►
Description
City of San José, California
Envision San José 2040 General Plan 4-Year Review Task Force Meeting of November 19, 2020
This public meeting will be conducted 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=816392&GUID=ABFEBF99-777E-4A71-AF12-C34459273767
A
A
A
A
A
B
C
Okay,
all
right
welcome
to
the
tenth
and
final
meeting
of
the
general
planned,
four-year
review
task
force
for
all
the
task
force-
members.
Oh,
we
can't
do
it.
I
wanted
you
to
to
do
one
of
the
emotions
and
express
how
you
were
feeling
the
zoom
emotions,
but
we
don't
have
that
option
anymore.
It's
gone!
So
thank
you.
All!
It's
been
a
it's
been
a
great
experience
and
we'll
talk
some
more
about
that
at
the
end.
But
we
wanted
to
jump
right
into
this
and
hopefully
have
a
smooth
final
meeting.
C
C
We're
gonna,
do
the
minutes
and
then
we'll
of
course,
have
a
staff
presentation
on
the
evergreen
east
hills,
development
policy,
we'll
take
public
comments
and
then
we'll
have
task,
force,
discussion
and
recommendations,
and
I
don't
know
if
there
are
next
steps.
I
guess
the
staff
will
just
let
us
know
what
the
next
steps
are.
So
can
I
get
a
motion
to
approve
the
october
29th
meeting
synopsis
and
please
say
your
names
linda
so
moved.
C
C
F
Great,
thank
you
teresa
so
good
evening,
good
evening.
Everyone
so
you
know
again
teresa
said:
welcome
task
force,
members
of
the
public
jared
hart
with
the
planning
division,
I'm
also
joined
by
our
planning
staff
team
tonight
and
department
of
transportation
staff
as
well,
including
jessica,
zinke,
deputy
director
of
planning
and
project
delivery
and
wilson
tam
transportation
planning
manager.
F
Over
the
last
year,
it's
been
been
been
a
year
now,
since
we
kicked
this
off
a
lot,
lot's
happened.
You
know
we
appreciate
everyone
being
flexible
as
we
navigated
through
this
virtual
format,
and-
and
hopefully
you
know
all
future
four-year
reviews
can
be
held
in
person.
Again,
I
just
really
wanna.
Thank
you
all
for
your
participation
in
this
process,
and
with
that
I
will
I'll
hand
it
over
to
cuon
to
begin
the
presentation.
A
A
Evergreen
is
primarily
a
residential
community
adjacent
to
the
eastern
foothills
of
the
city,
with
residents
commuting
outward
to
the
freeways
in
the
mornings
and
coming
back
home
in
the
evenings
in
the
mid
20th
century,
when
development
became
robust
in
san
jose,
new
development
evergreen
was
constrained
due
to
congestion
on
existing
roadways
and
it
was
prone
to
flooding
to
address
this
problem.
The
city
adopted
the
evergreen
development
policy
in
1976.
A
the
policy
limited
new
residential
growth,
so
that
the
area's
traffic
circulation
remain
an
acceptable
level
of
service.
The
evergreen
development
policy
also
created
flood
control
policies,
which
included
allowing
development
to
occur
only
if
it
protected
from
the
100-year
flood
and
did
not
divert
flood
or
cause
flooding
on
other
properties.
A
A
A
The
evergreen
east
hills
vision
strategy
process
was
concluded
in
2008
when
city
state
council
updated
the
evergreen
development
policy
to
include
a
small
increment
of
new
housing
and
commercial
growth
and
referred
further
consideration
of
land
uses
within
the
evergreen
development
policy
area
to
the
envision
san
jose
2040
general
plan
that
was
updated.
That
was
updated
and
adopted
in
2011.
A
The
current
version
of
the
policy
is
the
evergreen
east
hills,
development
policy
adopted
by
city
council
in
2008.,
both
the
2008
policy
and
the
city's
envisioned
2040
general
plan
govern
the
future
development
of
the
evergreen
area,
along
with
other
city-wide
policies.
So
you
can
see
here
on.
The
right
is
the
boundary
of
the
evergreen
development
policy
and
color
inside
it
is
the
24
a
general
plan.
Land
use
designations
so
for
the
evergreen
east
hills,
development
policy.
B
Great
thank
you.
Keulan
next
slide,
wilson,
all
right,
so
the
evergreenies
hills
development
policy
adopted
in
2008
as
kulan
just
mentioned,
was
picking
up
on
the
previous
intentions
for
evergreen,
but
with
a
very
significant
as
in
low
limit
on
the
amount
of
development
that
would
be
allowed
moving
forward
from
that
point.
So
it
established
this
development
pool
capacity
of
only
500
dwelling
units
about
500,
000
square
feet
of
retail
and
75
000
square
feet
of
commercial
or
office
space,
so
within
the
evergreen
area.
B
Next
slide
part
of
the
reason
that
this
history,
since
1976
and
moving
forward
exists
within
the
evergreen
area
is
because
it
is
really
one
of
our
unique
communities
and
there's
a
lot
of
need
to
really
think
about
the
physical
barriers.
The
land
use
patterns,
the
diversity
of
the
community
and
socioeconomics
as
well
and
kind
of
how
these
all
come
together
and
exacerbate
kind
of
the
high
traffic
patterns
that
allow
people
very
few
ways
in
and
out
of
the
evergreen
area.
B
When
this
previous
policy
was
adopted,
both
the
general
plan
and
statewide
changes
to
sequa
that
produce
a
new
standard
based
on
vehicular
travel
for
sql
transportation
have
been
adopted
and
they
really
meet
those
objectives.
That's
our
fundamental
kind
of
basis
for
the
recommendation,
change
that
our
objectives
stay
the
same,
but
since
2008
we
can
really
think
about
how
the
general
plan
and
the
vmt
policy
reinforce
the
previous
objectives
and
make
it
unnecessary
to
continue
or
extend
the
evergreen
east
hills,
development
policy.
G
So
really
the
improvements
are
really
about
trying
to
improve
the
vehicular
operations
at
the
intersession
level.
So
that's
why,
back
in
the
day,
the
policy
identified
it
some
exclusive
right
turn
pockets
at
some
intersections,
including
this
one
and
this
intersection
has
been
completed,
but
over
the
years,
dot
also
have
upgraded
other.
No,
you
know
like
under
other
improvements
at
that
at
this
intersection
beyond
just
the
pockets,
which
include
the
bike
lanes
class.
Two
bike
lanes
have
been
installed
over
the
years
along
this
corridor.
G
The
other
improvements
is
that
all
color
and
adrian-
and
this
is
a
full
signal-
a
new
signal
installed
at
this
location-
and
you
know
the
policy
code
for
a
new
signal
and
then,
when
dot
is
ready
to
construct
it
roughly
two
or
three
years
ago.
We
also
included
a
bike
lane
to
support
that
with
the
median
in
the
middle
and
also
buffered
bike
lanes
on
the
side.
G
And
other
pretty
significant
improvements
per
the
policy
and
fortunately
we
were
able
to
deliver
this.
You
know
without
using
significant
portion
of
our
tip
money
collected
is
the
interchange
project.
You
know
the
you
know.
The
interchange,
improvements
at
tully
capital
and
urban
planner
have
been
constructed
by
caltrans
process
over
the
last
10
years,
or
so,
and
and
also
there
was
a
exclusive
auxiliary
southbound
lane
between
capital
interchange
and
the
huber
burner.
Interchange.
G
G
The
entitled
development
would
not
be
subject
to
the
tip
until
they
are
ready
to
pull
their
building
permits.
So
when
these
existing
entitlements
were
ready
to
pull
their
building
permits
and
ready
to
construct,
then
they
will
be
subject
to
this
policy
by
having
to
pay
the
required
funds,
which
we
expect
that
that
would
yield
another
3.7
million
dollars.
G
So
when
we
evaluated
you
know
per
the
task
force
a
scope
of
work
for
this
four-year
review
of
the
general
plan.
One
of
the
things
we
have
considered
is
we
do
not
have
all
the
money
in
the
world
to
fund
the
remaining
15
intersections
per
policy,
because
we
know
that
there
are
still
outstanding
funds
that
have
yet
been
collected,
and
so
using
the
6.6
million
dollars.
Where
should
we
invest?
G
There
are
also
another
four
intersections
that
will
not
be
fully
funded
by
the
collective
funds
and
these
improvements.
What
we
call
the
relatively
lower
priority
would
be
constructed
when
additional
tip
would
come
what
would
be
available
and
those
funds
will
be
paid
by
any
existing
entitlements
who
are
ready
to
pull
their
permit
in
the
future
and
the
maps
on
the
right
kind
of
show.
G
F
Great,
thank
you
wilson,
so
staff's
second
recommendation
is
is
to
continue
to
achieve
the
objectives
of
the
evergreen
east
hills,
development
policy,
to
control
growth
by
retiring,
the
development
policy
and
allowing
future
development
to
move
forward
through
implementation
of
the
general
plan
and
transition
to
the
city's
bmt
policy,
which
supports
the
intent
of
the
development
policy
to
prevent
further
residential
sprawl
in
hillside
neighborhoods,
and
also
allows
commercial
office
and
retail
growth
in
transit.
Supportive
areas
next
slide.
F
F
F
So,
as
you
can
see,
outside
of
urban
villages,
most
properties
have
the
yellow
designation,
which
is
the
residential
neighborhood
designation
and
is
a
designation
for
single-family
homes.
Most
of
this
area
is
entirely
developed
and
you
know
there's
really
limited
opportunities
for
new
single-family
residential
development.
F
So
these
sites
they
have
a
range
of
non-residential
land
use
designations,
including
public
quasi
public
commercial,
industrial
as
well
as
private
recreation.
So
to
allow
for
for
residential
development
approval.
You
know
to
allow
residential
development
on
these
sites.
Approval
by
the
city
council
would
be
needed
of
amendments
to
the
general
plan
rezonings.
In
some
cases,
annexation
into
the
city
would
be
required
where
higher
density
residential
development
is
allowed
in.
F
The
general
plan
is
within
those
designated
urban
villages
which
is
is,
as
you
know,
is
one
of
the
you
know
the
major
strategies
of
the
general
plan
to
support
smart
growth
and
and
locate
housing
and
services
near
each
other
to
reduce
the
need
for
car
trips
next
slide,
please
so
taking
a
closer
look
at
our
urban
villages
within
the
policy
area
that
there's
there's
currently
seven
urban
villages.
