►
From YouTube: JUL 14, 2021 | Planning Commission
Description
City of San José, California
Planning Commission meeting of July 14, 2021.
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=878442&GUID=DB9998E8-455F-42ED-ABA3-7BE403BD5119
A
A
C
All
right,
thank
you
so
good
evening
my
name
is
rolando
bonilla.
I
am
the
chair
of
the
san
jose
planning
commission.
Welcome
to
the
planning
commission
meeting.
This
meeting
is
being
held
via
zoom
conference
call
due
to
the
covet
19
crisis.
Members
of
the
public
may
participate
by
following
the
instructed
instructions
listed
on
the
agenda.
You
may
also
view
and
listen
to
the
meeting
on
livestream
cable,
tv,
granicus
and
youtube.
C
If
you'd
like
to
provide
public
comment-
and
you
have
two
methods
to
identify
to
provide
public
comment,
all
members
of
the
public
will
remain
on
mute
until
the
individual
identifies
they
would
like
to
speak
and
you
are
unmuted
following
roll
call.
During
summary
of
hearing
procedure,
we
will
review
how
the
public
may
provide
comment
during
today's
session.
C
C
C
A
A
D
E
C
A
C
Well
then,
robert.
Thank
you
for
that.
Commissioner
control
is
here.
Let
the
record
reflect
the
commissioners
only
vario
and
ls
wise,
not
here,
but
let's
also
confirm
that
they
too
are
not
stuck
in
the
same
zoom
limbo
that
our
colleague
is
in
right
now,
summary
of
hearing
procedures.
The
procedure
for
this
hearing
is
as
follows.
C
After
the
staff
report,
applicants
and
appellants
may
make
a
five-minute
presentation.
City
staff
will
call
out
names
of
the
public
who
identified
the
items
they
wanted
to
speak
on.
You
may
identify
yourself
by
the
raised
hand,
feature
on
zoom
click,
star
9
on
your
phone,
or
you
may
call
408,
535-3505
or
email
planning,
support
staff
at
san
jose
ca,
dot,
gov
and
identify
your
name
phone
number
and
what
item
or
items
you
would
like
to
speak
on,
as
your
name
is
called
city
staff
will
unmute
you
to
speak
after
we
confirm
your
audio
is
working.
C
Your
allotted
time
will
begin.
Each
speaker
will
have
two
minutes.
Speakers
using
a
translator
will
have
four
minutes
after
the
public
testimony.
The
applicant
and
appellant
may
make
closing
remarks
for
an
additional
five
minutes.
Planning.
Commissioners
may
ask
questions
of
the
speakers
response
to
commissioner
questions
will
not
reduce
the
speaker's
time
allowance
staff
will
unmute
the
speaker
to
respond
to
the
commissioner.
C
C
If
you
challenge
these
land
use
decisions
in
court,
you
may
be
limited
to
raising
only
those
issues
you
or
someone
else
raised
at
this
public
hearing
or
in
written
correspondence
delivered
to
the
city
or
at
prior
to
the
public
hearing
the
planning
commission's
action
on
rezonings
pre-zonings
general
plan
amendments
and
code
amendments
is
only
advisory
to
the
city
council.
The
city
council
will
hold
public
hearings
on
these
items.
C
C
A
A
F
So
it
was
really
nice
to
see
over
the
course
of
those
couple
months
the
improvements
made
to
the
plan
and
it
goes
to
show
what's
possible
when
we
dig
in
and
we
allow
folks
to
work
on
these
issues
and
negotiate
and
come
up
with
something.
That's
a
a
triple
or
quadruple
win.
So,
hopefully
a
great
lesson
for
the
city
on
what's
possible
when
we
work
to
negotiate
and
we
try
to
make
projects
as
good
as
they
can
be
thanks.
So
much
for
your
time.
G
C
A
C
A
I
A
E
C
C
A
C
D
D
Secondly,
attaching
a
revised
mitigation
monitoring
and
reporting
program
or
mmrp
referenced,
as
exhibit
h
in
the
project
hearing
packet.
We
have
a
revised,
mmrp
and
third,
adding
two
standard
environmental
permit
conditions
to
the
special
use
permit.
The
first
one
would
require
a
detailed
acoustical
study
to
reduce
noise
associated
with
mechanical
equipment.
The
second
condition
would
require
the
applicant
to
pay
the
school
impact
fee.
L
Thank
you
myra,
so
good
evening,
commissioners,
and
welcome
to
the
new
commissioners
as
well.
My
name
is
alec
atienza,
I'm
the
planning
project
manager
in
the
planning
division
so
before
you
this
evening,
is
a
consideration
of
the
west
san
carlo
street
mixed
use,
project
environmental
impact
report,
including
a
statement
of
overriding
considerations
and
related
mitigation
monitoring
and
reporting
plan.
L
L
This
project
does
conform
with
all
applicable
development
standards.
With
regards
to
height
and
setbacks
for
the
west
san
carlos
urban
village,
as
well
as
the
cp
commercial
pedestrian
zoning
district,
additionally,
the
zoning
code
allows
sites
within
growth
areas
such
as
urban
villages,
to
request
parking
reductions.
