
slides
back
slide.
13
there
was
the
the
cities
were
listed
out
and
the
timeline
was
listed
out
and
it
looks
like
oakland
eliminated
parking,
minimums
near
transit
and
they
were
one
of
the
first
ones
and
then
sunnyvale
in
2016
and
I'd
I'd
really
like
to
know
what
the
what
the
outcomes
were
in
those
areas,
seattle
eliminating
it
in
2018-
and
you
know
the
2020
year
being
basically
a
lost
year.
I
don't
think
we
have
a
lot
of
data
from
that
and
any
of
the
ones
going
forward.
D
So
if
there's
any
information
about
those
I'd
be
interested
in
getting
that,
and
that's
not
a
question-
that's
a
request
for
going
forward
and
if
I
can
get
a
briefing
about
those
offline
that
would
be
great
and
then
I
did
have
a
concern
about
how
much
time
the
tdm
plans
will
add
to
the
project
review
process.
We
already
have
very
long
project
review
processes
and
I
understand
the
stakeholders
are
going
to
be
up
next
and
they
will
maybe
talk
to
to
speak
to
that.
D
G
I
I
just
want
to
add
to
that
just
be
mindful
that
we
already
have
a
tdm
provisions
in
our
code
that
people
are
using
now,
so
you
know
in
that
sense,
it's
just
changing
how
we
do
it,
not
necessarily
a
new
thing
that
we're
doing
just
so
be
mindful
of
that.
The
other
thing
to
be
mindful
is
a
lot
of
the
at
least.
I
M
D
I
G
Yeah
sure
that's
currently
one
of
the
processes
that
we're
looking
at
is
trying
to
get
an
idea
of
working
with
some
of
our
partner
cities
that
have
have
done
this
done
this
kind
of
roughly
I
mean
how
much,
how
much
staff
time
does
this
generally
take
to
do
a
tdm
review
and
based
on
that
would
be.
You
know
an
hourly
fee
for
that
staff
time
would
be
included
as
part
of
the
development
fee.
Submittal.
E
If
I
could
offer
his
clarifications,
was
it
that
not
every
project
will
will
be
subject
to
a
tdm
plan,
so
it's
based
on
the
current
thresholds
in
the
city's
vmt
policy,
so
those
kind
of
smaller
projects
that
meet
the
you
know
kind
of
small
infill
development
definition.
Our
vmt
policy
would
not
be
subject
to
these
tdm
requirements.
D
A
To
be
very
clear,
I
believe
it
says
all
new
residential
development
according
to
policy
5-1
and
moving
forward.
We
should
be
much
more
clear
that
that
means
that
small
projects,
fewer
than
15
homes,
of
detached
product
types
and
fewer
than
25
of
multifamily,
as
well
as
some
for
local
serving
retail
as
we
were
discussing
earlier,
those
are
exempt
as
they
are
exempt
from
the
local
transportation
analysis
policy
in
5-1,
okay,.
D
H
H
Here
we
go
okay,
so,
as
just
was
mentioning,
we
have
those
projects
that
are
exempt,
so
those
would
be
below
level
one.
So
those
projects
not
having
to
fulfill
tdm
level
one
would
again
be
those
projects
that
are
required
to
submit
will
be
required
to
submit
a
tdm
plan,
as
well
as
compliance,
documentation
and
level.
Two
is
kind
of
our
larger
developments
on
you
know,
along
the
spectrum
having
to
submit
a
tdm
plan
compliance
documentation,
as
well
as
a
tdm
monitoring
plan
annually.
H
So
you
can
get
a
sense
of
kind
of
those
thresholds
from
the
slide
here
level.
One
and
two:
this
is
a.
We
should
note.
This
is
a
preliminary
list,
we're
still
kind
of
refining
this
and
there's
going
to
be
added
categories
to
it.
Obviously,
this
isn't
as
expansive
as
as
it
should
be,
but
as
an
appendix
slide,
we
thought
we
would
include
what
we
have
so
far.
D
H
H
D
C
Thank
you.
I
appreciate
the
presentation
and
the
discussion
about
tdms
and
modifying
our
parking
requirements,
but
I
want
to
really
piggyback
on
the
questions
from
vice
mayor
jones
and
council,
member
davis
regarding
the
affordable
housing
units
and
the
peak
and
off-peak
parking.
If
you
look
at
slide
16,
can
you
pull
that
up
for
me
again.
C
C
F
F
Thanks
great
question:
we
don't
have
it
on
hand.
We
will,
as
we
said,
disaggregate
the
data
we
looked
at
for
this
study
and
get
back
to
you
on
that
and
with
that
specific
focus
of
making
sure
we're
looking
at
different
types
of
neighborhoods
and
all
that
and-
and
I
will
remind
we're
not
proposing
for
projects
not
to
have
parking
right,
we're
proposing
for
us
to
be
able
to
right-size
parking
and
so
for
a
lot
of
the
questions
are
kind
of
under
the
concern
of
there's
not
going
to
be
enough
parking.
There.
F
C
Arbitrary
parking
minimums,
which
actually
I
brought
forward
in
2019
as
a
priority
item
and
wasn't
one
that
rose
to
the
top,
but
it
was
something
I've
been
considering
for
a
long
time
that
parking
is
a
barrier
to
development
and
that
parking
may
not
be
that
necessary.
Maybe
we're
asking
for
too
many
units
in
certain
areas.
The
reason
it's
a
concern
I
think
to.
I
can't
speak
for
the
my
colleagues
who've
raised
it
already,
but
it
is
the.
C
This
is
a
concern
of
the
residents
in
a
neighborhood
where
bigger
projects
are
being
proposed
that
have
perhaps
not
adequate
parking
or
the
the
it's.
The
consideration
that
there's
not
adequate
parking.
So
if
we
can
point
to
some
data
that
says
well
in
actuality,
the
use
of
our
parking
spaces
is
there's
25
vacancies
in
peak
hours.
I
think
that's
a
compelling
argument.
If
we
have
that
data
for
some
of
the
neighborhoods
and
not
just
the
the
transit-rich
areas,
so
I'll
move
off
on
from
that.
C
But
so
I
look
for
the
disaggregated
data
when
you
have
that
regarding.
I
want
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
annual
fee
and
the
annual
compliance
looks
like
we're,
proposing
that
we'll
be
charging
the
developer
or
property
owner.
Actually,
at
that
point,
probably
the
an
annual
fee
is
that
just
I
I've
heard
that
it's
a
processing
fee,
but
is
it
a
processing
fee?
Is
it
based
on
units
per
space
parking
space?
C
H
Yeah,
so
I
can
take
the
the
latter
part
of
your
question
so
in
terms
of,
let
me
just
pull
that
slide
up
here,
yeah.
So
in
terms
of
smaller
projects,
what
we're
looking
at
is
annual
compliance
documentation
and
I
have
a
red
asterisk
here
you
can
see
on
the
slide.
This
is
actually
applied
only
to
programmatic
tdm
measures.
So
what
we
mean
by
that
is,
if
a
development
decides
they'd
like
to
provide
subsidized
transit
passes.
What
we're
looking
for
in
the
compliance
documentation
is
verification
that
those
transit
passes
have
been
administered.
H
In
terms
of
annual
tdm
monitoring
for
larger
projects,
they
would
be
required
to
fulfill
the
compliance
documentation
element
for
any
programmatic
elements
they
have
in
their
tdm
plan,
but
also
to
be
monitoring
the
rate
of
vehicle
trips
in
and
out
of
their
development,
and
they
can
do
that
either
through
you
know
a
standard
vehicle
trip
count.
You
know
so
that's
measuring
the
number
of
vehicles
coming
through
a
parking
lot,
as
well
as
intercept
surveys,
so
actually
disseminating
surveys
to
the
occupants
and
they're
in
their
development.
H
The
reason
it
is
only
applied
to
programmatic
tdm
is,
if
there's
an
instance
where
development
has
decided
to
install,
let's
say
a
mid-block
crossing
or
perhaps
a
bike
share
system.
You
know
those
are
those
are
intact
and
once
they've
been
inspected
by
the
city,
you
know
there's
no
need
to
do
that
on
an
ongoing
basis.
H
The
last
thing
I'll
mention
is
in
terms
of
the
actual
monitoring
and
compliance.
If
they
have
demonstrated
they've
fulfilled
these
requirements
for
three
years.
That
kind
of
requirement
is,
you
know,
pretty
significantly
reduced
with
the
understanding.
You
know,
they've
they've,
conformed,
they've
demonstrated
performance,
so
you
know,
let's
not
have
an,
and
you
know
a
a
a
a
requirement.
I
So,
regarding
the
the
cost,
so
that
information
will
be
coming
back
to
you
when
we
bring
this
body
of
work
for
your
consideration
for
approval,
but
I
mean
again
we're
all
we
can
only
be
cost
recovery.
So
what
we
have
to
do
is
estimate
how
much
time
it
would
take
a
staff
person
to
review
the
materials
and
based
on
that
time
we
have
an
hourly
rate.
So
that's
how
we
would
calculate
what
the
actual
cost
would
be.
It's
not
it
can't
be
a
money
making
generator
it's
just
it's.
C
Well,
it
may
not
be
money
maker
on
us,
but
the
reason
I
raise
the
question
is
that
it's
a
cost
to
the
developer
or
the
future
property
owner
who's
managing
the
property
and
has
to
provide
the
compliance
documentation.
So
when
we're
talking
about
the
cost
of
development
and
reducing
the
parking
minimums
to
less
than
we
require
right
now,
that
is
a
cost
savings,
but
is
the
cost
savings
going
to
be
realized?
If
we
add
additional
staff
time
it,
it
will
to
some
degree.
C
F
High
quality
transit
area
is
a
state-defined
term
and
it
moves
around
a
little
bit,
but
basically
it
means
a
high
frequency
transit,
whether
it
be
bus
or
rail
and
so
within
a
rail
area.
I
believe
it's
about
a
half
a
mile
around
rail
stations
and
then
the
bus.
I
think
it's
every
15
minute
frequency
within
a
quarter
mile.
C
Okay,
thank
you
and
my
final
question
is,
or
for
the
moment
it's
the
my
final
question.
If
we
in
providing
this
opportunity
to
reduce
parking
requirements,
if
a
developer
chooses
to
make
a
parking,
that
is
then
has
an
opportunity
to
be
converted
to
other
uses.
Do
we,
or
would
we
be
considering
offering
some
sort
of
incentive
to
a
developer
to
do
that
so
that
they
could
convert
their
parking
re
spaces
to
maybe
commercial
uses
like
commercial
occupancy?
H
Yeah
thanks
for
that
question,
I
just
want
to
call
out
that
we,
when
we
worked
with
the
urban
land
institute
kind
of
at
the
beginning,
kickoff
of
this
project.
One
of
the
primary
recommendations
that
came
from
that
was
born
out
of
those
conversations
was
actually
the
ability
to
adapt
parking
spaces
as
you're
pointing
out
you
know,
there's
a
big
opportunity
there.