This
is
part
of
the
general
plan,
four-year
review.
F
The
task
force
has
recommended
to
remove
two
of
those
urban
villages,
that
being
the
evergreen
village
and
the
capital
expressway
foxdale
urban
village,
and
also
add
one
urban
village,
and
that's
the
the
story:
road
urban
villages.
That's
shown
there
on
the
map,
leaving
a
total
of
six
urban
villages,
and
you
can
see
the
two
that
are
recommended
to
be
removed.
Those
are
marked
with
the
red
axes.
F
F
The
task
force
is
also
recommending
staff
in
the
task
force,
reducing
the
number
of
housing
units
by
the
same
amount
in
the
remaining
urban
villages.
So
the
overall
planned
housing
growth
in
urban
villages
within
the
palsy
area
would
not
change
from
where
we
are
today,
and
with
that,
I'm
going
to
pass
back
to
dot
staff.
B
Great
all
right,
so
now
we
get
to
return
to
the
topic.
You
listened
to
us
discuss
about
two
months
ago,
which
is
vehicle
miles
traveled
and
what
it
means
for
the
state
for
the
city,
etc,
and
so
you'll
probably
recall
that,
beginning
with
the
state
in
2013,
the
state
changed
the
law
and
moved
all
of
us
within
california
towards
measuring
how
much
vehicular
travel
is
associated
with
the
project
instead
of
measuring
particular
points
level
of
service
as
our
transportation
metric
under
sequa.
B
So
this
again
is
is
a
way
of
meeting
the
evergreen
objectives
around
protecting
from
uncontrolled
growth
delivery
needed
transportation,
improvements
which,
as
we
look
forward,
will
include
a
lot
more
multimodal
connections
to
round
out
the
ability
to
get
around
evergreen
and
other
parts
of
the
city
without
needing
to
rely
on
a
car
and
protect
the
environment.
So
moving
forward.
B
Vehicle
miles
travel
again,
if
you,
you
know,
didn't
think
about
this
ad
nauseum
since
september.
It
really
measures
how
far
people
will
need
to
travel
on
average
by
car
by
vehicle,
and
so
there's
no
there's
no
tracking
of
people
to
measure
vehicle
miles
traveled.
Rather,
what
we
use
is
an
existing
travel
demand
model
that
vta
manages
for
the
whole
region
that
estimates
how
much
people
will
need
to
travel
in
different
places
and
how
they'll
get
around,
whether
by
transit
by
car,
bicycle
walking,
etc.
B
So
consistent
with
the
previous
existing
evergreen
east
hills,
development
policy,
the
vmt
policy
aims
at
the
same
things
promoting
dense,
mixed-use,
infill
development
and
present
preventing
sprawl
into
open
spaces
and
reducing
our
environmental
footprint.
Overall,
the
map
on
the
left-
I'm
sorry,
wilson,
go
back
to
the
set
because
I
didn't
introduce
what
you're
looking
at
this
is
a
essentially
a
heat
map
of
what
average
vehicle
miles
traveled
is
in
different
parts
of
san
jose,
so
the
green
represents
the
lowest
average
vehicle
miles.
B
Traveled
people
may
choose
to
get
around
by
car,
but
they
travel
less
less
on
average
in
those
cars
and
they
have
more
options
for
non
non-auto
travel
and
then
you
kind
of
get
up
to
city
wide
average
within
the
yellow.
The
orange
is
just
above
average,
and
then
the
red
is
the
places
within
the
city
where
average
vehicle
miles.
B
Traveled
is
quite
high
relative
to
the
rest
of
the
city
and
region,
and
it
is
unlikely
that
any
individual
development
could
really
do
much
other
than
a
kind
of
absolute
trip
cap
to
get
below
citywide
average.
All
right
next
slide
now
so
now
we're
zooming
in
on
evergreen.
In
particular.
This
map
is
looking
at
average
home
based
vehicle
miles
traveled
within
the
evergreen
area.
B
So
you
can
see
that
this
is
kind
of
a
different
view
than
the
one
that
jared
showed
of
the
land
use
map.
But
there
are
important
overlaps
here,
which
is
that
just
like
the
previous
and
existing
evergreen
policies
have
been
about
making
it
pretty
hard,
very
difficult
in,
in
fact,
to
develop
in
significant
ways
in
most
of
evergreen.
B
Similarly,
a
via
a
vmt
based
lens
limiting
vehicular
travel
also
said
you
know
what
in
most
of
evergreen,
we
shouldn't
develop
much
more
right.
So
that's
that's
the
gist
of
this
map
and
you'll
also
see
that
it's
important
because
market
rate
residential
outside
of
urban
villages
doesn't
have
a
real
path
forward
in
the
red
parts
of
this
map.
B
G
This
decision
tree
to
help
us
go
through
the
step-by-step
process
of
how
these
various
cdwi
policies
would
would
come
into
play
together
as
part
of
the
development
review
process
and
will
explain
why,
as
just
that,
like
this
market
rate,
a
large
residential
development
would
basically
not
have
a
pathway
forward
in
the
red
area
in
the
evergreen.
So
first
the
first
step
when
a
new
development
application
comes
in.
G
We
would
check
whether
this
development
is
big
or
small,
and
by
small
we
mean
it
will
be
up
to
15
units
of
single-family
housing
or
25
units
of
multi-family
housing.
Again
like
we.
The
first
step
is
really
about
checking
the
general
plan
destination
and
the
zoning.
If
these,
if
the
general
plan
in
the
zone
does
not
allow
for
single-family
housing
to
happen,
then
the
vmt
policy
basically
would
not
apply
at
all,
because
we
would
be
kind
of
restricting
that
development
at
the
first
step
level.
G
So
the
the
second
step
I
was
just
talking
about
is
really
under
the
assumption
that,
when
the
general
plan
in
the
zoning
allow
for
this
type
of
residential
development
to
happen,
then
what
can
the
vmt
policy
come
as
the
next
step
to
further
restrict
development
in
the
review
process?
So,
as
I
said,
the
next
step
is
to
check
whether
this
development
is
small
and
maybe
small.
Then
you
would
have
a
green
light.
You
know
the
policy.
G
The
bmt
policy
allows
for
small
development
to
happen
in
the
african
area,
up
to
15
units
of
single-family
housing
and
comparatively
the
current
east
hill.
Although
sorry,
the
current
evergreen
eco
development
policy
allows
for
a
residential
development
of
up
to
35
units,
so
you
can
do
a
comparison
here.
The
vmt
allows
for
up
to
15
units
of
small
single-family
housing
or
25
units
of
multi-family
housing
versus
35
under
the
existing
enterprise
policy.
G
So
if
the
residential
development
is
not
small,
then
what
happens
so
there
are
two
paths
forwards
and
showed
by
the
two
arrows
here
and
I'm
going
to
show
you
the
first
path,
which
is
we
will
evaluate
whether
the
proposed
development
is
located
in
the
lower
vmt
areas
and
by
lower
vmt
areas.
We
mean
the
you
know
per
the
map
that
just
just
showed
the
green
areas,
the
yellow
area
and
the
orange
area.
Those
are
the
areas
that
are
relatively.
G
However,
if
you
are
in
the
high
vmt
area,
which
is
in
the
red
area,
the
larger
area
that
just
showed
in
the
last
screen,
then
you
would
have
a
much
more
difficult
pathway
forward.
Basically,
as
jessica
just
said,
unless
you
are
providing
100,
affordable
housing
in
the
red
area
and
by
100,
affordable
housing,
we
mean
you
know
below
eighty
percent
average
median
income.
G
G
G
So
under
those
scenario,
you
still
have
to
be
located
in
the
urban
villages.
In
order
for
you
to
proceed,
and
as
part
of
the
council
of
writing
consideration,
you
have
to
do
a
bunch
of
criteria
in
order
for
the
council
to
consider
to
override
your
bmt
impact
within
the
urban
villages,
and
one
of
one
of
the
criteria
would
be
paying
the
vmt
based
fee
and
the
vmt
based
fee
is,
is
really
hard
to
compare
with
the
existing
evergreen
policy
tip
because
they're
not
measured
using
the
same
unit.
G
One
is
based
on
bmt
and
the
other
one
is
based
on
network
service,
but
based
on
some
high
level
staff
calculations.
The
vmt
fee
is
roughly
three
to
four
times
higher
than
the
existing
effort
green
fee.
That
is
based
on
level
of
service.
So
you
can
see
that
you
know
you
know.
From
the
fee
perspective,
the
vmt
policy
actually
provides
the
more
stringent
requirement
for
the
development
to
proceed.
G
G
The
office
development
has
a
different
vmt
map
because
the
vmt
is
not
based
on
residents
behavior,
but
based
on
how
workers
come
to
the
evergreen
to
work
so,
but
the
general
trend
is
relatively
similar.
We
have
a
large
red
zone
on
the
kind
of
a
substantial
portion
of
the
evergreen
area.
These
are
the
you
know
the
workers
who
come
from
afar
and
driving
in
and
work
in
that
area
and
because
of
the
lack
of
transit
options
provided
to
them,
they
have
to
drive
very
far
distances
to
get
to
their
workplace
in
evergreen.
G
Similarly,
those
who
work
in
the
kind
of
like
the
north
west
quadrant
of
the
evergreen
area
do
not
need
to
drive
as
far
because,
potentially
because
there
are
a
more
robust
transit
system
on
in
that
area
and
and
therefore
you
know,
we
see
the
little
green
area
in
the
middle
where
the
arcadia
is
rich
area
is
at
and
then
gradually
you
have.
Your
vmt
starts
to
grow
in
the
yellow
area.
G
Further
on
to
the
orange
area,
and
eventually
as
you're
heading
eastward
you're
hitting
the
red
area-
and
it's
also
interesting
that
we
have
done
some
quick
analysis
on
kind
of
calculating
the
vmt
level
for
some
of
the
sample
sites.
You
can
see
the
numbers
on
the
right
of
the
screen
and
it
kind
of
gives
you
the
idea
that
you
know
you
know.