L
The
project
includes
an
approximately
42
percent
parking
reduction
in
the
number
of
code
required
vehicle
parking
spaces.
To
achieve
this
parking
reduction,
the
project
is
required
to
implement
a
transportation
demand
management
plan.
One
was
a
tdm
plan,
so
the
tdm
plan
would
help
achieve
the
city's
general
plan
objectives
of
encouraging
multimodal
transportation.
L
Unadditionally
all
bicycle
and
motorcycle
parking
would
be
provided
on-site.
The
project
is
consistent
with
city
council
policy
6-30
for
public
outreach.
A
joint
community
meeting
environmental
scoping
meeting
was
held
at
the
buena
vista
midtown
apartments.
On
monday
january,
9th
2020.,
approximately
22
members
of
the
public,
attended
that
meeting
questions
and
comments
from
attendees
included
concerns
related
to
building
height
traffic
parking,
a
lack
of
retail
options
in
the
neighborhood,
as
well
as
sidewalk
safety
during
construction.
L
L
The
environmental
impact
report
prepared
for
the
project
in
performance
with
seqa.
I
do
conclude
that
the
implementation
and
implementation
of
the
project
would
result
in
a
significant
impact
to
historic
resources.
The
project
would
include
the
demolition
of
candidate
city
landmarks
located
at
1530
west
san
carlos
street,
and
that
includes
one
crafting
style
house
in
seven
spanish
style.
Excuse
me,
seven
spanish
revival,
style
bungalows.
That
would
be
the
bungalow
court.
L
Additionally,
mitigation
measures
were
developed
to
lessen
the
following
project
impacts
to
less
than
significant
levels.
Those
impacts
include
exposure
to
sensitive
receptors
to
toxic
air
contaminants,
disturbance
and
or
destruction
of
migratory
nesting
birds,
exposure
of
workers
to
residue
contamination
from
previous
industrial
operations
at
the
project
site
exposure,
sensitive
receptors
to
construction,
noise
and
damage
you
might.
L
After
this,
the
applicant
will
actually
provide
the
project
details
if
that
helps
got
it
for
sure.
Yeah.
Thank
you,
and
so,
as
meyer
mentioned
earlier,
standard.
Environmental
permit
conditions
are
also
included
in
the
special
use
permit
to
ensure
no
impacts
occurred
during
construction
and
operation
of
the
project.
It
should
be
noted.
Staff
did
receive
a
supplemental
comment
letter
prior
to
this
meeting
regarding
opposition
to
the
findings
of
the
eir
environmental
planning,
staff
are
present.
L
Should
commissioners
or
members
of
the
public
have
any
questions
regarding
this
and
lastly,
as
discussed
in
the
staff
report,
the
project
is
consistent
with
a
general
plan:
west
san
carlos
urban
village
plan
zoning
code
and
applicable
city
council
policies.
Therefore,
staff
recommends
that
the
planning
commission
recommend
city
council
approve
this
project.
L
M
Great
good
evening,
commissioners
and
district
six
council
planning
staff.
Thank
you
for
all
your
help
on
this
project
and
I'm
jeff
currant
with
studio
current
urban
design
and
architecture.
Our
project
team
for
this
project
is
shown
here.
Urban
villas
llc
is
the
ownership
team
studio,
current
architect,
janeki
and
associates
landscape
architect
and
jam
h,
weiss
civil
engineering.
M
M
We
had
a
small
restaurant
space
on
the
front
of
the
site,
a
car
lot
over
here
and
some
rental
car
adjacent
to
it.
The
new
project.
This
is
the
ground
floor.
In
the
right
hand,
side
of
the
screen
you'll
see
pretty
much
the
entire
frontage
of
west
san
carlo
street
as
being
lined
with
active
retail
restaurant
space
and
a
residential
lobby.
M
The
building
itself,
as
alec
mentioned,
has
173
residential
units
a
little
over
18
17,
800
feet
of
commercial
retail
and
office
space
and
the
parking
we
exceed
the
minimum
parking.
By
about
what
would
that
be
16
16
spaces,
the
the
building
as
we
go
up.
The
second
floor
has
office
space
facing
the
main
boulevard.
M
These
are
live,
work,
loft
style
units
on
level
two
when
you
get
up
to
level
three.
This
is
the
top
of
the
podium
level
where
the
wood
framing
starts.
There
are
three
active
courtyard
spaces
for
the
residents,
as
well
as
units
surrounding
those
courtyards,
a
variety
of
studio
through
three
bedroom
units.
M
I'm
not
going
to
go
through
details
on
the
fourth
fifth,
sixth
and
seventh,
but
we
have
active
retail
or
active
outdoor
spaces
on
levels.
One
there's
a
30
foot,
long
paseo
in
the
rear
of
the
building.
That
eventually
is
going
to
be
four
blocks:
long
from
meridian
to
buena
vista
street
and
the
building.
You
can
see
here,
steps
back
on
the
south
side
to
respect
the
lower
density
daylight
plane
to
the
single
family,
homes
and
smaller
apartments
that
are
south
of
the
project.
M
M
This
slide
shows
the
east
elevation,
as
well
as
the
south
elevation
of
the
building.
There's
a
couple
of
renderings.