We
don't
want
to
be
restraining
kind
of
adaptation.
Reuse
as
time
goes
on,
as
the
parking
is
no
longer
needed.
H
So
one
of
the
things
we're
looking
at
and
have
been
talking
about
pretty
frequently
is
the
idea
that
we
could
be
crediting
developers
for
adaptive
reuse
as
part
of
the
tdm
program.
However,
the
caveat
there
is
these
tdm
measures
are
those
again
that
have
been
verified
by
capcoas
as
reducing
vmt.
Obviously,
adaptive
reuse
may
not
it's
not
something.
That's
been,
then.
That's
been
verified
in
that
way,
but
it
is
something
that
we
are
cognizant
of
and
are
looking
to
incorporate
into
the
process
and
recognition.
C
C
Are
and
my
question
piggybacks
on
councilmember
amanda's
question
regarding
sorry
about
that
regarding
the
lender
requirement
you
mentioned,
and
because
I
can't
see
who's
speaking,
I
think
it
was
michael
who
mentioned
it,
but
it
doesn't
the
you're
seeing
a
movement
in
landers
requiring
parking.
But
are
you
seeing
that
in
institutionals
and
institutional
lenders
and
I'd
like
some
data
to
show
that
you're
getting
that
information?
Not
just
anecdotally
but
you're,
really
seeing
lenders
who
are
saying
we
will
fund
these
projects
regard
even
with
the
reduction
in
parking.
I
Yeah
so
lenders
wanting
parking
is,
is
not
not
a
new
thing
right,
that's
been
how
its
development's
been
done
for
years.
I
don't
know
that
we
can
provide
or
have
documentation
the
lender
saying
it's
necessarily
okay,
but
it's
more
that
we're
seeing.
What
we
can
do
is
at
least
show
you,
projects
that
are
coming
in
and
to
what
degree
they're
I'm
requesting
or
getting
entitled
for
less
parking
than
is
required,
I.e,
they're
asking
for
a
parking
reduction,
and
then
we
could
provide
information
on
okay.
C
N
N
It
was
a
high-rise
project
and
and
so
not
not
a
not
one,
that
was
just
a
few
units,
a
high-rise
project
that
we
approve
with
zero
parking
near
the
deer
down
station
area.
So
it
was
an
area
where
we
know
we
wanted
to
prioritize
other
modes
of
transportation,
and
it
certainly
was
a
bit
of
a
push
and
work
with
the
community
there,
as
you've
heard
from
some
of
our
colleagues,
but
we
got
it
through.
N
N
Where
you
know,
what
are
we
going
to
do
in
cases
where,
where
we
maybe
have
only
investment
developers
and
not
developers
that
are
actually
going
to
to
construct
a
building
or
owner
own
or
operate
it
and
and
simply
again,
just
just
maximizing
the
the
value
of
it?
I
wanted
to
see
staff's
thoughts
on
that
and
and
how
we
were
thinking
about
it
if
we
were
and
how
we
might
be
able
to
address
that.
I
Yes,
I
don't
so
this
I
mean
this.
This
is
a
sort
of
business
model
that
happens
a
lot,
a
lot
of
the
quote
developers
that
we
see
in
san
jose
or
are
not
necessarily
developers.
They
are
entitlers
right
and
so
that
they
they're
correct.
They
actually
entitle
a
property,
and
then
you
know
one
thing
I
learned
from
the
uli
real
estate
course
is
like
the
best
time
to
get
out
and
make
your
money
without
a
lot
of
risk
is
sell
the
entitlement
to
somebody
else
and
get
out
of
town.
I
So
that
does
happen,
but
just
keep
in
mind
that
if
the
the
market
has
to
support
the
project,
that's
entitled
whatever
it
is,
including
the
level
of
parking
that
is
or
is
not
provided.
So
you
know
someone
who's
going
to
buy
an
entitlement
I
mean
you
know
it's
being
in
the
development
business.
Some
of
our
panel
is
probably
going
to
test
is
a
very
risky
business,
and
so
you
know
the
value
of
that
project
and
the
willingness
of
someone
to
buy
it
is
going
to
be
based
on
hey.
I
Do
we
think
the
market's
going
to
support
this
and
is
our?
Can
I
get
finance
and
therefore
can
I
get
financing
for
the
project
so
not
to
say
that
this
couldn't
happen,
but
if
someone's
building
a
whatever
it
could
be
a
pipe
dream
project,
we
saw
one
of
those
kind
of
in
the
santana
row
area.
At
one
point
you
know:
if
it's
not
something
the
market
will
want
it.
You
know,
even
though
it's
just
an
entitler,
it
won't
probably
get
built.
I
Yeah
yeah
you'd,
be
it
might
be
difficult
to
sell
or
you
might
sell
it
you
might
someone
might
buy
it,
but
they're
not
going
to
buy
it
at
like
holy
smokes,
I'm
going
to
buy
a
20-story
tower.
That's
worth
this
dollar
as
well.
It's
like
well
we're
not
going
to
be
able
to
build
a
20-story
tower
with
no
parking
in
this
marketplace.
I
I
Can
probably
come
back
to
either
modify
the
entitlement
that
they
have
to
change
it
to
reflect
the
market
conditions
or
maybe
come
up
with
a
brand
new
retitlement?
The
value
of
the
entitlement
could
be
that
hey,
you
can
get
away
with
building
something
pretty
intense
here,
that's
good
to
know!
That's
worth
more
than
oh,
I
could
just
put
a
single
family
house
here,
but
so,
but
I
think
the
market
will
sort
of
deal
with
this
issue.
N
You
know
the
the
value
of
a
development
site
and
if
you
can
maximize
it
by
reducing
the
cost
for
parking
by
eliminating
them
maximizing
the
heights
right,
then,
in
my
mind,
that's
the
maximum
value
of
it.
Even
if
that's
not
exactly
what
could
be,
the
market
would
sustain
to
develop,
but
it
maximizes
it
what
it
potentially
could
do
and
what
it
may
be
right.
What
I'm
running
into
the
example
is
that
we
didn't
have
this.
N
N
You
know
at
least
the
the
the
makeup
of
incomes
that
are
going
to
go
into
there.
We
know
the
area
which
is
great,
but
it
just
that's,
was
one
of
the
concerns
I
had
was
not
being
able
to
see
projects
like
this
break
ground.
I
would
have
loved
to
have
seen
this
one
and
seen
what
that
example
would
have
been.
N
I
understand
we
got
some
of
that
feedback
from
seattle,
but
I
would
agree
with
councilmember
davis
that
if
we
look
at
some
of
the
cities
earlier,
like
oakland
our
neighbor
here
and
just
to
kind
of
see
how
that
impact
has
been,
I
am
or
less
in
favor
of
of
reducing
or
eliminating
our
parking
minimums
and
allowing
our
market
to
to
help
us
determine
what
is
best.
But
at
the
same
time
I
do
think
there
are
valuable
and
reasonable
concerns,
and
that's
that's
what
we're
all
hoping
to
be
educated
on
discuss
today.
J
Nice,
council
member,
I
appreciate
all
the
good
questions.
I
know
we
we've
got
a
panel
coming.
I
just
have
two
questions.
I
swear
too
one
one
is.
I
just
want
to
confirm
that
for
those
developers
who
are
bold
enough-
and
I
know
this
is
a
very
costly
proposition
but
they're
willing
to
build
parking
that
can
be
converted.
They've
got
the
heights
they've
got,
they
eliminated
the
slope
and
the
garage.
All
those
things
is
our
building
code
fully,
enabling
that
or
do
we
are
we
creating
any
barriers
for
those
convertible
garages.
I
That's
a
good
question
mayor.
I
think
we'll
have
to
dig
in
that
little
more.
I
understand
so.
I
believe
our
citywide
parking
guidelines
at
least
encourage
that
you
build
parking
garages
that
can
be
convertible
and
we'll
have
to
dig.
I
don't
have
enough
knowledge
on
the
building
code
aspect
of
that,
so.
J
And
although
we
say
it's
concurrent,
we
know
it
becomes
consecutive
when
that
negotiation
lags,
and
that
means
more
delay,
which
is
more
cost
and
in
fact,
more
staff
time,
which
is
also
more
cost.
And
all
that
means
I
I
know
we
got
chris
neil
waiting
in
the
wings
I'll
be
interested
in
hearing
a
development
perspective,
but
I
think
there's
going
to
be
an
interesting,
dynamic
or
tension
choice.
J
We
make
in
tdm
between
having
a
lot
of
flexibility
for
builders
and
having
standardized
tdm
and
I'd
like
to
make
a
brief
argument
for
standardized
tdm
for
just
a
moment.
One
is
you
know,
and
it's
kind
of
reflective.
You
guys
remember
this
book.
It
came
out
about
15
years
ago
called
the
paradox
of
choice.
There
are
benefits
in
having
standard
options
and
I
think
developers
if
they
can
get
out
of
the
process
more
quickly,
they
will
embrace
those
benefits.
J
If
you
just
tell
me
where
the
bar
is
I'll
jump
over,
it
don't
engage
me
in
nine
months
of
negotiation,
but
secondly,
I
think
we
need
to
consider
the
network
effects
of
tdm
solutions.
I'm
thinking
about
bike
share,
for
example,
which
is
financially
very
challenged
right
now
in
this
city,
and
if
we
had
it
in
a
zone
where
we
know
bike
share,
is
serving
a
required
commitment.
You're
gonna
kick
in
money
to
bike
share.
That
would
be,
I
think,
helpful,
to
sustain
that.
J
Similarly,
I'd
love
to
see
electric
car
share
take
off
and
many
of
our
affordable
housing
projects.
I'd
love
to
see
a
requirement
that
we
have
electric
car
share
in
every
affordable
project
to
reduce
the
cost
of
transportation,
to
many
of
the
families
that
are
living
there
and
again.
That
requires
a
network
effect.
You
need
to
have
scale
and
ubiquity
for
any
of
that
to
work,
which
means
we
need
to
have
standard
rise
requirements.
So
that's
my
preaching
I'd
be
interested
in
thoughts.
You
guys
have
about
standard
standardized
versus
flexibility.
J
F
Really
really
great
point
and
and
something
we've
been
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
you
know
it's
not
a
one-size-fits-all
thing
right,
and
so
how
do
you
find
the
enough
that
is
one
size
fits
all
that
makes
standardized
versus
those
things
that
should
be
discussed
right
and
and
we're
not
interested
in
having
long
negotiations
about
this
either
right?
We
would
like
to
have
it
done,
and
we
in
that.
So
one
thing
I
will
say
that
we
are
already
doing
right.
F
F
That
being
said,
you're
saying
sure,
40
options,
yeah
40
options
is
that
I
think
that
there
are
either
z,
zonally,
zonal
ways
to
do
that.
Downtown
bike
share.
You
know.
North
san
jose
bike
transit
passes
right,
and
so
I
think
that
we
could
probably
approach
that
from
an
area's
perspective,
because
you
know
what
what
do
you
do
in
in
in
evergreen
or
something
like
that
right.