G
The
vmt
threshold
for
jobs
is
12.2,
as
you
can
see
on
the
left
side
of
the
screen,
and
so,
if
you
compare
that
with
a
bmt
level
for
a
site
such
as
evergreen
valley,
college,
you're,
looking
at
19.10,
so
there's
a
quite
of
a
delta
there.
So
that
means
like
the
further
apart
from
the
threshold,
the
more
difficult
you
are
conditioned
to
in
order
to
have
a
pathway
forward.
G
G
G
Sorry,
yeah,
and
on
top
of
that,
you
would
also
be
subject
to
a
vmt
based
similar
to
the
residential
vmt
base
b.
The
commercial
vmt
base
fee
is
also
roughly
three
to
four
times
higher
than
our
current
evergreen
iso
development
policy
tip
fees,
and
even
if
you
do
all
that
right,
you
would
also
need
to
establish
a
trip
cap,
meaning
that,
on
an
annual
basis,
you
would
have
to
report
to
the
city
about
how
many
trips
or
how
much
vmt
your
site
is
generating.
G
So
before
I
wrap
up
with
the
stack
recommendations
here,
I
would
also
like
to
quickly
highlight
that
you
know
when
we
met
with
d8
community
members
on
monday,
we
are
very
fortunate
to
have
an
opportunity
to
meet
with
them.
Some
of
the
comments
that
we
have
heard
is
really
about.
You
know.
Are
we
able
to
address
the
long-term
transmission
issues
in
the
evergreen
area
through
this
staff
recommendations?
G
As
as
an
overriding
consideration
for
council,
these
fees
or
mitigation
will
be
more
tailored
to
the
multimodal
safety
oriented
improvements
that
we
don't
or
that
we
did
not
actually
see
much
per
our
existing
effort
policy
and
the
previous
level
of
service
regime.
So
this
bmt
policy
is
more
about
trying
to
tackle
the
root
problems
of
transportation
in
not
only
evergreen
but
everywhere
in
the
city
as
to
improving
the
safety
and
the
multimodal
needs
of
for
the
area,
and
so
just
want
to
highlight
that
you
know
you
know.
G
C
I
J
J
D
Yourself
hi.
Thank
you
so
much
for
the
presentation.
This
is
kathy
trung
from
supervisor
cindy
chavis's
office.
She
sent
in
a
lot
of
support
supporting
staff
recommendation
earlier
today
to
try
to
transition
the
evergreen
development
policy
area
to
the
city's
new
vehicle
miles
travel
protections,
but
I
just
do
want
to
read
a
few
of
her
comments
into
the
record
further.
So,
as
you
all
may
know,
the
county,
in
cooperation
with
the
city
recently
completed
a
retail
view,
vision
plan
which
engaged
the
community
in
exploring
the
repurposing
of
the
180
acres
of
retail
view
airport.
D
D
Transitioning,
the
evergreen
development
policy
area
to
vmc
protections
will
allow
the
community's
aspiration
for
the
area
to
be
realized
within
the
next
decade.
The
area
of
retail
view
east
reach,
mall
and
the
former
cleveland
hills
golf
course
are
three
large
properties
that
present
major
place,
making
opportunities
within
the
evergreen
development
policy
area.
This
area
will
be
linked
to
the
rest
of
the
county
and
the
greater
bay
area
by
mass
transit
with
the
completion
of
the
east
ridge
transit
station
connection
to
bart.
D
C
K
K
E
Hi
so
I'd
like
to
start
with
cindy
chavez
and
the
people
who
had
just
spoken
in
favor
of
developing
reed
hillview,
I
don't
know
what
community
they've
been
speaking
with,
but
every
community
member
I
speak
with
is
not
in
favor
of
developing
that
property
they're
they're
in
favor
of
keeping
it
as
an
airport.
So
I
don't
know
where
that's
coming
from.
As
far
as
the
vmt
goes,
I
don't
think
that
that
is
in
our
community's
best
interest.
E
Honestly,
most
most
of
our
community
is
in
that
red
tier
and
our
people,
when
commuting
is
happening,
are
spending
a
third
or
a
half
of
their
commute,
just
trying
to
get
to
their
freeway,
and
if
you
build
these
urban
villages,
even
if
they're,
at
a
place
that
isn't
too
far
from
the
freeway,
like,
I
think
one
was
mentioned
at
silver,
creek
and
capital
expressway,
and
then
there's
one
mentioned
at
a
born
and
white.
That
still
is
going
to
gum
it
up
for
everyone
else.
E
So
I
have
been.
You
know,
paying
attention
for
the
last
couple
decades
and
I
actually
am
am
in
favor
of
urban
villages.
But
when
I
think
of
an
urban
village
coming
here,
we
might
be
able
to
take.
You
know
some
retail
on
the
lower
floor
and
25
units
on
the
next
floor,
but
not
250
units
and
the
amount
of
additional
units
you're
looking
at
adding
to
the
congestion
in
this
community
is
overwhelming.
E
L
Yourself,
hi
and
thank
you
staff
for
the
thorough
presentation.
This
is
allison
singlani
policy
and
research
associate
with
silicon
valley
at
home
and
for
the
last
12
years
my
family
and
I
have
also
been
proud
residents
of
east
san
jose.
I'm
urging
the
task
force
to
approve
staff's
recommendation
to
move
from
the
evergreen
east
hills,
development
policy
to
the
vehicle
miles
travel
policy,
because
our
families
and
children
in
east
san
jose
need
and
deserve
more
opportunities
for
affordable
homes
near
safe
and
effective
public
transportation
and
clean
healthy
air
quality.
L
The
vmt
policy
will
allow
more
homes
where
east
san
jose
residents
can
leverage
robust
transit
services,
giving
residents
more
equitable
access
to
high
quality
jobs
and
mobility
and
building
more
complete
communities
linking
affordable
housing
and
public
transportation
in
district
8
not
only
expands
equitable
transit
access
to
those
who
need
it
most.
It
also
complies
with
state
mandates
to
place
housing
in
ways
that
reduce
greenhouse
gas
emissions,
protecting
east
san
jose
residents,
who
have
suffered
from
air
pollution
at
disproportionate
rates.
L
Most
importantly,
the
vmt
policy
increases
the
city's
ability
to
rise
to
its
critical,
affordable
housing
allocation
target,
which
will
be
a
challenge
in
the
coming
years.
That
will
require
every
policy
tool
in
our
collective
toolbox
to
meet
the
needs
of
our
community,
leaving
behind
the
outdated
evergreen
east
hills.
Development
policy
in
favor
of
the
vmt
policy
strengthens
the
future
of
our
families
in
east
san
jose
by
allowing
more
opportunities
for
affordable
housing,
promoting
the
vitality
of
east
san
jose
and
prioritizing
people
of
color
and
communities
of
concern.
L
E
M
Hi,
my
name
is
andre
hunt.
I've
been
calling
it.
I
actually
would
like
to
jump
on
sandy's
statement
that
she
just
made
in
terms
of
the
evergreen
visioning
strategy
and
looking
at
sites
in
evergreen
and
looking
at
how
we
might
create
some
opportunities
and
development
opportunities
based
on
how
those
sites
are
delivering
services
that
are
important
to
the
community
and
will
help
increase
the
ability
to
do
affordable
housing
in
evergreen.
I
This
vmt
policy
will
continue
to
support
many
key
goals
of
the
original
evergreen
policy,
but
also
providing
a
path
for
the
development
of
more
housing
and
specifically,
more
affordable
housing
in
the
parts
of
the
city
where
we
really
want
to
see
more
growth,
urban,
core
and
near
expansion
with
our
community
facing
such
a
severe
housing
affordability
crisis,
we
really
need
to
do
everything
we
can
to
open
up
more
opportunities
for
affordable
housing
and
moving
towards
vmt
costs
is
one
way
we
can
do
that.
Thank
you.
M
Thank
you
and
thank
you
dot
for
this
really
clear
and
easily
digestible
presentation
on
this
topic.
I
really
appreciate
it.
My
name
is
emily
schwing
and
I'm
the
marketing
impact
manager
at
veggielution
and
representative
from
seaside
party
collective,
and
today,
I'm
urging
the
task
force
to
approve
the
staff
recommendation
for
transitioning
the
evergreen
east
hills
development
plan
from
the
current
unsustainable
metric
for
assessing
transit
impacts
to
the
more
current
metric
of
vmt.
M
M
Using
vmt
means
that
environmental
studies
focused
on
actual
environmental
impacts,
especially
including
pollution
and
global
warming.
Again,
thank
you
staff
for
all
your
work,
all
the
work
you
put
on
this
and
I
encourage
the
task
force
to
accept
the
staff's
recommendation
and
switch
over
to
vnt
metrics.
Thank
you.
I
Thank
you
so
much
and
good
evening,
my
name
is
victor
vazquez.
I
lived
and
worked
in
the
san
jose
mayfair
area
for
about
10
years
now,
overall
and
I'm
a
part
of
the
640
collecting
social
mayfair,
and
I'm
also
here
to
echo
what
my
peers
have
said:
we're
urging
the
task
force
to
prove
that
staff's
recommendation
of
transitioning
that
everybody
needs
sales
development
plan
from
the
level
of
surface
metrics
to
this
new
surface,
new
metric
known
as
bmts,
and
definitely
it
is
an
environmental
justice
issue
for
us.
I
As
you
know,
last
night
we
heard
over
100
community
members
speak
about
the
impact
of
you
know:
pollution
in
our
areas,
but
also
the
need
for
for
housing
and
specifically
affordable
housing,
and
we
are
excited
to
see
this
type
of
change
so
that
we
can
make
sure
that
wheat,
hillville
and
the
eastern
area
also
continues
to.
You
know,
take
its
own
share
of
affordable
housing
into
into
your
neighborhood,
and
we
are
happy
to
see
that,
because
that
means
that
more
people
have
a
chance
to
live
and
not
be
on
the
streets.
I
L
I
I
I'm
I'm
sorry,
I
guess
I
I
still
don't
know
how
to
use
zoom.
After
all
these
zooms
that
we
full
disclosure,
my
name,
is
omar
torres.