The
one
on
the
right
here
shows
the
30
foot
public
paseo
space
along
the
south
edge
of
the
property.
You
can
see
the
fifth
floor,
terrace
it's
a
sun
deck,
that's
off
of
our
main
lounge.
M
I
didn't
mean
to
flick
that
one
over
that's.
On
the
fifth
floor,
this
is
a
image
from
west
san
carlo
street
on
the
left
with
the
active
retail
and
office.
Above
that
and
then
five
levels
of
housing.
It's
a
seven-story
building.
The
project
intends
to
use
mid-century
modern
design,
that's
kind
of
been
inspired
by
some
of
the
on-site
signage
that
goes
back
to
the
40s
and
50s
30
seconds
left.
M
D
M
M
C
B
N
Hi
good
evening
this
is
john
laba,
former
planning
commission
vice
chair,
as
well
as
former
president
of
the
buena
vista
neighborhood
association.
My
family
has
a
home
two
blocks
from
the
project
site,
and
one
thing
I
wanted
to
know
was:
if
there
are
any
controls
in
the
planning
and
permitting
for
the
project
specifically
for
construction
impacts.
Controlled
intersections
are
blocks
apart
on
west
san
carlo
street
and
when
prior
developments
were
under
construction,
the
neighborhood
had
pedestrian
access
problems
around
the
project
sites.
N
Example,
if
you're
in
san
francisco,
typically
there's
like
a
little
catwalk
tunnel
thing
that
gets
built
in
san
jose,
we
don't
often
do
that,
but
on
san
carlo
street
I
personally
witnessed
people
pushing
strollers
in
the
middle
of
traffic
to
go
around
prior
projects.
So
I'm
wondering
if
there
are
any
controls
in
place
to
ensure
that
the
sidewalk
remains
accessible.
N
So
we
don't
see
mamas
pushing
strollers
in
the
street
to
go
around
the
development,
and
I
also
wanted
to
know
if
there
is
a
contact
in
case
there
are
construction
issues
or
the
project
engages
in
construction
activity
outside
of
its
permitted
window.
Typically,
there's
stated
hours
on
when
when
projects
can
operate,
those
are
my
questions.
N
K
K
In
addition,
the
city
has
failed
to
adequately
respond
to
lyoness
comments
on
the
draft
eir,
so
lyon
is
requesting
that
the
commission
refrain
from
recommending
approval
of
the
project
in
final
eir.
At
this
time.
As
a
quick
preliminary
matter,
staff
had
mentioned
that
there
were
corrections
to
the
eir
significance
term
determinations
and
mitigation
plan.
I
would
just
ask
that
we
get
a
little
more
detail
on
that
during
the
meeting
to
know
what's
been
changed
and
what's
been
disclosed
or
not
to
the
public
in
leno's
comment
letters
on
the
draft
eir.
K
We
raised
serious
concerns
about
the
increased
cancer
risk
to
future
residents
and
employees
resulting
from
off
gassing
of
formaldehyde
from
composite
wood
products
used
during
construction.
I
retained
a
indoor
air
quality
expert
who
found
the
increased
cancer
risk
to
future
residents,
and
employees
well
exceeded
the
sequel
significance
threshold
set
by
the
bay
area.
Air
quality
management
district.
K
As
a
result,
the
city
should
have
investigated
this
impact
and
applied
mitigation
measures
for
the
project
instead
of
analyzing
the
impact.
The
city's
response
in
the
final
eir
merely
claimed
that
the
project
would
comply
with
calgarian
building
standards
and
the
formaldehyde
regulations
of
the
air
resources
board.
This
ignores
the
fact
that
the
calculations
were
done
assuming
the
project
would
comply
with
those
standards
and
just
because
a
project
complies
with
its
existing
standards
does
not
mean
that
the
impact
is
less
than
significant
for
sequel
purposes.
K
Thank
you
did
not
need
to
be
addressed,
because
sql
does
not
require
an
analysis
of
the
environment's
impact
on
a
project
here.
The
formaldehyde
emissions
are
clearly
an
impact
of
the
project.
They
are
not
an
existing
environmental
condition.
So,
for
those
reasons
and
the
reasons
in
our
letter,
we
request
the
commission
not
recommend
certification
at
this
time.
Thank
you.
I
Our
members
were
lucky
to
review
this
project
in
april
2018
and
then
again
review
kind
of
some
of
the
updates
in
april
of
this
year,
and
so
they
were
very
impressed
with
the
number
of
elements
of
this
project.
The
thing
that
stood
out
the
most
was
the
elements
around
transportation
and
transportation
demand
management.
The
project
will
provide
bta
transit
passes
for
all
of
the
residents.
It
will
also
have
unbundled
parking
so
parking
separate
from
residential
units
and
also
with
its
mix
of
uses
and
ample
bike
parking.
I
We
really
believe
this
will
be
an
asset
to
the
corridor
and
really
allow
people
to
live
without
cars.
Additionally,
we
were
really
impressed
with
this
project
mix
of
uses.
We
really
believe
that
that
a
mix
of
uses
and
projects
creates
a
vibrant
area
and
with
office
on
the
second
floor
and
retail
on
the
first
whole
lot
of
residents.