It
is
different
right,
and
so
I
think,
standardized
across
the
city
would
be
the
co.
J
Yeah
point
we'll
take
it.
Thank
you
and
I
know
there's
a
lot
more
thought
to
go
in
all
that,
and
so
I
know
we
have
a
panel
coming
up
next,
let
me
just
offer
I
am
a
little
concerned
about
whatever
exemption
we're
getting
single-family
builders
below
15
units.
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
profit
margin
there
and
I'm
not
sure
I'd
want
to
exempt
them
from
at
least
paying
into
tdm,
since
they
are
creating
more
per
capita
vehicle
miles,
travel
than
other,
for
example,
multi-family
builders.
J
J
L
You
want
to
go
ahead
and
jump
in
okay,
I'll
try
to
be
quick.
Thank
you,
hi
everybody
good
morning,
thanks
for
the
great
presentation
I
think
made
a
really
strong
case
totally
agree
on
the
standardization
I
was.
I
I
liked
network
effects
even
better.
I
was
going
to
argue
that
maybe
we
could
consolidate
around
a
few
strategies
and
just
be
more
coordinated,
and
I
think
I
think
the
mayor
was
making
the
exact
same
point
whether
it's
bike
share.
L
Electric
car
share
whatever
it
is
what
what
strategy-
and
that
actually
leads
to
my
first
question,
which
is
what
have
we
learned
from
our
current
tdm
strategies?
Do
we
know
which
ones
are
getting
the
most
uptake
promoting
the
most
mode
shift?
Where
they're
working
I
mean.
If
we
do,
we
have
learnings.
F
L
F
Basis,
what
is
the
basis
of
making
another
minimum
right
now?
They're
arbitrary
they're,
based
on
national
statistics
that
are
built
as
well
as
downtown
minneapolis
as
suburban
houston
and
the
another
basis
is
just
another
arbitrary
number,
and
so
what
we're
doing
instead
is
saying.
Look,
let's
work
with
the
development
community
and
the
community
surrounding
to
figure
out
what
the
right
number
is
any
any.
Just
like
a
maximum.
F
It's
going
to
feel
like
a
an
arbitrary
number
one
way
or
the
other
and
again
coming
up
with
a
particular
minimum
based
on
what,
and
is
that
really
going
to
be
the
right
cookie
cutter?
What
we've
seen
is
the
cookie
cutter
that
is
out
there
in
the
in
the
industry
doesn't
fit
for
us
right,
and
so
you
know
we
could
always
try
and
find
another
one.
But
this
offers
us
the
maximum
amount
of
flexibility,
as
well
as
a
market-driven
approach
to
allowing
this
to
happen.
Yeah.
L
I
appreciate
that,
and
maybe
it's
too
hard
to
know,
I
guess
I
would
offer
that
maybe
the
the
the
basis
would
be
utilization
rates.
I
I
found
the
numbers
you
shared
around
the
25
unused
on-site
at
peak,
which
is
night
time
right
for
those
developments
be
to
be
very
compelling,
but
the
council
member
foley's
point
those
were
concentrated,
and
so
is
that
true
for
a
multi-unit
dwelling
such
as
the
one
going
on
being
built
on
blossom
hill
road
down
in
district
10.,
I
don't
know
I
mean
I
hope
so.
L
If
it's
also
25,
then
maybe
that
argues
for
a
standardized
approach,
a
one-size-fits-all
approach
across
the
city
or
we
just
across
the
board,
eliminate
the
minimum.
But
if
it
turns
out
the
utilization
rates
are
really
high
in
some
parts
of
the
city
and
are
25
unutilized
unused
in
other
areas,
then
maybe
that
would
argue
for
more
differentiation.
I
suppose
so
I
I
share
councilmember
foley's
question
on
that
is
that
truly,
is
that
what
we're
seeing
across
the
city.
F
Yeah,
could
I
respond
to
that
right.
So
if
we
look
at
utilization
rates
as
they
are
now
and
we're
trying
to
say,
we
need
to
reduce
the
amount
of
driving
in
the
city,
which
is
a
clear
goal
from
our
general
plan
and
from
many
many
many
policies
in
the
city
and
the
state.
At
this
point,
we're
locking
in
current
use
patterns,
and
so
looking
at
current
use
patterns
is
saying.
We
believe
that
what
we're
doing
now
is
the
right
thing,
and
I
don't
think
that
that's
what
our
policies
say.
L
L
I
mean
there
are
really
significant
differences
in
the
city,
and
so
I'm
just
I'm
curious
what
assumptions
we're
making
about
other
investments
if
we're
going
to
really.
If
we're
going
to
facilitate
this
change
that
I
think
we
all
want,
I
think
we
do
have
to
be
pragmatic
about
what
we
think
it's
going
to
take.
Yeah.
F
So
we're
looking
at
some
of
those
questions
in
the
access
mobility
plan
work
and
really
trying
to
figure
out
how
the
city
plays
the
most
productive
role.
In
those
conversations
we
aren't
the
vta,
but
half
of
you
guys
are
on
the
board
right,
and
so
you
know
how
do
we?
How
do
we,
as
the
city,
take
our
role
seriously
within
that?
Because
transit
isn't
only
slow
because
vta
is
doing
things
wrong
right,
transit
is
slow
because
we
didn't
do
a
whole
bunch
of
things
as
well.
Right.
F
A
lot
of
interplay
there
and
we're
doing
our
absolute
hardest
to
find
as
much
new
transit
dollars
as
we
can.
We
spend
a
lot
of
time
on
that,
as
well
as
other
transportation
investments
so
we'll
be
offering
council
the
large
larger
perspective
within
the
access
and
mobility
plan
in
about
january
next
year,
and
a
lot
of
you
have
already
talked
with
us
about
about
that.
L
H
Yeah
thanks
for
the
question,
so
when
we
we
did
a
number
of
you
know,
30
or
so
meetings
kind
of
across
the
span
of
of
the
last
two
years,
focusing
on
all
demographics
across
the
city.
We
did
neighborhood
association
meetings,
we
did
virtual
workshops,
forums,
in-person
events
and
heard
from
a
wide
spectrum
of
stakeholders,
including
kind
of
aging
aging
folks,
young
folks.
H
You
know
trying
to
get
an
accurate
read
on
on
what
it
is
that
different
constituents
need
in
san
jose,
and
I
think
what
we'd
like
to
come
back
to
here
is
that
transportation
demand
management
or
right
sizing
parking.
It's
it's
about
choice.
It's
about
mobility,
choice
for
the
individual,
and
so
you
know,
while
we're
saying
parking
will
be
built,
you
know
in
an
adequate
and
sufficient
amount
in
new
development.
We're
also
saying
that
mobility
options
provided
through
tdm
can
also
afford.
H
You
know
new
new
opportunities
for
folks
who,
who
may
you
know,
look
to
to
decide
to
use
them.
So
it's
I
think
right
now.
You
know
the
way.
I
view
it
is
we're
kind
of
locked
into
one
system,
and
it's
really
about
broadening
the
system.
Balancing
the
system
and
opening
up
opportunities
for
a
variety
of
different
folks
kind
of
wherever
they
are
so
in
instances
around
you
know
parking
on
bundling.
H
For
example,
one
in
ten
families
in
san
jose
does
not
own
a
vehicle,
and
so
you
know
sorry,
one
in
12
families,
households
in
san
jose
does
not
own
a
vehicle.
So
we're
saying
here
you
know
parking
on
bundling
could
be.
You
know
a
pretty
significant
opportunity
for
that
household
having
to
not
pay
into
parking
that
they're
not
actually
using.
So
it's
the
idea
is
just
kind
of
creating
that
that
space
for
for
the
choice,
ultimately.
L
H
I
H
H
H
You
know
just
mention
a
an
adjacent
effort
happening
within
the
department
of
transportation.
Is
our
emerging
mobility
action
plan
and
that
plan
is
really
honing
in
on
kind
of
what
are
the
mobility
needs
of
our
underserved
populations,
one
of
which
is,
obviously
you
know,
elderly?
How
can
we
best
accommodate
their
mobility
needs
and
one
of
the
things
that's
come
out
of
that
is
is
a
desire
to
not
see
electric
bike
share,
but
actually
e-cargo
share
from
mothers.
Perhaps
who
would
like
to
pick
their
children
up
from
school.
C
J
D
I
Want
to
just
acknowledge
emily
breslin
doing
amazing
work,
she's
actually
leading
us.
This
is
her
last
day,
she's
going
to
be
a
deputy
director
for
office
of
planning
research
in
sacramento.
So
you
know
this:
is
it
we're
going
to
go
to
blood
wigs
after
this
and
drink
a
lot?
So
if
you
want
to
join
us,
congratulations.
I
Yeah
after
5
p.m,
of
course,
right.
Okay,
so
I'll
introduce
amanda,
so
amanda
eakin
is
the
director
of
transportation
for
the
bloomberg
american
cities,
climate
challenge
at
the
national
resources,
defense
council
nrdc,
where
she
leads
a
team
supporting
25
american
cities
to
decarbonize
their
transportation
systems.
I
She
is
also
lead
for
developing
nrdc's
national
climate
strategy
for
transportation
appointed
by
san
francisco's
mayor
london
breed.
She
serves
as
vice
chair
at
the
san
francisco
municipal
transportation
agency
board
of
directors
overseeing
and
governing
san
francisco's,
public
transit
streets,
taxis
and
parking
assets.
I
B
B
B
I
am
going
to
be
your
moderator
today
for
this
panel
and
it's
a
great
honor,
because
this
is
a
really
esteemed
panel
before
I
introduce
the
panelists.
I
just
want
to
offer
a
few
quick
perspectives
to
you
for
today,
so
it
has
been
first
of
all,
an
honor
and
a
privilege
to
partner
with
the
city
of
san
jose
over
the
last
three
years
as
part
of
the
american
cities,
climate
challenge.
G
B
Notice,
I'm
wearing
my
san
jose
t-shirt
today
for
those
who
are
less
familiar.
The
climate
challenge
is
a
three
point:
three
and
a
half
year:
100
million
dollar
accelerator
program
funded
by
bloomberg
philanthropies,
and
we
created
a
national
challenge
open
to
the
100
largest
cities
in
the
u.s.
To
support
you
to
take
ambitious
climate
action.
B
We
opened
up
a
competition
and
san
jose's
proposal
was
so
strong.
It
made
it
a
very
easy
decision
to
accept
san
jose
into
this
program
and
provide
you
with
resources
to
accelerate
your
climate
action
and
they've
all
just
stepped
away.
But
I
do
just
want
to
acknowledge
you
have
wherever
they
are.
You
have
a
phenomenally
strong
staff
team
working
for
you,
they're
doing
really
standout
work
that
on
the
national
level,
is
showing
up
san
jose
as
a
climate
leader.