I
work
for
councilmember,
magdalena
carrasco,
but
I'm
speaking
on
behalf
of
of
many
residents
in
the
east,
in
the
in
east,
san
jose
and
evergreen,
and
supporting
staff
recommendation
to
transition
out
of
the
evergreen
east
hills
development
policy.
I
We
are
ensuring
a
better
future
for
our
east
san
jose
families
by
allowing
more
opportunities
for
affordable
housing,
promoting
the
vitality
of
our
beautiful
east
san
jose
and
prioritizing
our
beautiful
people
of
color
and
our
community.
So
it
would
also
support
investment
on
tully
road
and
the
eastern
area
to
make
wonderful
services
to
our
community.
Thank
you.
J
Hi
this
is
wesley.
Lee
hope
you
can
hear
me
is
my
comments
regarding
the
27
acres
on
the
evergreen
community
college
property.
I
guess
I
have
a
concern.
Is
you
know
back
in
2016
a
portion
of
that
one
was
designated
as
neighborhood
community
commercial,
and
at
that
time
I
was
very
worried
about
unchecked
commercial
development
on
that
land
and
the
traffic
impacts
that
would
occur
there.
J
Second
of
all,
I
actually
did
see
a
development
plan
on
that
27
acres,
actually
13
acres
and
a
lot
of
these
things
had
violated,
at
least
from
my
understanding.
Some
of
the
standards
like
building
heights
setbacks
and
traffic
concerns
and
so
forth,
and
they
used
a
thing
called
plan
development,
and
that
was
the
term
that
they
used.
J
So
they
could
circumvent
the
existing
policies
that
were
current
at
that
time,
and
I
have
very
big
concerns
about
these
types
of
policies
that
kind
of
circumvent
the
policies
that
I
mean,
in
my
mind,
are
clear
violations
that
are
not
beneficial
to
the
community,
such
as
on
building
heights
that
are
beyond
what
is
consistent
with
the
existing
development
policies.
You
know
and
setbacks
and
so
forth.
So
I'm
hopeful
that
there's
something
in
the
plan.
I
don't
know
how
this
works
to
prevent.
C
J
I'm
chair
of
the
land
use
committee
of
the
district
8
community
roundtable,
and
I
want
to
thank
community
members
for
supporting
san
jose
and
protecting
coyote
valley
and
supporting
evergreen
and
defeating
measure
b.
I
also
want
to
thank
council
member
arenas
and
director
huey
for
establishing
a
really
high
quality
relationship
with
community
members
on
land
use
issues.
J
We
met
between
christmas
and
new
year's
with
the
council
member
staff
and
provided
an
email
to
the
task
force
and
planning
in
february.
It
was
intended
as
an
introduction
to
evergreen
for
all
the
new
community
members
and
also
was
a
little
bit
broader
than
the
direction
council
gave
the
task
force
so
that
we
could
thank
strategic.
J
J
We
will
be
dealing
with
the
piecemeal
development
of
each
property
individually
if
bmt
doesn't
stick.
We
also
had,
in
our
letter,
a
request
that
we
consider
a
scenic
rural
road
general
plan
designation
for
upper
herbert
buena
connecting
to
aborn.
Also
in
the
exhibits
you've
received,
there
aren't
bike
plans
showing
what
the
plan
is
for
upper
year.
Buena
pass
the
measure
b,
site
and
we'd
like
that
in
a
motion.
C
I
D
Okay,
hi.
According
to
the
air
resources
board,
data
transportation
has
been
the
single
largest
sector
of
accounting
for
carbon
emissions.
Ever
since
they've
collected
this
type
of
inventory
in
19
in
2018
transportation,
accounts
counted
for
170
million
metric
ton
of
emissions,
which
is
40
of
california's
total
emissions.
D
So
we
definitely
need
to
look
at
adopting
vmt
as
a
metric
if
we're
going
to
tackle
climate
change,
so
we've
already
heard
that
reducing
vmt
will
reduce
air
pollution
and
the
associated
health
impacts
of
that
air
pollution,
and
so
the
added
in
the
added
advantage
to
you
doing
vmt
is
to
have
this
metric
for
addressing
climate
change.
Thank
you.
E
Perfect,
thank
you
so
much
well,
I
I
want
to
make
clear
and
be
transparent.
I'm
the
council
member
for
district
5,
which
is
just
down
the
street
from
eastridge
mall.
I
encompass
also
the
reed
hill
view
airport
and
it's
my
pleasure
to
be
here.
I
want
to
thank
all
of
the
members
of
the
task
force
for
all
their
work
and
dedication
to
making
sure
that
we're
an
inclusive
city
and
that
we
do
right
by
our
by
our
residents.
I
also
urge
the
task
force
to
adopt
the
staff
recommendation.
E
I
represent
your
the
neighboring
district,
as
I
mentioned,
and
I'm
seeing
firsthand
the
dire
housing
situation
that
we're
all
in
people
are
leaving.
Our
beautiful
city
displacement
is
causing
a
lack
of
labor
force,
forcing
schools
to
close
and
forcing
employees
to
travel
much
farther
lengths
than
they
usually
would
be.
We
expect
to
welcome
over
300
000
residents
in
the
next
40
years
and
and
san
jose
is
going
to
continue
to
thrive,
but
we
can't
do
so
without
providing
good
quality
jobs
and
great
housing
opportunities.
E
E
C
C
N
N
And
so
I
I
appreciate
the
thoughtfulness
that
you've
given
to
our
district
in
listening
to
all
of
the
voices
of
my
community
members
and
special
thanks
to
our
district
8
roundtable
land
use
committee,
because
I
know
that
they
spend
yeah.
I
think
you
heard
it
from
mr
robert
reeves,
mr
reeves,
that
we've
been
talking
about
this
since
last
year.
At
the
beginning,
it's
it's
an
anniversary
really
in
terms
of
a
discussion,
but
we've
been
talking
about
development
policy
way
before
that.
N
But
but
I
wanted
to
make
sure-
and
by
the
time
that
we
have
a
vote
today,
that
we're
very
clear
on
what
we're
voting
on
in
this
transition
out
of
this
development
policy,
and
so
I
have
a
couple
of
questions
that
I
wanted
to
ask
you,
and
this
is
this:
will
go.
I'm
sorry
jessica.
I
don't
know
why.
I
missed
you,
I'm
looking
at
straight
at
you.
N
Just
fine
you're
you're
very
generous,
but
I
know
the
level
of
work
that
you've
you've
done.
So
thank
you
so
much
so
I'm
gonna
ask
away,
and
you
tell
me
who
to
you
know
who
to
look
at
in
in
the
zoom
world.
So
in
a
site
that
is
red,
vnt
area
and
it's
not
an
urban
village.
How
difficult
would
it
be
to
build
a
large
project?
Now
I
know
wilson.
You
went
over
this
really
clear
clearly
and
I
love
the
decision
making
format
that
that
you
unfolded
for
us
in
your
presentation.
N
B
Yeah
so
so
great
question
and
jared
rosa
and
wilson
feel
free
to
jump
in,
but
I
think
the
major
sites
that
you
listed,
the
evergreen
valley
college
site,
the
berg
site,
the
mount
pleasant
golf
course
site
all
of
those
are
in
the
red
and
there
are
large
sites
and
they
are
not
zoned
for
residential
and
their
land.
Use
designation
also
is
not
residential.
B
So
that's
the
first
hurdle
in
in
the
case
of
the
mount
pleasant
golf
course.
It's
also
not
part
of
the
city,
so
it
would
need
to
be
annexed.
But
then,
beyond
that,
the
the
city
council
would
need
to
change
the
land
use
categorization
and
the
zoning
as
a
first
preliminary
step
to
make
that
and
then
the
more
general
question,
a
good
question
that
you
asked
within
if
you're,
not
in
an
urban
village
but
you're
in
a
red
area,
can
you
do
large
residential?
B
N
L
B
F
F
Sure
yeah,
I
can
answer
that
yeah,
so
it
is
possible
that
you
know
the
general
plan
allows
affordable
housing
projects
to
move
forward
and
in
urban
villages,
regardless
of
whether
a
plan
has
been
approved
or
or
the
you
know,
growth
horizon,
and
so
we've
seen
a
number
of
affordable
housing
projects
entitled
within
our
urban
villages
over
over
the
last.
You
know,
handful
of
years.
E
N
In
urban
villages,
and
and
these
are
well-
I
guess
I
I
would
say-
there's
there's
a
process
already
scoped
out
for
urban
villages,
and
so
the
point
I'm
I
was
just
trying
to
make
is
how
it's
that
it's
not
that
easy
to
do
a
100
percent,
affordable
housing
project
anywhere,
whether
it's
urban
village
or
not.
It's
just
not
something
that
there's
a
lot
of
developers
in
the
business
for
and
if
there
is
there's
a
lot
of
mixing
of
funding
streams
to
make
it
happen
a
lot
of
the
times.
N
What
we
do
is.
We
also
contribute
to
affordable
housing
projects
so
that
they
can
be
actually
done,
and
so
it
is
really
really
difficult
and
so
and
and
they're
they're
in
urban
villages.
So
if
they
were
red
vmt
and
not
an
urban
village,
100
would
be
the
only
way
to
go
so
I'll.
Let
that
go.
But
next
I'm
just
going
to
go
into
I'm
going
to
keep
in
the
the
red
zone
areas.
I
feel
like
we're
we're
playing
jeopardy
so
for
red
zone
areas.
Please.
How
would
you
review
it?
B
N
So
it
is
more
stringent,
yes,
okay,
perfect,
and
then
can
you
share
with
us
a
little
bit
about
how
you
think
vmt
has
been
working
in
the
rest
of
san
jose?
Has
there
been
a
lot
of
major
development
approved
in
in
red
zone
areas,
we'll
pick
on
almaden
valley
or
other
very
red
areas
like
ours
that
really
aren't
really
targeted
to
grow.
B
B
It
doesn't
mean
it's
the
only
project,
but
the
only
project
I'm
familiar
with,
where
we
have
required
a
an
urban
village
transit
oriented
development
project
to
go
through
a
very
extensive
process
because
of
the
high
vmt,
and
so
you
know,
unfortunately,
for
our
partners
at
vta.
They
are
going
through
the
sequa
process
because
that's
required
under
our
policy
to
make
sure
that
we're
fully
addressing
to
the
extent
possible
bmt
and
then
they
will
be
subject
to.