I
We
think
this
will
really
add
to
the
west.
Additionally,
the
project
is
very
dense
and
we're
really
pleased
with
the
density
and
amount
of
homes
that
will
be
built
on
this
project.
The
one
area
that
we
do
hope
that
could
be
improved
with
the
project
is
around
the
amount
of
affordable
housing.
We
believe
that
affordable
housing
should
be
provided
or,
if
possible,
should
be
provided
on-site
up
to
five
percent,
and
you
know
even
more
if
possible.
Additionally,
you
know
we
were
happy.
I
F
Hey
again
playing
commissioners,
this
is
alex
shore
executive
director
of
catalyze
sv
forgot
to
welcome
the
new
commissioners
earlier
in
the
evening
for
those
of
you
who
haven't
worked
with
our
organization
before
we
evaluate
and
score
development
projects,
which
is
what
my
predecessor
in
conversation
tonight
gavin
was
talking
about.
Our
members
are
very
very
interested
in
good
development
throughout
the
community
and
county,
and
yet
they
live
all
over,
so
they
bring
really
regional
perspectives
about
housing
and
transportation
and
vibrancy
to
hyper
local
topics
like
development
projects.
F
So
when
they
reviewed
this
project,
we've
had
some
great
conversations
with
studio.
Current
that's
been
very
responsive
to
the
things
we've
been
talking
about,
one
of
the
areas
of
improvement
that
gavin
mentioned
really
quickly
that
we've
been
talking
to
studio
current
and
the
team
about
for
a
couple
years
is
affordable
housing
on
site.
We
believe
that
integrated,
neighborhoods
and
buildings
are
really
important
for
the
next
generation
of
san
jose.
F
So
we
would
continue
to
ask
the
developer
to
consider
that
as
part
of
their
project
plan-
and
we
know
that
there
are
developments
like
one
down
the
street
on
meridian
avenue
that
just
a
month
or
two
before
they
came
to
planning
commission
decided
to
build
that
affordable
housing
on
site.
So
we
think
that
that's
a
really
important
component.
We
appreciate
the
developer
working
hard
to
try
to
be
responsive
to
neighbors
in
the
buena
vista
and
west
san
carlos
area.
F
Who've
talked
about
having
a
public
paseo
as
part
of
this
project
and
we
look
forward
to
seeing
what
the
developers
can
do.
We
know
they're
working
really
really
hard
to
try
to
make
that
component,
something
that
they
can
build
into
this
development,
and
so
we
hope
tonight
you
can
move
this
forward
and
we
can
continue
to
have
conversations
about
how
to
make
a
really
great
midtown
san
jose.
Thank
you.
So
much.
C
G
G
G
C
D
M
We're
really
excited
that
the
ownership
team
has
acquired
property
adjacent
to
this,
we're
working
on
a
a
new
phase
of
the
project
that
extends
the
paseo
all
the
way
over
to
willard
street
and
adds
a
lot
more
retail
along
the
boulevard,
and
I
think,
as
far
as
the
the
comment
about
providing
the
affordable
units
on
site,
I
wanted
to
invite
d.g
manny,
who
is
the
managing
member
of
the
llc,
the
ownership
team
to
address
affordable
housing.
If
she
has
anything
she
wants
to
say.
O
Oh
hi
good
evening
planning
commissioners
thanks
for
hearing
our
project.
Basically,
I
just
wanted
to
say
we
are
considering
acquiring
lots
which
are
adjacent
to
this
property
to
put
the
affordable
housing
there,
so
we
are
working
towards.
But
at
this
time
we
don't
have
any
concrete
plans,
but
we
are
definitely
looking
at
acquiring
additional
parcels
where
we
will
put
affordable
housing
for
this
particular.
M
M
A
G
No,
I
think
we
we
have
done
this
previously
as
a
courtesy
and
when
we
have
late
comments
or
when
they've
gone
to
the
wrong
people
or
they're
at
the
last
minute.
Something
else
inappropriate.
I
think
it
can.
You
know,
answer
whatever
questions
the
commission
has
arising
from
this
since
you
did
receive
it,
so
I
don't
see
any
issue
with
that
at
all.
G
In
fact,
I
would
prefer
that
all
of
this
you
know
often
be
in
the
record
than
not
in
the
record,
even
if
it's
a
courtesy
response
and
what
I
also
wanted
to
add
was
I
appreciated
one
of
the
commissioners
sending
me
this
message
and
I
got
it.
He
sent
it
after
4
30
when
he
received
it.
I
sent
it
to
staff
after
5
pm,
so
there
really
wasn't
adequate
time
to
consider
this.
It
didn't
go
to
the
right
people.
G
C
A
D
D
So
thanks
to
council
for
clarifying
that
staff
did
receive
as
vera
stated
the
comment
letter
at
around
5
30
this
evening,
but
I
also
wanted
to
provide
some
context
just
so
you
understand
the
secret
process
and
how
the
environmental
impact
report
came
about
and
how
it
was
prepared
just
for
some
context.
So
let
me
provide
that
at
this
moment.
D
D
D
D
And
let's
see,
I
believe,
another
comment
that
was
brought
up
was
that
the
eir
relied
on
us
unsubstantiated
parameters.
