►
From YouTube: JUN 8, 2022 | Planning Commission
Description
City of San José, California
Planning Commission meeting of June 8, 2022.
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.granicus.com/AgendaViewer.php?view_id=51&event_id=4575
A
B
B
C
Everyone,
my
name,
is
rolando
bonilla
and
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
cover
19
crisis
members
of
the
public
may
participate
by
following
the
instructions
listed
on
the
agenda.
You
may
also
view
and
listen
to
the
meeting
on
live
stream,
cable,
tv,
granicus
and
youtube
following
role
called
during
summary
of
hearing
procedure,
we
will
review
how
the
public
may
provide
the
comment
during
today's
session.
C
C
C
The
procedure
for
this
hearing
is
as
follows:
after
the
staff
report,
applicants
and
appellants
may
make
a
five-minute
presentation.
City
staff
will
call
out
names
of
the
public
who
identify
the
items
they
want
to
speak
on.
C
You
may
identify
yourself
by
the
raised
hand,
feature
on
zoom
click,
star
nine
on
your
phone
or
you
may
call
408,
535-3505
or
email
planning,
support
staff
at
san
jose,
jose
ca.gov
and
identify
your
name
phone
number
and
what
items
you'd
like
to
speak
on,
as
your
name
is
called
city
staff
will
meet
you
to
speak
after
we
confirm
your
audio
is
working.
Your
allotted
time
will
begin.
Each
speaker
will
have
two
minutes.
Speakers
using
a
translator
will
have
four
minutes
after
the
public
testimony.
C
The
applicant
and
appellant
may
make
closing
remarks
for
an
additional
five
minutes.
Planning.
Commissioners
may
ask
questions
of
the
speakers.
Response
to
the
commissioner.
Questions
will
not
reduce
the
speaker's
time
allowance
staff
will
unmute
the
speaker
to
respond
to
the
commissioner.
The
public
hearing
will
then
be
closed
and
the
planning
commission
will
take
action
on
the
item.
The
planning
commission
may
request
staff
to
respond
to
the
public
testimony
ask
staff
questions
and
discuss
the
item.
C
The
planning
commission's
actions
on
rezonings
pre-zonings
general
plan
amendments
and
code
amendments
is
only
advisory
to
the
city
council,
the
city,
hell
and
soul
will
hold
public
hearings
on
these
items.
Section
20.12.400
of
the
municipal
code
provides
the
procedures
for
legal
protests
of
the
city
council
on
rezonings
and
pre-zonings.
The
planning
commission's
actions
on
conditional
use
permits
is
appealable
to
the
city
council
in
accordance
with
section
20.100.220
of
the
municipal
code.
You
know
I'm
not
losing
my
mind
here.
My
I
don't
hope
I
I
hope
I
didn't
interfere.
C
My
kids
are,
I
think,
doing
karaoke,
so
I'm
going
to
tell
them
to
put
that
down
so
apologize
for
that
all
right
call
to
order.
In
orders
of
the
day,
we'll
now
move
to
public
comment
on
planning,
commission
items
on
non-agendized
items:
jen
do
we
and
and
while
you're
doing
that,
let
me
call
downstairs.
D
Gene
add:
oh,
we
have
one
hand
raise
jean
adams.
Is
this
for
an
item
that's
not
listed
on
the
agenda?
D
D
F
My
comment
is
for
section.
C
G
C
Okay,
perfect
we'll
now
move
to
item
four
consent
calendar.
Do
we
have
any
public
comment
on
the
consent
calendar
jen.
D
I
am
not,
I
am
seeing
gene
adams
gene
did
you
want
to
speak
on
an
item
on
consent,
calendar.
H
A
Okay,
yes,
I
my
hand
is
lowered.
Somehow
it
popped
up
to
look
like
I
had
a
question.
I
don't
yet.
Thank
you.
I
C
C
J
A
C
I
know
we've
got
a
couple
of
major
items
on
the
agenda
tonight.
So
can
we
get
a
sense
of
how
much
public
comment
we're
going
to
have?
I
want
to
give
everyone
obviously
the
time
to
speak,
but
I
also
want
to
give
the
commission
the
space
to
deliberate
jen.
Can
you
can
we
find
out
how
much
public
comment
we
have
for
this
item.
C
D
Okay,
we'll
go
ahead
and
start
with
gina
white.