B
So
as
far
back
as
the
fall
of
2018
bloomberg
and
entered
ac
and
the
whole
team
came
to
san
jose
and
we
put
up
on
the
wall
a
bunch
of
ideas
for
how
we
could
work
together
through
this
climate
challenge-
and
we
looked
at
all
kinds
of
different
transportation
policies
and
programs.
The
consensus
of
the
room
was
parking.
Parking
is
really
san
jose's.
B
Next
big
move
in
terms
of
your
climate
leadership,
and
so
it's
just
so
great
to
be
here
three
years
later,
looking
at
this
policy
and
moving
forward
towards
implementation,
so
the
climate
challenge
has
provided
technical
assistance
and
stakeholder
support
to
make
sure
to
vet
this
concept,
and
so
what's
coming
before
you
today,
I
just
want
to
make
sure
you
understand
has
been
vetted.
There
was
a
uli
technical
assistance
panel,
there's
a
lot
of
evolution
to
get
it
to
the
place
before
you
today.
B
I
also
just
wanted
to
put
as
part
of
a
national
program
put
san
jose's
leadership
in
the
national
context.
You
saw
up
on
the
screen
some
of
the
other
cities,
one
that
was
missed
up.
There
was
honolulu
last
year,
additionally
moved
as
part
of
their
affordable
housing
crisis
to
eliminate
parking
requirements,
and
it
was
just
last
week
that
st
paul
minnesota
did
a
very
similar
action
to
san
jose,
eliminating
minimum
parking
requirements
and
adopting
a
tdm
ordinance.
B
And
personally,
it's
really
scary,
and
I
sometimes
think
what
are
we
going
to
do
about
all
this
and
that's
sort
of
where
you
all
come
in
you're
all
sitting
in
a
position
of
power
and
a
lot
of
privilege
to
act
on
climate
to
do
something
about
it?
When
we're
all
reading
the
news
and
feeling
so
scared,
you
get
to
do
something
about
it.
That's
a
very,
very
powerful
and
privileged
position.
B
So
we're
just
so
happy
to
be
with
you
here
today
to
talk
about
san
jose's
next
big
step
in
your
climate
leadership
journey
and
how
you
can
continue
to
cement
your
legacy.
As
a
climate
leader
in
the
nation
and
also
in
the
world,
so
with
those
remarks
I
want
to
introduce
our
panel
elma
oredondo
is
the
co-chair
for
a
community-based
organization
called
alum
rock
urban
village
association
or
aruva
and
aruva
envisions
development
that
is
visionary,
inclusive
and
based
on
community
input.
B
Rick
disnika,
if
you
can
say
hello,
is
the
president
of
the
dyshnika
company.
It's
focused
on
infill
housing,
both
for
sale
and
for
rent
in
the
bay
area
and
also
real
estate,
consulting
he's
also
a
trustee
of
the
urban
land
institute
and
where
he's
been
a
member
and
vice
chair,
and
he
was
instrumental
in
pulling
together
the
technical
assistance
panel
of
experts
that
did
a
deep
dive
on
san
jose's
proposed
parking
changes
and
brought
a
lot
of
expert
perspectives
before
you
and
your
colleagues
chris
neil,
is
the
president
of
the
core
companies.
B
He
has,
during
his
career,
completed
a
broad
range
of
very
complicated
development
projects
that
will
be
expertise
he
will
draw
on
today
and
his
examples
range
from
a
regional
transit,
oriented
master
plan,
community
assembling
25
acres
with
six
different
property
owners.
Two
small
lot:
single
family
urban
infill
projects.
B
He
collaborates
with
the
county
and
cities,
including
san
jose
and
his
over
20
years
of
experience,
split
between
the
public
sector
and
private,
consulting
firms
and
finally,
justin
wang
is
the
advocacy
manager
at
the
greenbelt
alliance,
which
is
a
regional
conservation
and
urban
planning,
non-profit
and
outside
of
his
four
years
as
an
undergraduate
at
ucla.
He
is
a
lifelong
south
bay
resident.
B
I
B
Them
thank
you
all
for
being
here,
so
I'm
going
to
kick
off
with
sort
of
the
basics
justin.
I
would
love
to
hear
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
sort
of
just.
Why
are
we
here?
Why
are
we
talking
about
parking?
Why
should
anybody
even
care
about
parking
and,
if
you're,
a
person
who
cares
about
the
environment?
O
Absolutely
well,
first
of
all,
if
anyone
wants
to
know
why
they
should
care
about
parking,
they
just
watched
the
city
staff
presentation,
because
that
was
incredible,
but
specifically
from
an
environmental
perspective.
I
think
you
know
we
just
need
to
look
at
the
weather
outside
right,
like
the
wildfires
that
we're
experiencing
to
smoke
sea
level
rise.
The
urban
heat
island
effect,
which,
as
we
know,
is
exacerbated
by
surface
parking,
lots
parking
garages
all
this
concretizing
of
our
cities.
O
You
know
all
these
extreme
climate
hazards
that
we're
experiencing
are
have
been
exacerbated
by
the
the
plant
decisions
that
we've
made
and,
given
that
three
million
homes
in
california
are
in
fire
severity
zones.
You
know,
there's
a
real
real
human
cost
to
these
decisions
that
we
make
when
we
push
families
out
into
into
the
wildland
urban
interface.
Because
of
our
planning
decisions,
we
are
we're
putting
lives
at
risk
and
in
absolute
terms.
I
also
want
to
highlight
this.
O
O
And
again
this
enables
us
to
reduce
sprawl,
which
has
another
benefit
of
reducing
our
vmts
of
reducing.
You
know
the
climate
hazards
that
we're
seeing-
and
this
is
especially
impactful
for
our
frontline
communities
for
our
residents,
whether
they're,
low-income
elderly,
all
these
all
these
intersections
of
identities
that
are
disproportionately
impacted
by
the
climate
hazards
that
we
see
today,
you
know-
and
for
you
know
just
another
point
you
know
from
the
conservation
perspective
you
know
sprawl
is
really.
O
I
don't
think
any
of
us
here
wants
to
see
that
right.
That's
why
we
protected
coyote
valley.
That's
why
coyote
valley
has
been
front
and
center
in
the
conversation
in
san
jose
for
years,
and
you
know
whether
we're
talking
about
al
visa
or
so
many
other
places
where
we
don't
want
to
be
sprawling
out.
We
need
to
talk
about
policies
like
this
that
make
that
possible
and
yeah.
O
I
mean
I'll
leave
it
at
that
for
now,
but
just
again,
I
just
I
just
want
to
say
again:
this
is
this
policy
is
one
that
it
falls
in
the
footsteps
of
columbus,
north
san
jose.
You
know
this
bold,
visionary,
move
that
san
jose
did
to
to
position
itself
as
a
climate
leader.
This
is
how
we
do
it.
This
is
the
piece
of
the
puzzle
that
we
need
to
be
unlocking.
So
thank
you.
B
Okay,
excellent.
Thank
you.
So
much
I'd
like
to
turn
to
you.
Next
rob's
work
with
vta,
almost
every
city
in
the
bay
area
and
from
my
experience,
every
city
we
work
with
across
the
nation,
has
a
goal
to
reduce
reliance
on
private
vehicles
and
increase
transit
ridership
that
you'll
see
that
in
almost
every
climate
plan
everybody
agrees.
That's
what
we've
got
to
do
so
your
agency
is
the
transit
agency
for
the
region.
P
Sure,
thank
you.
It's
a
great
question
and
I
think
I
first
I
wanted
to
just
acknowledge
that
vta
as
an
organization
absolutely
sees
the
importance
of
transit
part
of
this.
You
know
a
piece
of
the
puzzle
here,
part
of
the
the
solution
to
help
make
this
policy
or
this.
This
policy
change,
that's
being
considered
effective
and
you
know
get
the
full
benefit.
P
When
you
do
that,
you
actually
generate
transit,
ridership
and
revenue
which
can
help
feed
back
into
you
know,
for
instance,
supporting
the
service
that
exists
now,
hopefully
improving
the
frequencies
of
the
service
in
the
future,
and
you
know
to
council
member
mayhem's
point
earlier.
It
is
you
know
it's.
It's
certainly
a
good
question
about.
We
can
have
robust
discussions.
P
I
think
in
the
in
the
future
about
where-
and
you
know,
in
what
parts
of
the
city
vta
will
be
able
to
provide
the
most
robust
transit
service,
but
we
definitely
have
a
commitment
to,
for
instance,
the
the
frequent
the
high
quality
transit
network
that
exists.
Now
you
know
the
15-minute
network
and
to
investments
like
bart
phase
2
the
light
rail
extension
to
eastridge
and
so
forth.
They
all
kind
of
work
together
in
this
virtuous
cycle.
B
Great,
thank
you
so
much
thanks,
alma
I'd
like
to
come
to
you
next
thinking
about
the
community
perspective,
your
organization
aruva
envisions
a
visionary
and
inclusive
development
based
on
community
input.
Can
you
help
us
to
understand
what
kind
of
development
you
envision
and
what's
the
connection
between
the
parking
requirements
we're
discussing
today
and
achieving
your
vision.
Q
Urban
village
advocates
a
neighborhood
group
of
residents,
business
owners
and
allies
concerned
about
the
lack
of
a
robust
community-based
development
plan
for
the
alum
rock
quarter
between
king
road
and
jackson.
Avenue.
The
alum
rock
corridor
is
extremely
densely
populated
about
15
000
people
per
square
mile,
which
is
the
density
of
the
city
of
san
francisco.
Q
We
want
a
robust
urban
village
plan
which
addresses
the
quality
of
life
of
its
residents
and
should
work
for
residents
and
business
owners,
and
not
just
for
developers.
Aruva
developed
an
equitable
plan
for
development,
where
we
emphasized
authentic
community
input
from
the
beginning
to
the
end
of
a
project.
Affordability,
where
at
least
50
percent
of
the
on
the
entire
footprint
of
our
urban
village
be
affordable
to
existing
households
within
the
95116
zip
code
area,
which
translates
to
units
being
built
at
very
low
income
and
extremely
low
income
standards.
Q
We
want
to
see
local
preference
measures
to
combat
anti-displacement
for
existing
residents
from
their
homes
and
for
at
least
75
percent
of
our
existing
non-industrial
businesses
to
remain
on
the
corridor.
We
want
culturally
inspired
and
vibrant
vibrant
places
where
the
project's
architecture
celebrates
the
cultural
legacies
of
our
community.
Q
It
will
be
argued
that
this
policy
contributes
to
affordable
housing
by
removing
the
construction
costs
associated
with
with
parking
spaces
and
somehow
not
providing
parking
spaces
along
with
tdm
strategies,
will
reduce
additional
traffic
or
parking
congestion
into
the
neighborhoods.
The
proposal
doesn't
address
some
fundamental
realities
on
the
ground
that
would
only
be
worsened
by
them.
The
proposal,
one
for
a
variety
of
reasons
that
cannot
be
ignored.
Q
One
reason
that
parking
problems
in
the
surrounding
areas
will
be
worsened
is
due
to
the
inadequate
public
transit
that
is
available
now
and
most
likely
for
decades
to
come.