The
first
amendment
clarified
the
parameters
we
used.
The
air
quality
analysis
for
the
draft
eir
used
a
longer
grading
period
than
the
default
value
to
account
for
the
project's
excavation
of
up
to
14
feet
in
depth.
D
C
Okay,
well,
thank
you
for
that.
It
was
impromptu,
but
clearly
you
have
been
working
closely
on
this
case,
so
you
didn't
have
some
answers
for
us.
I
appreciate
that
so
with
that
we're
going
to
now
take
this
to
commissioners.
Commissioner
questions,
I
know
commissioner
caballero
was
the
first
one
on
it,
so
I'm
going
to
call
on
commissioner
caballero
at
this
moment.
J
So
I
have
a
few
questions
at
first
staff
and
for
the
applicant
so
I'll
go
ahead
and
go
with
the
applicant
questions
first,
so
two
main
questions
have
to
do
with
the
paseo,
the
public,
paseo
and
then
the
tdm
so
for
the
public
paseo,
I'm
wondering
if
you
could
bring
the
slideshow
back
up.
That
shows
the
public
paseo
and
describe
a
little
bit
more
or
just
a
little
more
about
why
the
paseo
can't
be
open
to
the
public
after
phase
one
and
needs
to
wait
until
phase
two.
J
I
I
see
on
the
site
plan
that
there's
a
residential
building
that
sort
of
or
a
resident
I'm
assuming
it's
a
residence.
That's
that
sort
of
abuts
it
and
I'm
not
really
quite
understanding
how
it
would
be,
go
all
the
way
through
to
the
streets.
So
I'm
wondering
if
you
could
show
that
and
then
talk
about
why
you've
made
the
decision
to
delay
the
opening
of
the
paseo
until
phase
two.
C
M
All
right,
this
is
the
plan.
Basically,
that
shows
the
paseo
in
the
south
portion
of
the
property
and
the
way
that
the
urban
village
plan
reads
is
that
the
paseo
is
not
public
until
it
connects
with
a
public
street,
and
so
the
applicant
has
made
efforts
to
try
and
acquire
these
two
lots
that
would
extend
the
property
over
to
buena
vista
street.
M
We've
been
unable
to
do
so,
as
I
said,
we're
working
on
a
project
here
to
the
east,
which
does
extend
the
paseo
all
the
way
to
willard
street,
and
it
would
make
the
project
connected
for
the
public.
So
I
think
in
a
nutshell,
the
intention
was
that
people
not
be
walking
up
and
down
this
driveway
and
to
get
in
and
out
the
public
not
be
walking
in
and
out
to
get
to
this
space
in
the
back
that
the
space
truly
isn't
public
until
it
connects
to
a
to
a
public
city
street.
M
Yes,
there's
there's
some
residential
properties
on
the
east
side
of
this
which
the
the
ownership
team,
it's
actually
a
new
partnership
of
people,
but
it
includes
some
of
the
owners
of
this
property
and
we
have
designed
a
project
that
has
been
submitted.
It's
already
been
commented
on
by
staff
we're
in
the
process
of
responding
to
comments,
but
it
extends
the
paseo
another
couple
hundred
feet
over
to
willard
street.
So
there
is
a
project
that
ties
it
in.
M
J
And
my
understanding
is:
is
that
phase
one
I
think
it
mentions?
The
report
mentions
that
would
construction
would
take
approximately
24
months,
but
given
that
there's
no
guarantee
for
the
other
two
projects,
you're
mentioning
or
the
purchase
of
the
residential
properties,
to
I
guess
that
would
be
the
west
or
the
project
to
the
east.
I
mean:
doesn't
that
essentially
make
this
not
a
public
public.
M
M
I
know
the
developer
is
also
paying
city
park
fees
to
provide
new
parks
in
the
area,
so
the
paseo
is
only
one
small
component
of
what
the
project
ends
up
doing
in
the
big
picture,
to
help
out
with
city
parks
and
ultimately,
we'd
like
to
see
this
connect
to
the
public
right
of
way
ourselves.
But
it's
just
not
it's
not
plausible.
Until
it
hits
a
city
street.
M
Well,
there
is
a
walkway,
a
six
foot
wide
walkway
that
runs
along
the
edge
of
the
retail
here,
and
you
can
see
there.
It
crosses
over
a
parking
aisle
here
to
get
to
the
rear,
there's
there's
a
project
ramp.
So
when
you
get
to
the
end
of
this
driveway,
this
is
a
ramp.
That's
going
to
essentially
go
down
to
the
basement
level
of
parking.
J
J
M
M
But,
as
you
can
see
here
right
now,
it
terminates
into
the
driveway
of
the
you
know,
really
more,
the
utilitarian
automobile
access
portion
of
phase
one.
So
when
this
project
was
initially
submitted,
it
was
strictly
this
piece
here,
the
mid-block
section
after
we
submitted
it
and
got
city
comments,
the
owners
were
able
to
come
back
and
acquire
the
corner
parcel
where
the
car
lot
is,
and
so
this
phase
two
was
added
to
this
to
sort
of
encompass
this
design.
Here.
J
Okay,
that's
really
helpful.
Thank
you
so
much.