Basically,
you
can
think
of
it.
B
As
we
said
as
a
fee,
but
those
those
monies
will
be
used
to
invest
in
transportation,
improvements
that
lower
auto
travel
and
give
people
other
options.
So
that's
the
only
project
I'm
aware
of,
but
it's
perhaps
interesting
for
this
task
force,
because
it
is
it's
not.
It
wasn't
an
easy
one
right,
because
here
we
have
a
tod
site,
but
the
vmt
is
high
statistically,
and
so
they
do
have
a
significant
process
and
we've
certainly
talked
to
vta
about
the
pros
and
cons
of
that
and
the
the
challenges.
N
But
this
is
in
a
transit
corridor
area,
not
necessarily
deep
in
almaden
valley,
where
it
may
not
have
a
viability.
This
is
something
where
we
think
we
can
one.
We.
We
have
a
partner
that
is
willing
to
build
on
that
on
that
on
their
property
too.
It's
it's
transit
corridors,
and
so
there's
some.
It
sounds
like
it's
an
exception,
not
necessarily
the
rule.
N
Correct,
great,
okay
and-
and
really
this
is
this-
is
just
so
that
we
can
really
outline
how
vmt
policies
are
strong
enough
in
other
areas,
despite
not
having
a
development
policy.
The
only
other
area
that
has
a
development
policy
and
actually
meant
to
that
that
encourages
growth
is
north
san
jose
and
that
actually
was
retired.
Correct.
B
N
Maybe
attend
a
couple
of
the
the
community
roundtables
or
wherever
the
forum
that
is
most
appropriate,
where
people
can
can
actually
get
some
answers
to
their
questions
that
are
still
lingering,
even
though
I
know
that
we
had
a
really
great
presentation.
I
know
that
there's
still
some
questions
and
and
actually
michael
and
I
spoke
before
so
I'm
not
picking
on
him-
he
actually
agreed
to
this,
and
so
it
yeah
it's
not
because
he's
sick.
N
So
he
he's
actually
committed
to
doing
this,
and
this
is
really
great
news
for
for
my
community
so
that
we
can
continue
to
learn
more
about
vmt.
This
is
a
different
way
of
of
measuring
traffic
impact
and
development
in
a
way
that
that
is
very
different
from
from
the
los
that's
built
into
the
development
policy
plan.
N
N
Quentin
white
goes
from
180
to
120,
born
in
san
felipe
goes
from
248
to
163.
That
story.
Road
urban
village
is
a
proposed
urban
village
from
this
task
force
meeting
a
couple
of
months
back,
so
this
actually
came
out
of
this
group
to
to
have
this,
this
reduction
correct
and
actually
the
the
addition
of
the
story.
Road.
F
F
Right
so
for
affordable
right
on
the
south
side,
I
don't
believe
would
be
able
to
move
for
at
least
not
over
35
units
and
then
adjuster
wilson,
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong.
So
if
we're
still
under
the
you
know
under
the
existing
policy
today,
it
would
limit
development
about
you
know
up
to
35
units
and-
and
there
would
be
even
before
that
there
would
be
challenges
I
mean
with
with
the
land
use
designations.
N
Right
and-
and
this
is
outside-
I
just
want
to
point
this
out
to
my
community
members.
This
is
outside
of
district
8.,
so
this
is
not
even
in
our
district,
but
we
would
impact
if
we
didn't
approve
the
transitioning
out
of
this
development
policy
that
we
would
impact
other
districts
like
district
five.
N
Okay,
so,
lastly,
and
and
thank
you
thank
you
for
for
just
helping
me-
beat
a
dead
horse
here.
I
just
wanted
to
be
very
clear
about
what
I
had
heard
and
and
to
make
sure
that
we
are
all
on
the
same
page
about
what
this
means
to
my
district,
to
district
7
and
to
district
5,
because
we
are
not
the
only
ones
that
are
subject
to
this
development
policy.
N
We
limit
what,
whatever
investment,
district,
seven
and
district
parts
of
district
seven
parts
of
district
five
would
like
to
make
and
and,
as
you
all
know,
next
year,
I'm
gonna
knock
on
wood.
We
hopefully
we'll
break
ground
on
the
extension
to
light
rail
to
eastridge
and
with
that
bringing
a
different
kind
of
dog.
N
Okay,
well,
I
I'd
love
to
walk
the
dog.
I
think
that's
what
they
were
asking,
but
I'm
going
to
stick
to
this
meeting,
which
is
a
lot
more
interesting,
more
important.
So
so
I
there's
a
there's
some
investment
that
has
already
been
made.
That
is
just
really
wonderful
on
on
the
part
of
of
those
folks
who
own
eastridge
mall
for
many
years.
N
That
mall
was
you
know
just
a
gem
and
and
then
it
was
left
to
to
just
you
know,
to
crumble
over
the
years
and
it
was
dilapidated
and
nobody
really
went
to
the
mall,
even
though
right
now
this
year,
where
nobody's
going
to
the
mall,
but
they've
made
millions
and
millions
of
dollars
worth
of
investment
in
that
area,
and
it
is
just
absolutely
fabulous.
It's
it's
respectful
of
of
the
community
that
lives
there.
We
have
costco
that
moved
in
a
couple
of
weeks
ago.
N
It's
a
business
focus
costco
we
have
further.
Hopefully,
you
know
retail
that
will
come
to
that
area
and
so
there's
a
lot
of
potential
for
the
area
in
my
district
on
capitola,
expressway
and
and
tully,
and
and
because
of
that,
I
want
to
make
sure
that
the
district
that
I
represent
has
the
support
that
it
needs
in
order
to
have
some
progress
and
and
and
some
level
of
investment
that
has
really
for
this
side
of
our
town.
N
N
I
know
that
there's
been
some
comments
about
reed
hill
view
airport
and
I
just
want
to
make
it
clear,
reed
hill
view
airport,
even
though
it's
right
smack
next
to
homes
and
schools.
In
my
district,
it
actually
belongs
in
council
member
carrasco's
district,
there's
a
very
strange
cut
out,
but
it's
under
her
jurisdiction
in
her
district
and
I've
learned
just
recently
how
devastating,
in
terms
of
lead
poisoning
that
airport
has
left
that
that
particular
community
and
when
you
think
about
the
children
who
are
living
there
and
with
the
noise
and
breathing.
N
You
know.
This
is
really
comes
down
to
environmental
justice
and
equity
for
the
families
who
are
living
there.
They
can't
very
well
pick
up
and
go
and
move
somewhere
else
because
they
can't
afford
to,
and
so
whatever
the
the
board
of
supervisors
decides
to
do,
and
I
think
what
they
decided
to
do
was
move
in
the
track
of
seeing
what
what
this
all
means
to
to
our
community
and
it's
not
set
yet,
but
regardless
of
whether
that's
that's
even
in
the
picture.
N
This
vigorous
level
of
investment
around
eastridge
that
I
think
will
just
bring
our
community
together,
will
create
jobs,
we'll
avoid
people
from
driving
to
other
places
of
the
city
to
to
go
shop
and
eat
that
we
can
stay
in
our
own
district
and
so
really
having
some
reduction
on
on
our
environment
and
our
time
and
quality
of
life.
And
so
with
that
I
want
to
have
a
motion.
N
I
want
to
make
a
motion
to
approve
the
staff
recommendations,
one
and
two
to
send
this
item
to
council
with
a
support
recommendation
from
this
task
force.
I
also
want
to
request
that
dot
continue
to
gather
community
feedback
as
they
move
towards
project
delivery,
on
recommended
transportation,
improvements
and
and
then,
lastly,
request
planning
department
to
continue
to
engage
with
community
groups
in
d5,
d7
and
eight
inside
this
policy
area
between
now
and
when
the
council
considers
moving
forward
their
transition
to
the
vmt
policy
for
growth
controlling
and
closing
out
that
eehdp.
O
H
H
H
So
this
rigmarole
about
vmt
or
not
vmt
is
just
a
waste
of
time.
I'd
like
to
hear
from
staff
how
many
residential
units
and
how
many
millions
of
square
feet
of
commercial
development
can
we
build
within
a
million
within
a
half
mile
of
the
new
east
ridge,
light
rail
station
because,
quite
frankly,
that's
the
only
decision
in
evergreen
that
really
matters.
Thank
you.
B
Chair
alvarado,
should
I
start
with
that
that
eric
makes
a
good
point
on
the
clarification,
which
is
that
state
law
has
required.
This
change
in
sql
policy
and
the
city
of
san
jose
has
implemented
it.
However,
we
also
still
have
the
evergreen
east
hills
development
policy
as
an
additional
layer
right
now,
which
is
imposing
these
these
caps
and
these
level
of
service
based
fees,
and
so
that's
the
the
recommendation
to
retire.
It
is
it
to
let
bmt
alongside
the
general
plan
and
the
zoning
stand
as
the
designating
factors.
C
E
You
chair,
so
thanks
for
the
question
eric.
That
is
something
that
remains
to
be
seen
as
jessica
said,
step.
One
is
transitioning
from
the
existing
policy
and
then
upon
direction
from
the
city
council
staff
will
do
the
work
with
the
community,
of
course,
in
determining
the
level
of
development
capacity
around
that
new
light
rail
area.
P
Good
evening,
thank
you
very
much.
I'm
really
concerned
about
some
of
the
comments
I
heard
tonight,
because
a
lot
of
people
think
that
the
evergreen
development
policy
is
only
about
transportation
policy
and
standards,
and
it's
not.
There
were
at
least
four
dozen
community
members
and
stakeholders
that
took
place
in
the
evergreen
visioning
project
and
the
evergreen
east
hills
development
project
for
over
seven
years
to
put
together
a
55-page
document
that
outlined
how
evergreen
would
be
comprehensively
visioned
to
grow.
P
That
has
to
do
with
limiting
traffic
and
proper
mixed
use,
and
I
really
wonder
how
many
people
really
read
it
there's
only
four
pages.
Let
me
repeat
that
there's
only
four
pages
in
the
evergreen
development
policy
that
deals
with
transportation
policy
and
standards,
the
rest
has
to
do
with
the
the
vision
for
how
the
community
will
live
in
evergreen,
and
I
want
to
point
out
some
of
the
some
of
the
chapters
that
that
are
addressed,
because
it's
possible
that
others
may
not
have
had
the
opportunity
to
look
at
it.