C
That
is
true,
but
you
know
what
yeah
that's
good.
Commissioner,
had
a
long
night.
I
appreciate
you.
I
appreciate
you
saying
that
so
we
will
do
public
comment
for
one
minute
and
then
let's
go
ahead
and
start
with
the
staff
presentation.
K
Yes,
clarified
share.
This
is
for
item
5a.
K
That
is
correct,
okay,
good
evening,
commissioners
and
chair.
This
is
patrick
kelly.
Let
me
share
my
screen
just
a
moment.
Sorry
about
that.
There
we
go
okay
evening,
chair
and
commissioners.
This
is
patrick
kelly
planning
project
manager,
for
this
request
I'll
try
to
keep
my
comments.
Succinct,
given
the
other
item
on
the
agenda
tonight
is
also
of
significant
interest.
K
The
house
proposed
by
the
applicant
mark
gishwind
is
located
on
an
approximately
16
and
a
half
acre
hillside
property
and
would
take
access
from
santa
teresa
road
via
a
driveway
that
coincides
with
a
significant
portion
of
an
existing
dirt
road
on
the
property.
I
hope
you
can
see
this
image
of
the
plan.
K
K
K
And
slide
four
shows
the
location
of
the
site
kind
of
an
aerial
view.
To
give
you
some
context
and
resupport
bayless
drive
other
neighborhood
streets
in
shown
in
the
north.
K
The
next
several
slides
show
visual
simulations
of
the
house
taken
from
various
points
of
view.
This
is
taken
from
santa
teresa
road,
showing
the
driveway
and
the
original
location
of
the
house
isn't
visible
in
this
image,
because
it's
behind
the
ridge
in
the
knoll
area,
where
the
swale,
where
it
won't
be
seen
this
is
from
manresa
court.
K
The
original
location
of
the
house
shown
here
and
the
new
location
seen
in
this
image,
also
from
mount
risa
court
a
different
point
of
view
and
from
another,
the
final
cult,
the
cul-de-sac,
the
cul-de-sac
bulb
for
manresa
court,
and
you
can
see
the
the
house
here
in
its
new
location,
not
no
longer
on
the
on
the
ridge
line
and
for
point
of
comparison.
This
is
the
original
location,
the
original
simulations
we
received
for
the
project
kind
of
showing
what
it
would
look
like.
But
it's
been
moved
off
that
location
into
this
whale
over
here.
K
These
are
points
of
view
from
other
neighborhood
streets.
This
is
the
view
from
pin
from
finney
lane.
Not
the
house
won't
be
visible
from
here,
but
here's,
the
former
location
from
air
in
place
won't
be
visible,
and
so,
as
detailed
in
the
staff
report,
the
project
is
consistent
with
the
open
hillside,
general
plan,
designation
and
hillside
development
policies.
In
that
site,
grading
is
minimized.
The
project
is
visually
unobtrusive.
K
K
Hillside
views
are
preserved
through
only
allowing
very
low
density
development
in
hillside
areas
and,
as
the
project
is
consistent
with
the
general
plan,
zoning
ordinance
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
the
project
and
I'll
now
turn
the
presentation
over
to
the
sql
project
manager,
cassandra
vandersweep,
who
will
provide
a
brief
overview
of
the
environmental
analysis.
Thank
you.
F
Good
evening
planning,
commissioners
and
members
of
the
public,
my
name
is
cassandra
vanderzweep
and
I'm
the
environmental
project
manager
for
the
geshwin
residence
project.
With
the
city
of
san
jose
planning,
building
and
code
enforcement.
I
apologize.
I
have
a
bit
lengthy
of
a
discussion,
but
I'll
do
my
best
to
go
through
it
efficiently,
but
slow
enough
that
it's
understandable.
F
So
after
the
project
application
was
submitted
in
2017,
the
city
decided
that
a
full
initial
study,
rather
than
a
categorical
exemption,
would
be
required
for
compliance
with
the
california
environmental
quality
act
also
called
seqa
due
to
the
characteristics
of
the
property
with
proximity
to
the
wildlife
corridor.
F
The
initial
study
concluded
that
the
proposed
project
would
not
result
in
any
significant
and
unavoidable
environmental
impacts
with
the
implementation
of
identified
mitigation
measures.