My
next
question
has
to
do
with
the
tdm
measures
and
just
want
to
confirm
that
the
two
that
the
two
main
ones,
that
you're
recommending
are
the
transit
transit
subsidies,
which
I
love
because
in
honesty
I
think
transit
should
be
free
for
everyone,
but
subsidies
are
great
too
and
then
that
the
unbundling
of
the
parking
correct,
correct,
okay
and
then
I
guess
my
last
question
has
to
do
with
well
and
it's
more
of
a
comment
than
a
question.
J
So
I
don't
expect
you
to
answer
it's
just
my
overall
kind
of
disappointment
that
there's
no
on-site,
affordable,
housing.
You
know,
I
know
that
this
area
is
pretty
affordable.
Now
and-
and
so
you
know,
would
love
to
see
affordable
housing
in
every
single
project
that
comes
forward,
but
I
do
want
to
commend
you
on
on
a
different
piece
of
that.
I
love
the
architecture.
I
love
the
style.
I
love
everything
about
the
way
this
looks,
and
I
hope
that
you
know
it.
J
C
G
H
Thank
you
chair.
I
wanted
to
first
touch
on
the
letter
it's
sort
of
like
groundhog's
day.
This
commission
has
heard
that
pretty
much
template
letter
and
it's
done
strategically
at
the
last
minute,
avoiding
the
professional
planning
staff
and
send
it
to
the
commissioners
to
create
uncertainty
and
doubt-
and
I
think
the
city
staff
answered
it
very
well.
It's
the
state
of
california
that
regulates
building
materials,
and
that
was
an
appropriate
answer
to
that
eir.
H
I
wanted
to
point
out
that
that
the
paseo
in
itself
is
it
was
a
community
dream
and
putting
that
together.
Incrementally
is
it
does
take
time
and
it's
it's
actually
it's
great
to
see
it
being
proposed
on
this
side
and
on
the
other
side
of
the
street,
and
you
know
it
is.
It
is
a
dream
or
aspiration
of
communities
to
have
these,
and
it's
it's
great
to
see
progress
being
made
on
that
regard.
H
This
project
matches
what
we
want
in
the
general
plan
right,
active
uses,
building
density
and
significant
smart
growth
manner
between,
in
this
case,
downtown
and
santana
row.
It
meets
the
requirements
of
the
village
plan.
It
is
great
density.
I
know
some
people
have
fear
of
density,
but
we
are
consistently
approving
projects
with
similar
density
at
the
planning
commission
constantly.
With
similar
height,
we
just
approved
one
around
the
corner
at
san
carlos
meridian
and
park,
which
is
right
against
residential
seven
stories.
H
We
had
another
project
which
had
some
historic
candidate
landmarks
and
they
were
candidates
and
those
were
on
a
project
we
approved
on
meridian
avenue
near
willow
street.
That
was
233
units
on
two
acres.
So
much
of
this
we've
seen
before
as
a
planning
commission,
you
know
the.
How
do
I
say
this?
There
is
an
alternative
in
the
eir
to
have
to
you
know,
save
the
existing
structures.
H
However,
that
removes
an
incredible
amount
of
housing
units.
It
removes
the
commercial
space,
it
removes
open
space,
so
I
don't
really
see
that
as
a
viable
alternative
and
what
the
applicant
has
put
forward
and
what
the
staff
recommended
has
recommended
is
a
good
one.
It
complies
with
height
setbacks
and
zoning.
The
tdm
allows
for
reduced
parking
and
we've
done
that
on
other
projects.
H
As
a
planning
commission-
and
I
think
it's
you
know
on
the
design
side-
which
is
you
know,
that's
how
individuals
feel
I
do
feel
it's
attractive,
but
again,
that's
not
a
matter
for
us
to
decide
versus
height
and
density
and
things
of
that
matter.
I
did
attend
this
community
meeting
in
2018
for
the
initial
meeting,
and
this,
this
mix
of
uses
is
really
unique.
C
H
I
forgot
to
bring
up
one
other
point
on
the
topic
of
affordable
housing.
Applicants
have
a
choice.
The
city
provides
them
a
choice
and
that
choice
is
either
on-site
or
you
pay
and
in
this
case
17
million
dollars
in
fees.
So
it's
not
for
anyone
to
say
you
must
when
the
fact
that
the
applicant
has
the
choice-
and
I
think
that's
important
for
the
record.
A
Yeah
my
question
was
also
about
affordable
housing.
I
mean
first
just
a
question
about
how
the
inclusionary
housing
ordinance
applies
here.
So
it
sounds
like
the
applicant
is
still
trying
to
figure
out.
They
mentioned
that
they're
trying
to
acquire
another
site
to
build
off-site,
affordable
housing
to
satisfy
the
requirement-
and
I
guess
I'm
just
wondering:
can
city
council
approve
the
project
if
the
applicant
still
hasn't
decided
how
they're
going
to
satisfy
the
requirement?
L
I
can
jump
in
here
just
briefly,
so
the
applicant
would
still
have
to
provide
the
20
off-site
fee,
no
matter
what.
Ultimately,
though,
the
affordable
housing
agreement
isn't
finalized
well
is
finalized
prior
to
the
building
receiving
a
certificate
of
occupancy.