P
P
Okay,
is
to
become
the
new
policy
framework
for
a
limited
amount
of
new
residential,
commercial
and
office
development
within
the
area
intended
to
promote
long-term
viability
of
the
evergreen
east
hills,
air
linking
together
limited
new
development
with
supporting
transportation
infrastructure.
Okay,
so
it
talks
about
a
holistic
view
of
how
evergreen
is
going
to
be
developed,
not
just
transportation,
and
it
specifically
was
put
together
by
a
former
council
member
dave
cortezi.
P
So
for
the
people
who
say,
oh
just
re,
get
rid
of
the
evergreen
eco
development
policy
and
replace
it
with
vmt.
It's
like
saying,
let's
replace
a
a
grocery
store
with
an
apple
okay.
It's
it's
such
a
small
piece.
Okay,
I
have
no
problem
with
vmt.
I
have
no
problem
with
the
ability
to
move
forward
with
a
new
process
and
policy
for
dealing
with
transportation.
P
I
do
have
a
problem
with
throwing
the
baby
out
the
bath
water.
Okay,
it's
really
important
that
we
understand
that
land
use,
transportation,
infrastructure
and
implementation
are
huge
pieces
and
even
more
important
is
to
look
at
the
chapters
at
the
end,
the
appendices,
okay,
and
to
really
understand
what
it
is
that
it
was
asking
for
okay.
So
if
you
look
at
appendix
a
let
me
get
down
there,
myself.
P
P
Appendix
a
talks
about
okay
guiding
principles
for
land
use
and
transportation
planning
in
the
evergreen,
there
are
six
guiding
principles:
okay,
guiding
principle
and
key
outcome
number
one.
The
new
development
should
follow
sustainability,
principles
of
equity,
environment
and
economic
development.
There
is
so
much
work.
That's
been
put
into
this
policy
over.
P
When
you
make
a
fix
in
one
area,
it
it
ripples
down,
it
impacts
other
neighborhoods,
that
is
a
hundred
percent
true,
and
by
getting
rid
of
those
lanes
in
capital,
expressway
is
going
to
the
other
arterials
throughout
evergreen.
We
need
to
have
a
comprehensive,
revisioning,
okay,
taking
this
as
the
template
and
as
the
foundation.
P
B
P
Okay,
yeah,
absolutely
that
everything
surrounding
the
vmt
policy
for
city
of
san
jose
is
incorporated
into
the
evergreen
east
hills
development
policy.
It
would
be
a
shame
to
re
to
lose
all
of
the
work
done
over
seven
years
by
dozens
of
stakeholders
and
those
stakeholders
included,
churches
and
schools
and
businesses
and
landowners.
P
Okay,
it
wasn't
just
ones
or
two
nimbies.
Okay,
dave
cortez
went
through
great
lengths
to
make
sure
that
he
was
completely
inclusive.
Nothing
has
been
done
comparable
to
that
since
then,
and
to
throw
this
out
without
having
another
engagement
with
the
community.
I
believe
would
really
really
basically
thumb
the
nose
at
what
was
done
and
waste
a
lot
of
very,
very
good
work.
C
C
L
So
so
I'll
just
speak
to
it
the
same
I
actually
agree
with
with
eric
and
with
jim
that.
The
main
question
here
is
how
we
incorporate
vmt
into
the
edp
so
as
to
move
forward
past
the
level
of
service
which
we're
not
doing
anyway.
So
the
key
issue
is
how
we
transform
the
edp
rather
than
getting
rid
of
it,
because,
as
jim
mentioned,
there
are
so
many
other
development
parts
of
the
edp
that
protect
evergreen
and
without
those
we
don't
have
that
protection
anymore.
L
Q
Q
I
was
listening
to
the
public
comments
and
looking
at
the
urban
village
slide,
it
looked
like
you're
actually
decree
with
the
using
the
vmp
t,
you're
decreasing
the
number
of
housing
units
that
can
be
built
in
the
urban
villages
and
so
the
question.
One
of
the
questions
that
popped
in
my
mind
was
that
what
is
this
going
to
do?
Because
a
lot
of
the
speakers
said
thank
you
for
putting
vmt
in,
because
it'll
allow
us
to
have
more
housing
and
I'm
going
wait
a
minute.
Q
Q
Bike
lanes,
which
I
fully
support-
I
was
you
know
that
was
one
of
my
very
first
things.
That's
chair
of
the
sni
here
to
add
a
bike
lane
on
bird
avenue
when
they
said
it
couldn't
be
done,
and
now
we've
gotten
a
bit
of
a
protected
bike
lane.
But
the
question
I
in
my
mind,
was
looking
at
what
was
built
or
painted
is
how
safe
is
that
and
what
is?
Q
Are
we
measuring
vision,
zero
impacts
on
the
kinds
of
transportation,
improvements
that
we're
doing,
which
is
supposedly
changing,
lanes
to
bike
lanes
and
narrowing
them,
and
what
will
that
do
to
our
pedestrian
deaths
and
our
ability
to
move
bicycles
safely
through
the
area?
Then?
The
third
thing
that
popped,
in
my
mind,
is
as
you
narrow
the
streets.
Q
This
is
an
area
that
I
was
very
concerned
about
when
we
had
the
fire
on
the
east,
foothills
and-
and
you
know
the
second
largest
fire
in
california,
history
that
it
might
pop
over,
and
so
how
would
we
evacuate
these
people
if
we're
making
the
changes
to
the
traffic
infrastructure?
That
would
create
even
more
log
jams.
Q
B
I
mean
it's
a
closer,
so
the
other
thing
you
know,
as
jared
mentioned
in
these
changes
from
the
previous
urban
villages
and
then
more
emphasis
along
story.
Road
where
there
is
the
third
highest
transit
line,
for
example
in
the
region,
is
right
there
as
you
move
people
closer
in
you're,
further
away
from
the
hills,
you're
further
away
from
the
fire
danger
harvey
to
your
point
and
then
you're
also
closer
to
you
know
most
of
the
places
that
you
need
to
go
on
a
daily
basis.
B
The
types
of
improvements
were
really
about
widening
roadways
overall,
adding
a
right
turn
pocket,
adding
a
left
turn
pocket,
adding
a
through
lane.
In
some
cases,
and
in
many
cases
we
didn't
find
them
as
meaningful
as
the
improvements
that
we
tried
to
do,
especially
since
we
became
a
vision,
zero
city
a
few
years
ago,
trying
to
add
more
protection,
like
you
mentioned,
and
the
bike
plan
that
we
adopted
as
a
city
in
october,
really
prioritizes
physical
protection
between
people
who
are
biking
and
then,
of
course,
also
from
the
sidewalk
for
people,
walking,
etc.
B
So
moving
to
complete
the
remaining
projects,
the
11
high
priority
that
wilson
mentioned
those
all
have
also
been
kind
of
brought
up
to
our
policy
standards
of
today
with
vision,
zero
as
much
as
possible,
while
also
achieving
the
policy
goals
that
they
were
aimed
at
around
intersection
improvements
and
then
moving
forward
with
the
vehicle
miles.
Traveled
policy.
Q
B
B
It's
a
good,
it's
a
good
point
harvey
we
have
as
so.
The
vmt
policy
is
a
part
of
council
policy
5-1,
which
we
enacted
a
couple
years
ago,
as,
as
eric
said,
one
of
the
associated
pieces
of
it
is
a
more
focused
local
transportation
analysis
and
explicit
within
that
are
pedestrian
safety,
bicyclist
safety
and
safety
overall.
So
we
do
have
that
as
our
explicit,
what
we
measure
and
what
we
ask
people
to
address
when
we
find
issues.
O
All
right,
thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
have
some
of
the
same
concerns
that
we've
heard
from
our
other
committee
members,
but
one
thing
I'm
really
not
clear
of
is
how
the
development
pool
plays
out
in
this
there's
only
139
units
left
in
the
residential
development
pool
on
the
current
plan,
and
so
how
are
the
urban
village
allocations
in
sync,
with
these
development
pools
and,
as
you
know,
the
small
units
being
taken
into
consideration.
F
O
O
O
F
O
B
B
P
O
F
Going
to
be
got
it
yeah,
you
clarified
them,
but
a
question
on
that
is
that
just
to
to
clarify
to
the
so
the
appendices
and
kind
of
the
the
goals
and
preferences
generated
through
the
visioning
process,
those
those
are
not
they're.
They
are
separate
from
the
policy
just
in
terms
of
clarification
and
and
and
so
the
you
know,
they
kind
of
serve
as
guidelines
for
development
projects
as
they
move
forward
today.
F
But
they're,
not
you
know
specifically
used
in
terms
of
like
development
standards
for
the
evaluation
of
consistency
with
the
policy.
They
are
separate
from
the
policy,
but
you
know
understanding
jim,
that
gems
making
sure
we
just
want
to
make
sure
steph
that
we
understand
yeah
his
intent,
and
I
that
makes
sense
to
memorialize
that,
given
the
work
and
all
the
community
engagement,
that
was
done
as
that
process,
somehow
that
still
gets
memorialized
and
doesn't
just
go
away,
and
so
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
clear
on.
O
Right
yeah,
I'm
glad
you
hear
that
especially
the
class
2
and
class
4
bank
lanes
that
are
being
we're.
Part
of
that
next
question
was
concerning
the
transportation
improvements
and
how
you
know
there
was
20
of
them
in
the
original
plan,
and
we
still
have
15
of
them
left
to
go,
and
then
you
for
prioritizing
11
of
them
and
there
seems
to
be
a
very
small
pool
of
money
to
even
do
11..
B
O
I
hope
those
class
2
and
class
4
bike
lanes
are
included
in
there.
Then.
The
final
thing
I
want
to
say
is:
I
think
everybody
is
pretty
clear
that
things
are
moving
fast
and
the
old
plan.
Really
doesn't
you
know
it's,
although
there's
excellent
parts
to
it,
we
need
to
move
forward
and
there's
some
significant
changes
in
the
near
future.
Reed
hill
view
long-term
impacts
of
covet
the
light
rail
line
to
downtown
and
bart
the
impacts
of
ad68
ab-68.