Existing
public
transit
is
wholly
inadequate
to
serve
as
a
viable
alternative
for
most
working
class
car
users
living
in
san
jose.
The
alumni
community
has
all
been
has
always
been
one
of
the
largest
users
of
public
transit,
but
nothing
on
the
horizon
or
horizons
suggests
that
significant
improvements
will
be
made
in
the
next
10
to
20
years.
Q
Third,
over
time,
electric
vehicles
are
becoming
even
more
popular
mode
of
transportation.
This
is
driven
by
people's
readiness
to
take
personal
action
to
fight
climate
change.
As
this
electric
car
industry
matures,
the
affordability
of
these
cars
will
become
more
attractive
to
lower
income
people.
The
expansion
of
the
electric
car
industry
is
supported
by
the
federal
and
state
governments
and
their
private
sector
partners.
Q
Electric
car
sales
will
substantially
increase
over
time,
thus
creating
more
demand
for
parking
spaces.
Further
studies
are
needed
to
accurately
understand
the
probabilities
of
extremely
low
and
very
low
income
households
choosing
to
abandon
their
cars
entirely
without
adequate
public
transit
in
place.
Lower
income
working
working
class
people
will
continue
to
rely
on
cars
as
their
primary
mode
of
transportation.
At
higher
rates
than
higher
income
people
working
class
people
could
be
construction
and
other
service
workers
in
native
vehicles
to
hold
their
equipment.
Q
Those
who
those
who
do
work
irregular
shifts,
not
the
typical
day
shift
and
mothers
must
get
their
children
to
day
care
school
and
themselves
to
work
to
enact
the
proposed
parking
change
without
with
these
the
ground.
Realities
at
this
time
will
only
negatively
affect
most
lower
income,
households,
the
elimination
of
parking
requirement
and
leaving
the
developers
to
determine
the
best
parking
for
a
development
is
currently
a
recipe
for
hardship
on
lower
income.
Community.
B
Okay,
thank
you
so
much.
I
think.
We've
heard
we
heard
a
number
of
key
themes
that
we
may
want
to
circle
back
to
in
the
staff
follow-up
around
community
engagement,
public
transit
and
impacts
on
low-income
households.
So,
let's
just
put
a
marker
on
those.
I
would
like
to
now
come
to
our
developer
experts.
Rick
and
chris.
R
All
right
good
morning,
thank
you,
amanda
for
me.
It's
off!
Thank
you
so
appreciative
of
being
including
this
panel
and
having
the
broad
range
of
experience
right,
because
we
want
to
set
something
up.
Housing
will
not
get
developed
in
the
community
if
we
don't
have
something
successful
for
both
the
community
residents
and
the
developers
who
are
trying
to
create
change.
It's
very
difficult
to
be
a
change
agent
and
creating
housing
is,
is
a
difficult
impact
to
a
community.
So
I
encourage
us
to
have
that
in
mind.
R
R
We
do
a
lot
of
affordable
housing,
we've
done
market
rate,
rental
and
ownership,
affordable
rental
and
ownership
mixed
income.
So
I'm
bringing
that
experience
to
this
discussion
today.
I'm
also
a
board
member
of
spur
and
sv
at
home,
so
those
are
kind
of
the
lenses
I'm
bringing
to
the
conversation
today
and
acknowledge.
R
There's
a
bias
with
those
points
of
view
I
just
think
fundamentally
reducing
or
eliminating
the
parking
minimums
will
be
a
very
significant
support
to
creating
more
supply
and,
if
that's
a,
if
that's
a
key
goal
or
outcome
from
this
process,
I
think
that's
beneficial
and
I
think
fundamentally,
that's
just
the
the
the
guidelines
are
so
old
and
antiquated.
I
mean
I
think,
they're
from
the
60s
70s
or
80s,
so
I
think
it
it's
it's
time
to
revise
them.
R
I
think
that
the
the
challenge
is
the
process
and
the
tdm's
and
and
I've
had
a
lot
of
dialogue
with
staff.
My
concern
is:
do
the
tdms
become
part
of
a
burden
as
well
and
create
another
complex
process,
an
additional
cost?
I
think
one
thing
to
remember:
as
you
go
through
this
process
from
a
developer,
a
capital
cost
up
front
is
very
different
than
an
ongoing
cost.
There's
almost
a
25
times
multiplier.
R
R
I
mean,
for
example,
there's
the
one
near
deardon
that
had
a
zero
parking
ratio,
as
you
think
about
these,
I
would
encourage
you
to
consider
both
the
projects
you've
seen
come
through
for
approval,
but
also
the
groundbreakings
you've
participated
in,
because
my
opinion
is
that
san
jose
is
not
ready
for
a
project
with
no
parking
today,
because
the
transit
is
not
there,
but
you
might
be
seeing
several
come
through
for
approval
without
any
parking.
So,
as
you
consider
these
comments,
I
would
also
consider
projects
I've
seen
get
built.
R
What
are
the
qualities
of
projects
are
actually
getting
built
today,
which
are
very
different?
Projects
are
actually
getting
approved
today
for
entitlements,
because
many
are
not
converting
to
construction.
It
is
very
hard
to
develop
and
start
projects.
Today
I
mean
there's
an
element
of
the
pandemic,
but,
to
be
honest
with
you,
it
was
very
difficult.
Pre-Covered
construction
costs
were
soaring
pre-covered
and
they're
they're,
ironically
they've
continued
to
soar
throughout
regarding
affordable
housing.
There's
a
state
density
bonus
that
allows
parking
reduction.
R
I
think
the
caveat
I'd
put
on
that
is
if
it's
a
large
family
and
the
community
and
affordable
housing
is
incenting.
Some
large
family
there's
a
big
difference
between
parking
ratios
for
a
studio,
one
bedroom
versus
a
family.
So
I
find
the
dwelling
unit.
Conversation
I
think,
is
challenging
because
all
units
are
not
created
equal.
So
I
think
that
has
a
big
difference
on
the
parking
ratios
by
dwelling
unit.
R
Affordable
housing
in
the
bay
area
is
currently
the
least
successful
in
securing
the
final
state
resources
to
build
housing.
So
any
risk
of
adding
new
costs
to
affordable
housing
is
making.
It
will
make
something
that's
extremely
difficult
today,
even
more
difficult
in
the
future,
there
was
just
a
last
round
of
bond
allocation
in
at
the
state
level,
the
bay
area
had
33
projects
supply
and
only
11
secured
the
critical
last
funding
to
start
construction.
So
it
was
a
about
a
33
success
ratio.
R
If
you
compare
that
to
other
parts
of
the
state
where
their
costs
are
much
lower.
Southern
california,
la
inland
empire
were
almost
an
80
success
rate,
so
the
cost
to
construct
in
the
bay
area
and
san
jose
is
a
significant
impediment
to
starts,
and
so,
if
I
apply
that
to
market
rate,
that
would
be
the
concern
is
the
lower
parking
ratio
is
critical
to
be
able
to
start
new
projects,
but
if
we
replace
it
with
new
costs,
my
concern
is,
you
still
won't
get
any
new
start.
R
So
I
think
from
the
the
builder
committee
the
support
for
reducing
the
parking
ratios.
I
think
those
who
are
building
housing
right
now,
I
think,
would
have
would
have
parking.
They
would
not
design
projects
that
don't
have
parking.
I
think
parking
is
important
and
critical.
I
think
the
consumers
want
it
and
I'll
close
with
kind
of
one
anecdotal
example.
We
have
a
project,
it's
probably
started
eight
to
ten
years
ago,
it's
in
downtown
san
jose.
It's
called
spark
105
unit
project
in
downtown
san
jose.
R
It
was
parked
we
had
the
range
to
park
it
at
a
.75
ratio
or
a
1.0
ratio,
and
I
want
this
is
not
necessarily
an
example
of
all
commercial
development.
But
it's
one
example,
which
is
to
secure
our
equity.
It
was
not
the
debt
who
had
an
opinion
on
parking
ratios,
it
was
our
equity
and
the
equity
was
concerned
about
that.
We
had
too
low
of
a
parking
ratio
and
their
opinion
was
not
necessarily
about
our
project.
R
The
question
is
well:
what
does
everyone
else
around
you
have
and
if
you're
going
to
be
competing
with
1.5
2.0
parking
ratios?
That
was
their
concern.
So
we
worked
with
staff
to
design
and
we
had
the
ability
to
add
stackers,
and
so
we
we
could
have
saved
the
money
not
had
the
stackers
in
or
we
could
have
implemented
the
stackers.
So
we
implemented
the
stackers
we
leased
up
during
covet.
It
has
a
one-to-one
parking
ratio
with
stackers
and
it's
been
very
successful.
R
So
I
think
it's
a
good
example
of
a
project
that
was
able
to
get
that
parking
ratio
in
the
downtown
and
it
has
been
success,
a
qualified
success,
given
the
fact
it
was
able
to
lease
up
during
covid
my
concern
for
that
one.
If
you
apply
it
to
the
current
tdm
guidelines,
it
would
actually
incur
additional
cost,
and
so
I
guess
my
my
comment
is
in
support
of
reducing
the
parking
requirements
but
being
extremely
thoughtful
about
applying
additional
cost
to
the
project
to
the
offset.
B
Great
so
I'll
just
flag
for
staff
again
there
seem
to
be
some
cost
questions
coming
up,
and
I
know
we've
seen
previous
materials
around
cost
comparisons
on
parking
and
the
tdm.
Maybe
you
can
speak
to
that
at
the
conclusion
of
this
panel
rick.
Would
you
like
to
add
anything
to
this
question
about
the
views
of
the
parking
regulations
under
discussion
and
how
that
will
affect
growth
and
development
in
san
jose.
S
Our
recommendations
in
our
study
had
three
major
items:
just
right
parking
right
sizing,
we
recommended
eliminating
parking,
minimums,
soft
and
reasonable
parking,
maximums
and
data
gathering
and
community
engagement.
Our
second
major
theme
was
one
size
does
not
fit
all
scaling.
Recommendations
for
office
and
commercial,
tiered
parking
reduction
strategies
and
flexible
tool
kits
were
two
of
the
supportive
elements.
S
Pop-Outs
or
parklets
have
been
accepted
by
the
market
and
the
biggest
one
is
major.
Automakers
have
announced
significant
goals
within
the
next
10
to
20
years
of
converting
the
vehicles
they
manufacture
from
internal
combustion
engines
to
electric.
So
how
does
that
impact
just
right
parking?
I
think
it's
even
more
critical
today,
since
all
the
studies
plus
the
stakeholder
interviews
may
no
longer
be
relevant,
but
they
might
just
don't
know,
but
the
main
thing
I
would
emphasize
is
data
gathering
and
community
engagement.
You've
done
that
already
continue
to
do.
S
It
gather
the
facts
measure
the
results,
it's
important
to
understand.