Does
that
answer
your
question?
So,
even
if
they
were
to
acquire
another
parcel
off-site,
you
know
they
would
still
have
to
provide
the
20
off
site
in
luffy
for
these
two
parcels
here.
A
C
O
Yeah
so
initially
the
investment
group
decided
that
if
this
will
all
be
luxury
condos-
and
that
is
why
we
did
we
were
just
again-
these
are
going
to
be
condos
and
not
apartments
and
that's
when
they
decided
do
we
have
an
option.
So
this
option
was
given
to
us
by
the
housing
department
and
we
thought,
since
we
have
an
option,
we
thought
okay
right
now
we
will
just
choose
that
option
but,
as
was
told
by
the
city,
alec
was
mentioning
that
we
have
not
decided
completely
on
that.
O
We
might
just
make
it
as
an
inclusionary
thing
if
it
comes
to
that
or
we
are
looking
at
acquiring
adjacent
parcel,
just
a
partial
in
in
within
the
same
block.
Actually,
so
if
that
is
possible,
then
we
will
have
a
separate
building
there,
so
it
is
still
under
deliberation.
It's
a
work
in
progress.
Nothing
has
been
decided
as
far
as
we
are
concerned.
A
Okay,
just
as
a
subjective
comment,
if
it's
possible
to
have
the
units
on
site
or
in
a
nearby
property,
I
do
think
that's
valuable
to
have
communities
that
have
a
mix
of
income
levels
and
not
have
one
part-time,
be
the
luxury
housing
in
a
different
part
of
town,
be
the
affordable
housing.
That's
it
for
my
comments.
Thank
you,
chair.
E
E
M
E
Okay,
thank
you.
I
have
to
agree
with
my
colleagues
who
just
spoke
that
about
the
affordable
housing
that
I
always
prefer
to
have
that
integrated.
I
think
integration
is
always
better
for
everyone
to
have
those,
and
I
understand
when
you
can't
and
that
the
city
gives
the
option
but
yeah
so
there
there
is
that
and
then
I
can't
remember,
if
you
said,
are
these
owner
occupied
units?
Are
these
rentals.
C
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Torrance.
Is
there
any
other
comment
from
my
colleagues
and
you
know
what
I'll
do,
because
we
are
a
new
group.
We
don't
know
each
other
and
right
we're
all
getting
to
know
each
other.
I
do
know
there's
a
motion
on
the
floor
that
commissioner
oliveira
made,
which
we
will
address,
but
do
any
other
colleagues,
commissioner
casey,
do
you
have
any
thoughts.
A
C
A
A
O
Can
I
answer
that
question
yeah,
so
the
restaurant,
which
was
there?
It's
not
a
legacy.
Restaurant
they've
been
there
for
like
three
four
years
and
they
moved
down
the
street.
I
mean
not
down
the
street
exactly
on
santa
clara
street,
so
they
already
found
a
place
and
they
have
a
restaurant
there
and
the
used
car
sales
people.
A
O
O
C
A
B
All
right,
so
I
have
a
couple
of
questions
and
then
just
a
slight
correction
on
one
of
the
pages.
So
we'll
start
with
the
correction
page
16
of
24
and
the
staff
report,
can
we
change
the
word
bust
b-u-s-t
to
bus
b-u-s?
Stop
so
that's
number
one
and
then
the
couple
of
questions
that
I
have
is
there
are
single-family
residences
that
are
going
to.
B
You
know
be
demolished,
and
I
just
want
to
know
how
many
individuals
currently
live
in
those
housings
and
then
in
those
houses
and
are
they
being
relocated
or
are
they
being
given?
What's
their
timeline
to
to
move
and
then
currently,
if
we
can
understand
how
much
their
those
those
families
that
are
on
those
properties
are
paying
in
rent,
because
I'd
like
to
know
who
dislocating
individuals
who
are
living
under
what
would
be
considered,
affordable
housing
conditions
or
low
income
housing
conditions?
O
So
all
of
them
have
moved
out
when
we
purchased
the
property.
There
were
about
seven
of
the
six
of
the
units
out
of
the
eight
was
occupied
by
section,
eight
8
participants
and
they
all
have
found
alternate
properties,
so
they
were
paying
market
rent
and
then
one
of
the
property
was
occupied
by
the
mother
of
the
seller.
The
person
who
sold
the
property
to
us
so
she
moved
somewhere
else
and
then
one
other
person
moved
closer
to
their
family.
The
son
lives
in
santa
rosa,
so
he
moved
there.
B
Okay
and
then
do
you
know
if
the
people,
the
individuals
that
were
under
section
8
housing,
they
relocated
into
section
8
housing
in
the
in
the
area?
Yes,
okay
and
then
my
other
question
is-
and
this
is
this
is
minor,
but
I
do
want
to
understand
with
respect
to
residential
open
space.
If
I
do
the
calculations
at
160
times,
173
units,
I'm
at
27
680,
and
we're
about
a
thousand
square
feet
of
open
space.
That's
short-
and
maybe
this
is
a
question
to
the
planning
staff
or
maybe
to
the
attorney.