You
know
the
dwelling
units
and
so
accessory
dwelling
units.
O
K
C
E
C
I
I
We
need
to
look
to
how
we
can
do
more
as
a
community
and
make
things
easier,
not
harder
as
we're
trying
to
increase
residential
development
and
commercial
use.
So
I
think
this
is
a
opportunity
area
for
our
community.
I
think
the
residents
of
avi
san
jose
and
evergreen
deserve
more
in
their
community,
and
it
is
a
great
step
to
thank
everyone.
R
I'm
looking
for
clarification
first
and
then
I
have
a
couple
questions.
So
if
I
understand
correctly,
there
are
two
staff
recommendations.
I'll
just
note
this
in
case
it
matters.
I
notice
that
in
the
memo
they're
reversed
from
on
the
on
the
presentation,
so
I
don't
know
whether
to
refer
to
them
as
one
or
two,
and
you
may
want
to
identify
that
and
so
would
be
good.
If
later
on,
we
understood
whether
the
motion
is
applies
to
both
or
if
we're,
only
limiting
it
to
one
which
would
be
the
vmt
motion.
R
B
That's
a
great
question:
I'm
gonna
have
wilson
pull
up
the
precise
original
improvement
at
those
two
locations,
but
one
quick
clarification
before
that
is
that
the
planned
eastridge
to
bart
regional
connector
line
that
is
hopefully
going
under
construction
next
year
is
elevated.
It's
elevated
across
story
road,
but
then
it
does
actually
land
at
eastridge,
so
it
is
on
the
ground.
By
that
point,
I
just
heard
a
slightly
different
one
from
the
first
for
the
the
framing.
So
I
want
to
make
that
really
clear.
B
B
G
Have
multiple
documents
in
front
of
me
right
now,
thanks
for
the
question
juan,
so
the
improvements
on
capital
and
quimby.
If
I
recall
that's
what
you
were
referring
to
is
about
adding
a
a
northbound
right
and
eastbound
right
pocket
and
those
are
actually
done,
and
you
know
technically,
we
are
supposed
to
call
it
like
a
complete
intersection
like
this
is
done
for
the
policy
and
we
move
forward
with
the
next
improvement.
G
R
Okay
and
then
just
a
follow-up
question
and
then
one
more
question,
and
so
then
I
noticed
that
two
of
the
that
some
of
the
higher
priorities,
or
at
least
two
are
near
to
the
foothills
and
where
there's
really
not
much
traffic
so
just
to
confirm
city
staff
believe
that
number,
eight
and
nine
the
ones
near
quimby
are
lower
priority.
Based
on
what
you
just
said
than
a
couple
that
are
up
near
the
hills
with
little
traffic.
I
just
want
to
make.
G
B
Yeah
and
what
wilson
does
just
in
case,
I
know-
maybe
not
everybody,
maybe
everybody
knows
what
a
pork
chop
is,
but
maybe
they
don't.
So
I
think
one
of
the
things
that
that
wilson
was
explaining
is
that
the
original
improvements,
level
service,
oriented,
adding
right
turn
dedicated
right
turn
pockets.
B
The
pork
chop
is
that
area
that
allows
you
to
make
a
free
right
with
only
slowing
down
without
really
stopping
and
then
looking
for
pedestrians
etc.
So
those
rights
exist,
but,
as
wilson
said,
we
saw
that
you
know
the
the
needs,
perhaps
especially
with
more
density
coming
in
and
with
light
rail
coming
in
it.
B
Doesn't
it's
not
a
safe
enough
place,
especially
for
people
to
walk
across
that
intersection
for
us
to
feel
like
it
was
truly
completed,
but
again
don't
want
to
spend
money
twice
in
the
same
place
before
ever
getting
to
other
portions
of
the
area
and
so
kind
of
that's
why
it's
a
secondary.
Hopefully
we
will
have
the
funding
to
make
additional
changes,
etc,
but
also
you
know
wilson
is
looking
at
the
specific
ones.
I
don't.
G
G
Yeah
the
improvements
identified
per
the
engineer
engineers
report
is
improving
pedestrian,
improving
the
pedestrian
environment
by
providing
the
lighting
at
that
area
and
yeah.
Basically,
it's
about
improving
the
lighting
for
pedestrian
at
you
know
everdale
and
scottsdale
pedestrian
path,
aborn
and
west
grove,
which
is
kinda
near
to
that
intersection
and
and
basically
that
the
general
area
near
that
intersection.
We
will,
you
know,
improve
the
pedestrian
lighting
in
that
area.
R
Okay,
and
so
so,
my
intent
was
to
get
a
better
understanding
of
one
of
the
recommendations,
because
I
didn't
know
if
both
were
combined
in
the
purposes
of
the
motions
heard
earlier,
and
if
not,
I
wanted
to
understand
if
the
delivery
of
transportation
improvements
was
consistent
with
facilitating
use
of
the
light
rail.
Because
again,
it's
a
long
time
coming
and,
thank
goodness,
that's
coming.
C
Yeah,
I
think
it's
it's
pretty
clear,
we're
approving
the
transportation
improvements
and
then
just
acknowledging
that
we
are
incorporating
vmt
into
the
evergreen
east
hills
development
plan
such
that
the
visioning
work
that
has
been
done
in
the
past
is
is
still
maintained
and
retained,
but
we
of
course
have
to
approve
the
vmt
transfer
anyway,
given
that
it
is
state
law.
Now.
P
P
C
P
C
C
Thank
you
so
much
and
in
the
interest
of
time
I
just
wanted
to
bring
to
people's
attention.
It
is
now
8
20..
We
are
scheduled
for
an
additional
10
minutes.
We
have
two
more
individuals
from
the
task
force
who
have
not
spoken
yet,
and
they
are
sam
and
smita
if
we
can
hear
from
them
and
then
consider
whether
we
can
make
a
vote
cast
a
vote
on
this.
That
would
be
terrific.
Thank
you.
F
I'm
I'm
sorry,
do
you
mind
if
I
make
a
minor
clarification
for
that?
I
just
want
to
again
make
sure
we're
clear
on
the
the
recommendation.
That's
on
the
floor
and
just
to
clarify
too,
I
think
the
the
appendices
and
the
visioning
document
that
are
currently
part
of
the
you
know
attached
to
the
evergreen
east
hills
development
policy.
Just
from
a
practical
standpoint,
I
don't
think
staff
would
be
able
to
incorporate
that
the
vmt
policy.
F
On
top
of
that,
I
think
it
would
be
somewhat
the
other
way
around
where
and
I
understand
that
the
intent
is
to
memorialize
and
not
just
throw
out
those
important
documents,
and
we
want
to
do
that,
but
just
want
to
make
sure
it's
clear
that
we
would
have
the
vm
the
way
I
think
we
could
do.
That
would
be
to
have
the
vmt
policy
and
then
and
then
we
would
somehow
make
sure
we
keep
around
those
visioning
documents.
P
Before
planning
for
evergreen
right,
so
it's
it's!
It's
I
hear
what
you're
saying
jared.
I
realize
that
you
know
you're
fitting
a
square
peg
in
a
round
hole
somehow
but
like,
but
the
purpose
of
memorializing
isn't
just
to
say
yeah.
We
have
them
sitting
on
the
shelf
somewhere.
It's
to
apply
them
to
the
extent
possible
is.
I
All
right,
thank
you
very
much
chair
teresa
alvarado,
and
I
I
want
to
take
this
opportunity
to
thank,
certainly
our
co-chairs
teresa
and
david
for
great
great
work
and
leading
us
through
this.
This
cycle
for
the
past
years
appreciate
that
very
much,
and
certainly
thank
you
to
staff
for
your
great
work
and,
of
course,
the
privilege
for
me
to
be
with
our
group
of
task
force
here
and
thank
you
very
much
and
the
spirit
of
thanksgiving.
So
I
want
to
bring
to
a
question
relating
probably
clarification.
I
You
know,
as
you
know,
evergreen
valley
college.
There
there's
some
some
land
available
there
that
has
been
designated
as
neighborhood
community
commercial
and
should
there
be
a
need
for
developing
housing
for
faculty
and
staff.
As
you
know,
the
need
is
there
and
I
want
to
know
if,
under
the
edp
or
the
vmt
policies,
can
we
development
develop
housing
for
faculty
and
staff
so
that
our
students
can
continue
to
have
quality
education?
I
That's
a
long-term
sustainable
need
for
our
community
in
the
future,
and
if
we
can
do
that,
then
what
steps
would
be
needed
and
what
costs
I
mean.
I
understand
that
the
ti
f
is
60,
gr,
k
or
14k
versus
the
vmp
t
fee
is
like
40k
or
something
like
that
or
even
more
depends
on
the
zoning.
I
mean
I
mean
it's
red
or
whatnot,
so
if
you
can
help
clarify
that
because
this
could
be
a
real
need
for
the
college,
if
one
day
we
we
need
to
develop
housing
for
faculty
instead.
B
B
And
then
I
don't
know
if,
if
fira
is
the
right
person
to
kind
of
address
a
little
bit
of
the
question
of
when
you
can
have
a
tailored
specific
housing,
that's
only
available
to
certain
people
because,
as
you
point
out,
that
really
does
it
does
address
how
far
people
are
traveling.
But
it's
also
a
very
tricky
part
of
housing
law,
because
you
can't
always
do
that,
and
I
don't
know
all
the
ins
and
outs
and-
and
I
know
that
is
trying
to
be
smart
about
time
too.
E
Comment
real
briefly,
remember
also,
though,
that
any
such
presidential
project
would
be
subject
to
the
city's
inclusionary
housing
ordinance,
so
it
would
need
to
provide
15
percent
or
pain
and
luffy
equal.
You
know
equivalent
for
inclusionary
housing,
which
cannot
be
limited
to
faculty
students
or
whoever,
that
is
public
housing.
Nor
will
the
city
agree
to
that.
If
you
know
it
receives
any
kind
of
public
financing
from
us
or
in
our
approvals
for
inclusionary,
it
has
to
be
open
to
the
public
we
cannot
limit
to
faculty
and
to
students.
E
C
E
Thank
you
madame
chair,
thank
you
staff.
This
has
been
fascinating.