What's
changed
in
today's
environment,
you
need
to
know
what
the
work
days
will
be
to
adjust
your
demand
and
supply
analysis.
Will
this
be
temporary
or
permanent,
continue
to
gather
information
and
get
the
facts
from
all
the
employers
small
to
large?
S
My
personal
observation
is
that
this
change
in
the
work
environment
will
be
permanent,
albeit
I
don't
know
exactly
what
that
means.
Employers
and
employees
will
figure
out
ways
to
be
more
flexible
in
coming
to
the
office,
both
in
days
and
times
of
the
day,
the
concept
of
pop-outs
and
parklets.
It's
a
new
concept
that
began
was
very
limited
pre-pandemic,
but
it's
exploded
during
the
pandemic,
probably
more
a
matter
of
survival
than
anything
else.
The
customers
seem
to
like
it.
S
S
If
you
don't
provide
parking,
then
some
small
scale,
retail
businesses
may
suffer
due
to
the
lack
of
easily
accessible
parking.
I
think
pop-outs
may
prove
to
be
a
very
good
strategy
for
energizing
the
streets.
People
like
to
walk
up
and
down
the
streets
they
like
to
be
able
to
kind
of
meander
when
you
drive
by
things
you
just
miss
it.
It's
important
to
measure
the
parking
demand
based
upon
each
neighborhood
and
look
for
infill
locations
for
small
surface
lots
to
offset
the
loss
of
surface
parking.
S
Reducing
car
usage
was
a
driving
factor
in
the
reducing
fossil
fuels
to
satisfy
the
climate
action
goals,
which
I
think
is
a
great
idea,
but
again
what's
happening
to
change
that
what
happens
if
people
just
switch
to
electric
cars
and
parking
has
been
significantly
reduced?
Will
there
be
a
parking
deficit?
S
I
believe
that
this
conversation
will
take
place
over
a
time
period
shorter
than
we
thought
when
we
conducted
our
study,
because
the
major
automakers
are
enthusiastically
embracing
it.
However,
the
law
of
unintended
consequences
may
occur
by
reducing
parking
to
the
address
the
internal
combustion
engine
cars.
When
people
will
just
substitute
electric
cars
for
fossil
fuel
cars,
this
could
have
a
major
impact
for
achieving
your
commercial
and
retail
economic
development
goals.
I'm
posing
these
questions
because
I
think
they
have
to
be
asked.
S
None
of
us
really
know
the
outcomes
we're
in
a
transition
period.
The
last
element,
I
would
say,
is
using
transit
versus
the
private
automobile
is
a
health
issue
that
all
can
individuals
will
consider.
Will
people
return
to
pre-pandemic
use
of
mass
transit,
I'd
say
maybe,
but
the
return
to
transit
usage
will
take
longer
than
we
might
like?
S
I
think
everybody's
thinking
about
you
know
how
much
exposure
do
I
need
to
put
myself
through.
I
happen
to
use
mass
transit
on
a
frequent
basis
when
I
go
into
the
city
of
san
francisco.
I've
noticed
a
significant
reduction
now
granted,
there's
no
activity
in
the
city
of
san
francisco
to
speak
of
so
that's
a
part
of
it,
but
I
also
noticed
a
reticence
on
a
lot
of
people's
part
because
of
the
health
concerns,
so
these
are
things
that
will
play
out.
B
S
Had
a
residential
market
rate
and
affordable
developers,
we
had
a
commercial
developer,
a
local
person.
Actually
we
had
financiers
and
trying
to
think
we
had
a
land
planner
an
architect,
so
we
had
kind
of
a
broad
cross
section.
So
we
talked
from
a
broad
overview
policy
perspective,
and
then
we
talked
about
boots
on
the
ground.
I'll,
remember
specifically,
one
internal
conversation
we
had
between
eric
tao,
who
represents
the
the
for
the
market
rate,
housing
and
mary
murtaugh,
who
represents
affordable
housing.
S
If
you
have
all
seniors
that
are
in
studios,
many
of
whom
don't
have
cars.
That's
a
different
dynamic
dramatically.
A
lot
of
the
senior
projects
provide
off-site
buses
from
their
own
location.
So
there's
a
lot
of
different
things
that
are
going
on
that
you
really
need
to
drill
down
to.
But
out
of
that
discussion
between
mary
and
eric
came
the
conversation
about
the
adaptive
reuse
of
some
of
these
underutilized
shopping
centers,
and
I
think,
that's
well
documented
in
a
case
study
discussion
in
our
report.
Great.
B
Thank
you,
and
just
want
to
underscore
the
recommendations
of
that
panel
were
to
eliminate
minimum
parking
requirements
and
also
to
think
about
soft
and
flexible
parking,
maximums
we're
not
going
as
far
as
parking
maximums
right
now,
and
many
of
the
questions
concerns
I
heard
this
morning
were
related
to.
If
we
had
parking
maximums
so
just
wanted
to
clarify.
That's
not
the
panel
was
there,
but
we're
not
going
there
today.
B
Yet,
with
this
ordinance
change
rick,
you
spoke
about
sort
of
the
future.
What
does
the
future
hold?
None
of
us
knows
it's
a
fascinating
question.
Are
we
going
to
stay
working
from
home?
Is
that
going
to
work
for
business?
Are
we
all
going
to
go
back
in
three
years
and
forget
all
about
this
horrible
nightmare,
justin
you're,
also
our
sort
of
youth
representative
on
the
panel
and
wondered
if
you
could
just
speak
a
little
bit
about
sort
of
from
your
perspective
as
a
millennial
both?
B
O
Absolutely
so
I
can
start
off
anecdotally
right.
You
know
I
went,
I
was
in
la
for
college
and
that's
probably
one
of
the
most
stereotypical
cities
that
you
need
that
you
need
a
car
in
right.
Well,
I
I
survived
without
a
car
shockingly,
but
you
know
that's
what
that's
you
know.
It
was
in
college
that
I
really
start
to
see
these
mobility
habits
change.
O
You
know
I
knew
a
lot
of
people
that
came
from
the
suburbs
that
came
from
you
know
all
across
the
united
states
and
they
were
so
used
to
having
a
car,
and
you
know
at
first.
You
know
everyone
has
that
conversation
like
oh,
like
I
wish.
I
wish
I
had
a
card.
I
wish
I
had
this.
I
wish
I
had
that,
but
as
as
time
goes
on
right,
you
find
ways
around
it.
You
find
right,
you
know
uber
and
lyft,
obviously
very
popular,
but
you
know
the
school
also
sponsors
public
transit.
O
You
know,
there's
the
big
blue
bus
to
take
you
to
santa
monica
and
people.
You
know
they
start
developing
that
habit
of
taking
public
transit.
You
know
I
personally,
I
I
skateboarded
from
santa
monica
all
the
way
down
to
rancho
pals
verdes.
You
know
just
because
you
know
we
didn't
have
a
car.
We
couldn't
drive
to
long
beach.
We
couldn't
go
to
orange
county.
We
were
just
like.
Let's,
let's
find
something
fun
to
do.
You
know
using
just
our
own
two
feet
and
you
know
now
out
of
college.
O
You
know
talking
to
my
peers,
my
my
fellow,
my
friends
from
the
area
that
graduated
moved
back
here
and
now
they
have
a
lot
of
them.
Shockingly,
a
lot
of
them
have
tech
jobs.
You
know
a
lot
of
them
are
doing
very
well
very
well
for
themselves.
A
lot
of
them
are
working
from
home
and
they
don't.
You
know
it's
it's
hard
to
generalize
right,
but,
like
you
know
some
of
them,
there
are
some
people
that
have
that
dream
car.
You
know
they
really
wanted
that
test.
O
They
bought
a
tesla,
but
I
would
say
by
and
large
most
of
them
are
are
not
you
know,
they
don't
need
a
car.
You
know,
especially
if
they're,
in
a
committed
relationship,
if
they're
living
with
their
partner,
you
know
they
don't
need
to
have
a
car,
they
share
one
and
a
lot
of
times
they're
only
just
using
it
for
groceries.
O
You
know,
I'm
talking
to
them
and
the
mobility
habits
I'm
seeing
are
really
really
not
quite
the
same
from
you
know,
just
from
talking
to
my
parents-
and
this
is
all
anecdotally,
but
this
is
also
what
the
data
the
data
shows
us
just
a
key
few
figures,
thank
god.
I
have
my
paper
here.
So
the
total
distance
driven
per
person
in
the
united
states
actually
peaked
in
2004
and
also
according
to
data
from
the
federal
highway
administration.
I
O
Really
does
like
to
do
things
that
aren't
driving
and
I
think
that
you
know
like
like
one
of
my
fellow
panelists
so
eloquently
described.
You
know
this.
This
can
change.
You
know
if
you're
working
class,
if
you
have,
if
you
have
all
these
other
needs,
sometimes
you
do
need
to
drive
this
morning.
You
know
you
might
have
noticed.
I
came
in
a
little
bit
late.
O
I
was
originally
planning
to
take
the
bus
in
to
to
prove
a
point,
but
there
was
a
family
emergency
at
home,
so
I
was
running
late
and
I
and
I
had
to
drive
you
know,
and
I
was
glad
that
I
had
that
flexibility.
Sometimes
you
know
we
do
need
to
drive,
but
so
much
more
often
we
have
other
options
at
our
fingertips.
O
You
know
recently
I've
been
biking
everywhere,
whether
you
know
smoke,
not
not
in
the
last
couple
of
weeks,
but
for
me
that
that's
really
what
this
policy
is
all
about
for
in
talking
to
my
friends,
it's
about
having
these
options
at
our
fingertips
that
that,
where
we're
not
mandated,
you
know
a
parking
minimum
feels
like
a
mandate
to
drive.
That's
what
it
feels
like,
whereas
what
I,
what
I
and
my
peers,
people,
that
I've
talked
to
really
want
to
see
is
the
option.
O
You
know
we
want
better
public
transit,
we
want
to
ride
vta,
we
want
to
take
part
we
want
to.
We
want
to
bike
places,
and
I
also
want
to
underscore
the
fact
that
it
is
not
just
young
people
that
you
know.
This
is
not
the
only
identity
or
perspective
that
we
need
to
take
into
consideration.
Like
we
said,
low
low
income,
families
are
low
income
people,
people
with
disabilities
seniors.
O
I'm
really
glad
that
councilmember
mayhem
brought
that
up,
because
I
think
that
these
are
all
crucial
parts
of
our
community
that
we
need
to
that.
We
need
to
take
into
account
and
again
some
of
these
people
may
need
to
drive
at
times,
and
I
think
that
that
is
something
you
know,
and
that's
not
what
we're
saying
here
we're
not
saying
we
can't
drive
ever
we're
saying
that
let's
try
to
support
alternatives
so
that
when
people
do
have
to
drive
it
isn't
as
pain.
It's
not
painful.
We've
all
had
that
experience
of
sitting
on
280.