L
B
L
M
Yes,
I
mean
as
far
as
alec
as
far
as
the
common
open
space
goes,
our
required
open
space
was
fourteen
thousand
six
hundred
square
feet
and
the
provided,
no,
I
say,
fourteen
I'm
sorry.
Twenty
four
thousand
six
hundred
square
feet
is
required
and
we're
providing
26
000
and
600
almost
700.
So
we
we
are
a
couple
hundred
feet
over
the
required.
L
B
And
it's
mender
where
it
says
residential,
open
space,
60
square
feet
per
unit
with
a
minimum
dimension
of
six
feet.
Common
open
space
should
be
provided
at
a
minimum
of
100.
So
if
I,
if
we
do
the
60
plus
100,
unless
those
are
separate,
unless
it's
like
not
just
I
mean,
unless
it's
aggregate
together
right
so
but
I'm
looking
at
100
to
60
right
so.
K
It's
so,
commissioner,
I
can
answer
your
question:
they're,
providing
26
000
square
feet
of
common
open
space,
so
that's
different
than
private.
It's
not
a
combination,
so
the
balconies,
for
example,
are
considered
private
open
space,
so
that's
one
calculation
and
then
providing
about
100
square
feet.
So
if
you
took
173
they're
only
providing
required
to
provide
17
300
square
feet
of
common
open
space,
they're
providing
26.
B
K
No,
no,
no,
those
are
two
different
types
of
open
spaces
once
one's
private
yeah
and
it's,
I
think,
that's
where
the
confusion
isn't
in
terms
of
sorry,
john
t
supervising
planner
and
in
addition,
and
as
alex
says,
these
are
design
guidelines.
They
don't
necessarily
have
to
meet
them
all.
Given
this
is
urban
context.
You
have
commercial
uses
down
there
on
the
bottom
ground
floor,
so
common
open
spaces
can
be
provided
in
other
ways
than
the
typical
open
space.
But
yes,
they're
they're,
two
different
calculations.
C
H
Yeah
just
one
other
point,
I
know
there's
been
concern
about
well
the
mix
of
income
levels
in
the
neighborhood,
because
this
would
be
market
rate
paying
in
the
millions
of
dollars
in
the
fees.
But
if
you
go
across
the
street,
we
rip
the
city
replaced
the
fiesta
lanes
bowling
shopping
center
years
ago
and
we
put
100
approximately
150,
all
low
income
units
across
the
street.
So
in
a
way
this
project
would
balance
the
neighborhood.
Thank
you.
K
I
Evening,
commissioners,
joe
provenzano
public
works,
I'd
be
happy
to
help.
Take
that
on
for
you
as
part
of
their
conditions
of
approval,
they
are
required
to
come
in
with
what
we
call
a
site
utilization
plan.
This
is
how
the
project
will
intend
to
construct
the
site
and
the
impacts
on
the
streets
for
their
construction
access.
I
At
that
point,
we
will
look
very
closely
at
the
neighborhood
accessibility
around
the
sites.
If
needed,
perhaps
the
pedestrian
tunnels,
it
may
determine
how
the
trucks
access
the
site.
Obviously
you
know
try
to
keep
everybody.
Safety
is
their
top
priority,
but
the
applicant
will
come
in
with
a
formal
plan
that
will
be
approved
by
the
city,
be
approved
by
our
inspection,
staffs
and
as.
C
A
C
C
A
J
E
C
A
C
C
Great
and
with
that
itemmd
the
public
record
colleagues,
does
anyone
have
anything
to
add
to
the
public
record?
Again,
congratulations
on
being
appointed
your
first
meeting
of
the
san
jose
planning
commission.
This
is
literally
the
level
of
excitement
they
tend
to
go
in.
So
you
know
get
your
rest
before
these
meetings
that
they
can
go
along
at
times,
but
congratulations.
C
H
Chair,
I
would
just
say
that
for
our
new
colleagues
that
you
know
just
what
you
approve
tonight
would
be
a
great
conversation
at
a
party
or
at
with
your
friends
to
talk
about
what
type
of
developments
are
getting
approved
in
san
jose,
and
I
think
probably
most
people
are
unaware
across
the
city
of
the
type
of
type
of
quality
development
such
as
this
one
that
are
coming
forward.
Thank
you.
C
E
Yeah,
I
just
wanted
to
extend
my
greeting
also
to
the
new
commissioners.
I
was
brand
new
a
year
ago
and
I'm
really
impressed
that
you've
already
given
comments,
and
I
that's
just
amazing
so
very
glad
to
have
you
and
my
friends,
love
hearing
me
talk
about
planning,
commission
stuff.
They
think
it's
fascinating.
C
C
No
worries
with
that
colleagues:
it's
a
pleasure.
It's
an
honor.
Let's
take
this
ride
and
journey
together
to
the
residents
of
this
city.
It
is
the
first
time
in
the
history
of
our
city
that
there
are
11
of
us
and
making
it
more
interesting
is
we
have
never
met,
so
we
are
going
to
deliberate
to
the
best
of
our
abilities.
At
times
it
may
get
interesting.
It
may
get
a
little
messy,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day,
we're
all
focused
on
doing
what
we
believe
is
best
for
the
city
and
for
our
community.