Thank
you
task
force
members
for
forbearing
with
me.
I'm
just
super
confused,
so
requesting
clarification
here
we
had
a
motion
from
council
member
arenas
and
then
we
now
have
a
second
motion
right
from
jim
zito
and
I'm
trying
to
understand
the
difference.
E
The
original
motion
was
to
accept
staff
recommendation
and,
if
I'm
understanding
and
following
correctly
the
new
motion,
which
was
not
an
amendment
but
a
full
new
motion
is
to
accept
staff
recommendations
but
bring
in
the
visioning
appendices
and
thinking
as
part
of
it.
Is
that
correct
so
we're?
Essentially,
if
we
vote
on
this,
we're
voting
on
the
original
motion
essentially
or
something
that's
materially
the
same
as
the
original
motion,
but
just
with
bringing
in
the
the
documents.
P
C
P
C
E
N
N
Let
me
just
ask
a
question
and
and
put
this
to
rest
for
me,
so
I
think
what
we're
having
here
is
just
an
incorporation
of
divisioning
strategy
and
these
appendices
that
that
jim
mentioned
were
never
formally
part
of
the
development
policy
they're
just
an
appendix.
So
it's
not
something
that
the
development
policy.
It's
not
a
guideline
for
for
the
development
policy,
it's
just
an
appendix
in
it.
It
talks
about
the
visioning
strategy,
and
you
know
I'm
fine
with
having
that.
I,
I
guess
you
know.
N
N
N
Also,
the
state
doesn't
allow
us
to
have
moratoriums
on
the
development
of
residential,
so
our
development
policy,
if
there's
some
folks,
who
think
that
they
can
hide
behind
this
development
policy
to
protect
and
not
have
any
residential
in
our
district.
That's
the
state
overrides
that,
and
so
I
guess
this
is
this
is
for
me,
you
know
I.
I
will
I'll
consider
supporting
the
motion
on
the
floor.
N
C
P
Please,
okay,
so
I
completely
understand
that
by
law
you
have
to
move
to
vmt.
I
also
understand
that
vera
verified
that
we
can't
put
caps
on
residential
development,
so
that
obviously
cannot
be
part
of
any
policy
going
forward.
My
concern
was
that
the
appendices
and
the
key
outcomes
that
were
outlined
in
the
evergreen
development
policy
took
seven
years
to
develop
and
those
concepts.
P
C
C
C
I
C
C
And
I'm
waiting
for
staff
to,
let
me
know,
I
see
margie's
physical
hand
up,
I
see
michelle's
physical
hand
up
and
I
see
my
own
physical
hand
up
and
staff.
Oh,
I'm
sorry
and
steven
solario's
hand
is
up
as
well,
so
I'm
just
waiting
for
staff
to,
let
me
know
they
captured
all
of
our
virtual
and
real
real
hand,
raises.
C
C
C
C
A
Thank
you
teresa,
so
for
the
next
steps.
After
the
task
force
meeting
tonight,
staff
will
update
the
summary
of
task
force
recommendations
with
the
motion
passed
tonight.
Moving
forward
prior
to
city
council
in
spring
2021
staff
will
be
completing
the
following
action
items
for
signature
project
policy.
Ip
5.10
staff
will
be
conducting
a
feasibility
analysis
for
commercial
for
commercial
space
reduction
incentive
for
affordable
housing
projects
for
opportunity.
A
Housing
staff
will
be
conducting
a
cost
effectiveness
study
evaluating
multiple
factors
for
feasibility,
including
comparing
demand
for
renter
versus
ownership,
changes
to
general
plan
policies
and
development
standards
and
for
opportunity
housings,
where
the
sites
can
be
located.
The
cost
and
price
range
for
the
development
to
likely
occur
and
study
in
different
areas
of
the
city
for
neighborhood,
business
districts
or
nbds.
A
There
will
be
a
community
outreach
to
each
of
the
four
nbds
and
staff
will
re-evaluate
criteria
for
sorry
software.
We
evaluate
criteria
for
replacement
of
commercial
on-site
as
it
pertains
to
each
of
the
affected.
Neighborhood
business
districts
on
policy,
age,
2.9
or
locally
known
as
the
1.5
acre
rule
for
guidelines
for
underutilized
staff
will
provide
more
how
it
is
defined
through
a
separate
effort
on
the
citywide
planning
housing
team.
We
anticipate
bringing
this
to
city
council
before
spring.
2021
staff
would
like
to
also
acknowledge
the
letter
from
task
force.
A
Member
leslie
kruselia
that
provides
some
clarification
for
motion,
made
sorry
clarification
for
the
motion
made
by
ray
branson
and
passed
by
task
for
the
task
force
on
january
29th
staff
reviewed
the
recording
and
the
motion
was
to
strike
out
and
remove
criteria
number
two
from
policy
age
2.9,
which
states
that
development
that
demolishes
and
does
not
adaptively
reuse.
Existing
commercial
buildings
should
substantially
replace
the
existing
commercial
square
footage.
The
motion
was
also
reiterated
by
co-chair
david
pandor
before
the
voting
as
part
of
the
recommendation
package
to
city
council
staff
will
capture
that
there
are.
A
There
are
task
force
members
who
want
to
revisit
criteria
1
of
policy
age
2.9
which
to
eliminate
commercial
requirements
for
100,
affordable
housing
in
urban
villages,
regardless.
If
there's
an
adopted
urban
village
plan
at
the
june
25th
task
force
meeting
with
a
topic
about
policy,
age,
2.9
was
brought
up
again.
The
task
force
make
a
recommendation
to
consider
a
city-wide
policy
that
does
not
put
an
obligation
on
100,
affordable
housing
developers
to
develop
commercial
space
staff
will
make
that
clear
in
the
updated
summary
of
recommendations
that
this
is
a
city-wide
policy
to
consider.
A
As
part
of
the
continued
updates,
the
vmt
policy
staff
will
explore
this
metric
on
the
topic
of
coyote
valley
staff
will
conduct
public
outreach
to
affected
property
owners
by
the
proposed
land
use
recommendations
and
also
for
the
redistribution
of
plant
growth.
After
hearing
comments
from
task
force,
members
at
the
october
meeting
staff
is
in
discussion
about
the
reallocation
of
jobs
to
that
visa
master
plan
area.
If
this
is
pursued,
staff
will
conduct
outreach
to
the
visa
community
to
specifically
evaluate
the
possibility
of
reallocating
the
5000
jobs
to
that
visa
master
plan.
A
Employment
lands,
growth
area
staff
also
want
to
acknowledge
task
force.
Member
kosilya's
letter
that
100
intends
for
her
motion
for
the
recommendation
and
quoted
exploring
opportunities
for
housing
for
every
four
year
review
at
the
test
for
the
october
29
task
force
meeting.
That
is
to
acknowledge
that
the
residential
capacity
shift
to
the
downturn
core
and
station
area
will
be
insufficient
over
the
long
term
and
the
cap
on
the
residential
growth
may
discourage
housing
production
and,
lastly,
environmental
analysis
under
environmental
quality
act
will
be
performed
on
the
policy
recommendations.
I
F
F
But
then,
in
addition
to
that
recommendation
specific
to
the
polls
either,
it
was
also,
I
believe,
the
item
that
that
the
addition
to
the
motion
that
you
added
ray
that
was
to
you
know,
consider
a
city-wide
policy
that
would
eliminate
the
requirement
for
for
100
for
a
commercial
for
100,
affordable
housing
projects,
basically
city-wide.
So
that
would
you
know,
extend
to
urban
villages.
F
I
I
I
P
Yeah,
thank
you
to
that
point.
I
seem
to
remember
that
vote
very
clearly,
because
it
happened
at
the
very
end
of
a
very
long
meeting
and
it
was
for
lack
of
a
better
word.
A
little
bit
rushed
and
my
understanding
was
that,
yes,
the
the
motion
did
pass.
I
might
have
been
the
only
person
to
vote
against
it
there.
P
After
that
was
that
that
would
be
looked
into
now.
The
vote
is
what
the
vote
is:
I'm
not
trying
to
dispute
that.
I'm
trying
to
say
that
that
I
believe
that
there
was
also
a
comment
made
that
steph
would
look
into
the
the
aspect
of
amenities
or
services
for
those
you
know
how
they
would
be
provided
for
those
particular
high-density,
affordable
housing
units.
F
We
could
look
back
on
that.
I
mean,
I
think
in
our
summary.
We
tried
to
you
know
closely,
look
at
at
all
the
motions
that
were
made
and
we
were
trying
to
transcribe
that,
like
specifically
into
the
into
the
summary
there
to
make
sure
that
we
captured
everything.
So
we
can
certainly
take
a
take
a
look
back
at
that.
Make
sure
that
we
capture
those
recommendations
and
motions
accurately
and
and
make
any
updates
that
are
needed.
L
L
I
Q
F
Yeah
good
good
question
harvey
yeah,
so
there
were
a
whole
host
of
action.
Items
related
to
opportunity.
Housing
most
of
them
are
would
come
after
council
makes
a
decision
on
whether
this
was
a
concept
they
want
to
continue
to
pursue.
The
cost-effectiveness
study
was
the
one
action
item
that
was
recommended
and
steph
recommended
that
we
would
do
prior
to
this,
the
the
kind
of
policy
framework
going
to
council
in
spring.
F
C
C
I
really
want
to
just
acknowledge
one
person
on
our
task
force
whose
birthday
is
today
and
she's
here
with
us:
mariel
caballero,
happy
birthday,
marielle.
I
believe
she
knows
happy
birthday
and
of
course
I
want
to
thank
my
co-chair
david
pandori
for
helping
to
share
the
the
load
this
year
and
thank
you
thank
you
to
staff.
C
This
was
quan's
first
effort
at
a
general
plan
process
and
she
did
an
amazing
job
and
all
the
staff
did
an
incredible
job
to
help
us
adjust
to
the
virtual
world,
and
I
think
I
think
it
was
really
it
worked
out
really
well.
Thank
you
all
for
your
participation
over
the
last
several
months.
I
mean
it's
been
terrific.
Of
course,
this
will
be
kept
informed
about
when
this
goes
to
council
when
this
package
goes
to
council,
but
until
then
wishing
you
all
happy
holidays.