O
You
know
stuff
for
hours
and
that
nobody,
nobody
wants
that
and
by
unlocking
this
flexibility,
we're
able
to
provide
those
options
to
people
and
that's
that's
really
key
great
and
then
to
dive
into
the
housing
part
just
a
little
bit
as
a
young
person
who
would
love
to
own
a
home
at
some
point
in
this
place.
You
know
I
I
lived
in
sunnyvale
my
entire
life,
and
I
would
want
nothing
more
than
to
buy,
buy
a
home.
I
don't
care,
it
doesn't
have
to
be
single
family.
Just
you
know,
condo
whatever
I
would.
O
I
would
love
to
live
in
my
community
that
I
grew
up
in
and
that
is
seemingly
increasingly
out
of
reach,
and
it's
not
just
me
right,
like
I,
my
local
high
school
from
high
school,
they
I
a
friend
of
mine,
his
son,
his
his
son,
just
started
club
that
is
focused
on
housing,
affordability,
trans
transportation
and
sustainability.
Like
these
things
are
trickling
down
to
you
know
it's
not
just
college
people,
it's
it's
young
kids
that
are
really
really
concerned
about
this.
O
B
Great,
thank
you.
Just
on
a
personal
note,
we're
retrofitting
our.
I
live
in
san
francisco,
we're
retrofitting
our
house
right
now
and
we're
putting
in
a
rental
unit
downstairs,
and
I
didn't
even
think
about
the
fact
that
we're
not
providing
any
parking
until
recently,
when
I
realized
there's
no
way,
we
could
do
this
and
create
a
new
rental
unit,
essentially
sort
of
an
in-law
unit.
If
san
francisco
required
me
to
put
parking
there
because
there
would
be
no
space
for
it,
so
there
are
all
kinds
of
ways
that
parking
manifests.
O
Think
I
totally,
I
remember,
there's
a
second
you
know
professionally
as
well,
not
just
personally
but
yeah
green
belt
alliance.
You
know,
like
we
talk
about
land,
you
know
we
talk
about
conservation,
we
talk
about
urban
planning
and
really
making
sustainable
cities
of
the
future.
You
know
the
futures,
the
the
cities
that
we're
going
to
be
growing
old
in
that
our
children
are
going
to
be
growing
up
in
you
know
parking
is
such
a
big
part
of
that
we
spend.
O
We
have
so
much
land
dedicated
to
cars
when
I
think
all
of
us
want
our
city
to
be
dedicated
to
people
and
there
are
real
climate
impacts.
Like
I
alluded
to
my
first
answer
right,
you
know,
like
the
the
vehicle
models
travel,
the
greenhouse
gas
emissions
that
we're
seeing
you
know
worsening
these
climate
hazards
and
again
it's
our
frontline
communities
that
are
taking
the
brunt.
The
brunt
of
this.
We
saw
the
flooding
in
san
jose.
O
You
know
these
these
vulnerable
communities
that
are
suffering
and
have
to
pay
the
cost,
and
it's
it's
it's
just
unconscionable
that
we
don't
take
immediate
climate
action
and
that's
what
I
see
this
policy
as
this
is
a
media
climate
cl.
This
is
immediate
climate
action
that
builds
our
climate
resilience
and
enables
us
to
to
promote
infill
housing,
which
is
what
we
so
desperately
need
getting
people
out
of
the
way
of
wildfires,
because
it
seems
like
that
is
going
to
keep
on
coming.
Unfortunately,
so
thank
you.
B
So
rob
again
happy
to
have
you
here
on
the
panel
with
us
in
in
one
way
of
thinking
about
it
requiring
parking
minimum
parking
requirements
requires
developers
to
put
a
certain
amount
of
capital
into
building
parking
spaces.
A
tdm
strategy,
on
the
other
hand,
would
require
developers
to
put
that
money
potentially
into
transit
through
transit
passes,
which
has
a
nexus
with
your
agency's
ability
to
sustain
service.
I
know
I
sit
on
the
board
of
a
transit
agency,
we're
facing
very,
very
difficult
financial
challenges
right
now.
B
P
Sure
that's
a
very
good
question
and
maybe
I'll
just
start
by
kind
of
addressing
a
little
bit
the
the
situation
that
vta
finds
itself
in
and
just
reassure
you
that
we're
on,
I
think,
a
positive
path.
You
all
know
that
vta,
like
many
transit
agencies
around
the
country,
was
hit
very
hard
by
cobit
19..
P
You
know
many
of
my
co-workers.
Frontline
workers
sacrificed
the
entire
pandemic.
Here
you
know
as
as
frontline
workers,
and
we
we
also
suffered
a
cyber
attack
earlier
in
the
year
and
the
tragic
attack
at
guadalupe
yard.
You
know
so
we
are
we've
gone
through
some
rough
times,
but
we
are
in
a
path
of
recovery
where
we
are
actually
providing
almost
as
much
service.
Now
85
of
the
pre-covet
service.
P
We
are
providing
now
in
terms
of
service
hours,
we're
actually
bringing
the
service
back
to
what
we
believe.
100
percent
of
pre-covered
levels
by
the
early
part
of
next
year
by
february
of
20
20
2022
excuse
me,
so
we
think
that
we're
already
you
know
well
positioned
to
you
know,
serve
some
of
the
riders
that
you
were
mentioning
that
that
would
like
to
take
advantage
of
enhanced
public
transit.
P
We're
well
positioned
as
we
recover
from
some
of
these
difficult
times,
but
you
know
in
terms
of
how
the
tdm
piece
ties
in
absolutely
like.
If
we
see
it,
it's
actually
been
a
pretty
successful
thing.
For
instance,
the
core
companies
for
years
has
my
understanding
is,
as
new
development
comes
in
the
core
companies.
Actually,
it's
kind
of
the
program
of
development
usually
subscribes
to.
We
used
to
call
it
the
vt
eco
pass.
Now
it's
the
vta
smart
pass
and
that's
kind
of
just
a
win-win
for
everyone
right.
P
You
can
provide
a
mobility
option
for
the
residents
of
development.
This
can
also
be
applied.
You
know
it's
actually
at
most
of
the
universities
and
colleges
in
santa
clara
county
have
similar
arrangements
and
some
of
the
major
employers
that
brings
in
kind
of
a
steady
type
of
revenue
to
vta.
That's
you
know
not
doesn't
swing
as
much
as,
for
instance,
you
know
fair
bucks
revenue
on
a
given
week
to
week
basis,
so
it
can
help.
P
P
P
You
know
if
there's
the
possibility
of
a
number
of
developments
as
part
of
this
tdm
program
contributing
in
towards
transit
passes.
You
could
actually
imagine
you
know
generating
enough
revenue
that
you
could.
You
know,
support
either
increased
service
levels
in
an
area
or,
potentially,
you
know
kind
of
expanding
the
coverage
of
a
route
to
those
developments.
B
R
B
B
H
Yeah,
thank
you.
I
want
to
address
kind
of
the
earlier
points
raised
by
a
number
of
our
panelists
just
by
saying
and
acknowledging
that
I
think
we
can
all
attest
to
the
fact
that
san
jose
is
really
in
a
transition
period.
Where
you
know
we,
we
have
50.
You
know,
plus
years
of
auto
infrastructure
that
we've
built
up.
H
This
is
a
continued
dialogue
with
each
of
our
stakeholders
here
to
understand
the
nuances
and
how
we
can
best
put
together
a
set
of
recommendations
that
meets
you
know
the
city's
goals,
as
well
as
the
needs
of
our
communities,
our
development
community
as
well.
So
you
know
this
being
a
study
session.
I
just
kind
of
want
to
end
it
on.
We
are
absolutely
still
in
in
in
the
definition
phase
of
what
these
recommendations
are
and
look
forward
to
kind
of
continued
collaboration
with
our
stakeholder
community.
G
I
mostly
in
you
know
in
the
means
of
brevity.
I
just
you
know,
want
to
really
appreciate
our
our
panelists
for
being
here.
You
know,
obviously,
they're
they've
got
their
own
jobs
they're
taking
time
out
to
be
here,
and
I
want
to
really
say
thank
you
to
them
and
again,
just
emphasize
that
you
know
this
is
still
a
work
in
progress.
G
I
know
some
of
you
have
seen
some
of
the
background
data
that
we've
provided,
and
you
know
we
really
welcome
the
opportunity
for
you
to
comment
on
that
and
work
with
you
to
kind
of
get
get
this
ordinance
update.
You
know
at
a
at
a
place
where
everyone
is
really
you
know
excited
about
moving
forward
with
it.
Thank
you.
J
Yeah,
I
think
it
would
be
good
what
I'd
like
to
do
is
to
go
to
the
public
first
and
because
we're
gonna
run
out
of
time
and
lose
council
members
at
12
and
again
I'm
sorry
for
interrupting.
I
I
do
want
to
just
very
say
say
very
simply,
thank
you.
Thank
you,
alma
thank
you
rick
and
chris
and
justin
and
rob
we
really
appreciate
your
contributions
today.
J
J
G
I
A
J
A
Almost
three
hours
of
talking
about
how
you're
gonna
take
away
parking.
Do
you
really
want
to
make
this
town
even
that?
Much
worse
I
mean
who
who
rides
their
bike
besides
sam,
I
mean
do
you
people
walk
around
with
a
tape
measure
where,
wherever
you
go,
you
must
have
a
stanley
tape
measure
all
of
you
under
on
your
belt,
to
measure
things
I
I
mean
this
is
like
this:
isn't
it
this
isn't
a
county
or
city
of
shopkeepers?
A
It's
a
county
or
city
of
real
estate,
people
measuring
every
square
foot.
You
are
not
going
to
be
able
to
institute
mass
transit
into
a
place
with
such
urban
sprawl.
No
matter
how
many
villages
you're
going
to
make
it's
not
going
to
work
the
light
rail,
you
can't
even
get
it
to
work
right
now.
If
you
really
want
it
to
happen,
do
what
you
did.
C
A
C
C
S
Yes,
I'd
like
to
thank
alma
for
that
document,
considering
the
amount
of
meetings
that
I've
been
to
the
chicano
community
has
never
had
the
opportunity
to
center
from
the
community
a
document
of
such
such
depth
accuracy
and
there
was
a
nobility
to
it-
there's
an
understanding,
a
complete
understanding
of
centering,
the
history
of
sasi
puedes
and
what
has
happened
to
the
mexicans
here.
So
I
just
want
to
thank
you
and
all
the
time
that
aruba
put
into
creating
that
document.
I
appreciate
that.
S
Secondly,
the
youngster
that
was
talking
about
using
youngster
there's
something
that
you
need
to
learn.
Don't
you
ever
speak
on
issues
about
the
suffering
that
has
gone
on
in
this
city?
If
number
one
you
went
from
it
number
two,
you
can't
relate
to
it.
It
is
disrespectful
and
presumptuous
to
do
that.
Don't.
G
J
A
Can
you
hear
me
yes,
hi?
My
name
is
ryan
globus.
I
live
in
v6
and
I
want
to
thank
staff
and
the
council
for
considering
this.
I
strongly
support
removing
parking
minimums
just
to
give
an
example,
my
husband
and
I
share
a
car
and
when
he
goes
to
the
martin
luther
king
library,
he
bikes,
because
it's
easy
to
do
so-
there's
not
a
giant
parking
lot
in
front
of
him
and
it
just
sort
of
feels
like
the
best
way
to
get
there.
A
But
when
he
goes
to
the
coleman
shopping
center,
which
is
surrounded
by
a
giant
parking
lot,
it
doesn't
feel
safe.
It
doesn't
feel
right,
and
so
he
drives
instead
and
that's
just
a
little
example
of
how
oh
providing
too
much
parking
makes
people
drive
more
often.
I
would
also
request
that
for
public
comments,
we
have
a
list
of
the
next
speakers,
so
I
can
tell
if
I'm
next
or
if
there's
like
100
people
in
front
of
me,
that
would
be
super
awesome.
Thank
you.
A
A
A
A
A
G
A
A
A
Economy
as
kind
of
a
specialized
process-
and
it
doesn't
have
to
be
the
major
driver
of
our
economy
at
this
time-
renewables
are
really
important.
Let's
build
that
and
and
and
build
towards
safe
safety
for
37
seconds.
They
are
building
down
in
gilroy
a
new
transit
center
they're
planning,
3
000
new
parking
spaces
for
it,
and
they
want
to
plan
for
more
that's
single
occupancy
vehicle
things
they
put
this
issue
off
because
we
need
to
debate
the
future
of
mass
transit.
A
D
In
this
conversation,
their
san
jose
city
council
members
represent
a
good
number
of
the
seats
on
the
vta
board
and
it's
going
to
be
essential
for
the
city
of
san
jose
to
be
supporting
through
vta
and
through
the
region
to
have
frequent
and
fast
public
transit
service
to
be
able
to
make
this
policy
work
and,
lastly,
keep
an
eye
out
for
go
anywhere.
Transit
passes
that
are
likely
to
be
coming
down
through
a
regional
transit,
fair
study,
which
could
really
help
provide
people
with
more
mobility.
That
would
support
this
policy.
Thank.
A
A
K
A
And
on
page
16,
it
says
parking
requirements
generally
impose
an
undue
burden
on
housing
development,
particularly
for
transit-oriented
or
affordable
housing.
These
requirements
have
a
disproportionate
impact
on
housing
for
low
income
households,
because
these
families
tend
to
own
fewer
vehicles,
but
are
nonetheless
burdened
by
the
extra
cost
of
parkings.
A
A
A
If
you
do
proper
community
engagement,
you
will
know
that
people
are
very
dissatisfied
with
the
current
system
because
of
time,
cleanliness,
etc.
I
think
you
thinking
that
just
because
transit
is
available
near
them
that
doesn't
mean
that
they're
going
to
use
it.
I
think
it's
unrealistic
to
think
that
someone's
just
gonna
use
public
transit
or
riding
a
bike,
so
I'd
suggest
that
you
look
more
into
that
and
finding
ways
of
actually
encouraging
people
to
use
public
transit
check
your
assumptions.
A
J
Tony
and
thanks
to
all
the
members
of
the
community
for
offering
their
insights,
I
want
to
say
one
more
thing
about
this
panel
that
just
offered
their
insights
to
us
over
the
last
hour
or
so,
which
is
it's
not
uncommon
that
we
will
have.
The
preachers
then
bring
the
choir
and
we
will
hear
essentially
the
same
message
we
heard
from
staff.
That
is
not
the
case
here.
I
really
appreciate
that
all
of
you
offer
very
diverse
perspectives
and
their
very
real
perspectives.
J
I
know
I
live
east
of
downtown
between
east
side
and
downtown
and
I'm
aware
of
the
fact
that
in
some
of
our
most
struggling
neighborhoods,
that
is
where
the
parking
challenges
are
enormous,
because
we
have
a
lot
of
families
living
under
one
roof
and
everybody
needs
a
car
to
get
to
work
and
it's
brutal,
and
so
we
have
to
offer
solutions
that
help
everyone.
I
appreciate
many
of
the
perspectives
have
been
offered
here.
J
M
M
M
All
three
of
them
now
go
to
three
different
schools:
I'd
love
to
be
able
to
take
public
transportation
or
put
him
on
the
back
of
my
bike,
but
it's
it's
just
the
realities
of
it
is
are
difficult
to
to
wrap
my
head
around
it.
So
I
I
like
to
know
how
we're
going
to
engage,
how
we're
going
to
offer
solutions
if
we
truly
move
in
this
direction,
how
we're
going
to
ease
the
the
magnitude
of
burden
on
single
moms
who
have
multiple
children
having
to
travel
to
multiple
places.
J
G
F
F
We
have
a
lot
of
work
to
do
to
create
the
entire
system
that
helps
the
single
mother,
who
needs
to
get
around
quicker
right.
So
this,
along
with
many
other
things
that
are
going
on,
are
what
we
need
to
kind
of
contextualize.
This
within
also
the
policy
isn't
going
to
happen.
Its
effects
aren't
going
to
be
immediate.
It's
going
to
be
over
time
right.
M
Mayor,
if
I
may
catch
myself,
I
I
really
appreciate
the
feedback
right
now,
and
I
recognize
that
this
will
will
not
be
an
overnight
solution
or
nor
will
it
take
effect
immediately,
as
as,
as
the
last
panelists
just
explained,
you
know
it's
each
project
and
they
and
they
take
a
while
from
entitlement
to
shovels
in
the
ground.
So
I
I
get
that
I.
M
I
do
hope,
though,
that
as
we're
engaging
the
community
that
we
do
it
a
little
differently
that
that
we
get
creative
in
that
engagement,
especially
in
low-income
communities,
those
communities
of
concern,
which
is
definitely
district.
Five
we're
up
against
one
end
of
the
city
trying
to
get
our
kids
to
multiple
schools.
M
I
wish
school
buses
were
back
in
in
effect
by
the
way
that's
going
to
be
my
plug,
but
but
I
I
I,
I
think
it
would
be
a
really
creative
effort
to
walk
in
the
shoes
of
any
one
of
these
families
and
just
see
where
they
trek.
You
know
if
you
were
to
kind
of
map
out
what
I
have
to
do
for
three
children.
It
would
be
nearly
impossible
unless
I
got
up
at
4
30
in
the
morning
to
try
and
get
the
kids
to
school
by
7
30..
M
I
think
she
said
three
and-
and
I
I
do
think
that
this
would
this
would
have
a
huge
impact
on
one
of
the
poorest
communities
in
the
city
of
san
jose.
I
I'd
like
to
be
able
to
truly
dig
deeper
into
that
and
find
out
how
we
can
alleviate
that
and
make
sure
that
these
vehicles
aren't
going
to
go
into
those
residential
streets.
H
H
One
of
the
models
in
this
engagement
that
I
just
wanted
to
highlight
was
was
focus
groups
that
came
into
neighborhood
associations
or
organized
groups
such
as
aruva,
we're
still
on
the
docket
to
do
one
of
our
focus
groups
with
them,
but
just
to
kind
of
open
up
the
conversation
and
as
you're
pointing
out
live
a
day
in
their
shoes,
not
make
any
assumptions
kind
of
what
are
what
are
the
pressure
points
that
you're
facing?
What
are
your
lived
experiences?
How
do
you
get
around?
H
What
are
your
mobility
needs
rather
than
kind
of
imposing
you
know
how
do
you
like
this?
So
I
think
it's
really
important
that
we
continue
to
do
that.
Dialogue
and
and
certainly
hear
the
points
that
have
been
raised
here
today
and
you
know
intend
to,
I
think,
continue
to
do
focus
group
conversations
that
are
a
little
bit
more
open-ended
than
what
you
might
typically
see
in
an
outreach
process.
J
J
L
I'll
be
I'll,
be
really
brief.
I
mean
first,
I
also
just
I
want
to
thank
our
excellent
panel,
especially
it
was
really
great
to
hear
that
diversity
of
thought
on
the
panel.
It's
we
don't
always
get
that
and
just
appreciate.
It
really
appreciate
staff
for
putting
on
an
excellent
presentation
and
overall
discussion
this
morning.
So
just
thank
you
all
for
that.
I
think
you
know
I
feel
like
seeing
the
data
in
the
case
that
you've
laid
out.
I
really
do
feel
like
directionally
here.
This
is
correct
and
there
are
a
lot
of
really
good
arguments.
L
There
are
clearly
inefficiencies
and
hidden
costs
in
the
status
quo.
Today
I
mean,
I
think,
that's
undeniable
and
so
you've,
given
us
a
potential
path
forward
here.
That
certainly
resonates
with
me.
At
the
same
time,
I
just
want
to
reemphasize.
I
think
what
you're
hearing
from
many,
I
think
many
of
my
colleagues
at
least
I'm
hearing
and
from
some
of
our
panelists-
is
just
the
incredible
geographic
and
social
and
economic
diversity.
The
the
diverse
lived
experience
in
our
community
and
it's
you
know
it's
it's
a
it's
a
beautiful
thing
and
you
know
it's
interesting.
L
I
was
reflecting,
I
lived
15
years
studying
and
working
without
owning
a
car
in
boston,
washington
dc
and
san
francisco,
but
throughout
all
those
years
I
was
young.
Mostly
single
did
not
have
kids,
you
know
was
living
in
really
transit
rich.
I
mean
incredibly
truly
transit-rich
areas
and
it
worked
great
and
so
I've
seen
the
other
side
of
it.
L
I
mean
this
is
this
is
about
an
overall
shift
in
people's
life
like
what
happens
when
they
walk
out
their
front
door
every
day,
and
so
I
I
just
want
to
re-emphasize.
I
think
it's
an
obvious
point.
We've
all
been
making,
but
I
just
get
nervous
when
it
sounds
like
policy
prescriptions,
make
a
lot
of
sense
from
a
bird's
eye
view
of
kind
of
directionally.
L
J
B
Just
want
to
respond
to
that,
because
we've
heard
that
we've
heard
this
one
size
doesn't
fit
all
a
few
times.
I
just
want
to
offer
a
perspective
that
the
current
minimum
parking
requirements
is,
in
fact
one
size
fits
all
that
does
not
respect
the
diversity
of
the
neighborhoods
that
that
is
literally
in
the
code.
You
want
to
build
commercial,
this
many
parking
spaces.
What
eliminating
parking
requirements
does
is
actually
allow
you
to
do
exactly
what
you
were
talking
about.
Councilmember
mayhem
is
consider
the
diversity
of
perspectives,
a
developer
could
say
near
transit.
B
I
can
provide
a
little
bit
less
parking
because
people
are
going
to
take
transit
if
I'm
not
near
transit.
I
can
provide
a
little
more
parking
again.
There's
no
maximums
here
so
just
wanted
to
reflect
specifically
on
that
that
I
actually
think
you're
you're
quite
right
about
the
diversity
of
places
and
that
that's
what
this
change
is
allowing
you
to
do.