The
initial
study
identified
impacts
related
to
biological
resources,
specifically
that
the
project
may
result
in
impacts
to
the
american
badger
and
special
status
birds,
and
that
impacts
would
be
reduced
to
a
less
than
significant
level.
With
the
implementation
of
the
identified
measures.
These
mitigation
measures
require
pre-construction
surveys
and
avoidance
measures
for
american
badgers,
as
well
as
nesting
birds.
F
Additionally,
the
permit
contains
standard
permit
conditions,
including
the
compliance
with
all
applicable
conditions
and
payment
of
required
fees
identified
in
the
santa
clara
valley,
habitat
conservation
plan
also
called
habitat
plan.
The
habitat
plan
addresses
potential
impacts
to
habitats
through
fees
paid
to
the
santa
clara
valley,
habitat
agency.
F
The
city
received
four
comments
during
public
circulation
and
after
the
end
of
public
circulation.
The
city
received
additional
comments
from
pathways
for
wildlife
and
lawyers
representing
the
santa
clara
valley,
audubon
society
comments
received
during
and
after
public
circulation
were
primarily
concerned
with
aesthetics
impacts
from
the
development
on
an
open
hillside
impacts
to
wildlife
corridor
along
the
coyote
alameda's
canal
on
the
northern
border
of
the
site,
which
included,
which
included
long
term
noise
and
lighting
impacts
from
the
project's
operation
and
driveway
use.
F
Removal
of
sensitive
plant
species
such
as
milkweed
impacts
to
species
including
american
badgers
and
mountain
lions,
adequacy
of
the
initial
study
and
supporting
biological
report
and
a
request
that
the
an
eir
will
be
repaired
and
recently
a
letter
came
in
regarding
ab52
consultation
and
tribal
cultural
sensitivity.
F
The
response
to
comments
in
errata
to
the
ism
d
were
posted
on
may
26,
2022
and
interested
parties
were
notified.
The
response
to
comments
document
addressed
for
the
four
comment
letters
received
during
public
circulation
period
and
the
additional
comment
by
pathways
for
wildlife
submitted
on
october
7
2021..
F
As
addressed
in
the
response
to
comments,
the
comments
received
did
not
result
in
any
new
information
that
would
change
the
ism
d
analysis
or
require
a
recirculation
pursuant
to
the
sequest
statute
and
guidelines.
Section
15073.5
staff
would
also
like
to
address
public
comments
that
were
received
during
the
preparation
for
today's
hearing.
City
planning
staff
and
the
project.
Biologists
have
carefully
reviewed
all
of
the
information
and
comments
raised
in
the
comments
provided
by
the
audubon
society.
The
melechma
ohlone
tribe
and
overall
project
comments
received
regarding
pro
the
project's
analysis
related
to
biological
impacts.
F
The
city
maintains
that
the
project
biologists
performed
an
adequate
biological
assessment
for
the
purposes
of
sequa.
The
ism
d
correctly
identified,
impacts
to
biological
resources,
including
the
wildlife
corridor,
and
identified
suitable
mitigation
measures
and
standard
permit
conditions
to
reduce
any
impacts
to
less
than
significant.
F
F
The
city
notified
all
tribal
contacts
provided
by
the
nahc
via
email,
including
the
commenting.
The
ecma
tribe,
of
the
circulating,
ism
and
d
staff
did
not
receive
comments
from
many
tribes
after
the
public
circulation
of
the
draft
iasm
d.
F
Tamiya
nation
concluded
consultation,
noting
that
the
application
of
the
standard
permit
conditions,
as
well
as
conditions
on
as
well
as
conditions
for
for
cultural
resources,
training
and
an
on-site
monitor
during
earthwork
activities,
would
would
reduce
cultural
resources
impacts.
Less
than
significant
staff
asserts
that
the
city
consulted
in
accordance
with
ab52
and
provided
notification
above
and
beyond
ab52
requirements.
F
Regarding
the
request
for
the
preparation
of
an
eir
staff
notes
that
the
existence
of
public
controversy
over
environmental
effects
of
a
project
do
not
in
and
of
itself
require
the
preparation
of
an
eir.
If
there
is
no
substantial
evidence
before
the
city
that
the
project
would
have
a
significant
effect
on
the
environment.
F
Substantial
evidence
consists
of
fact
reasonable
assumptions
predicated
on
facts
and
expert
opinion
supported
by
facts.
The
staff
has
the
city
has
determined
that
the
comments
presented
during
the
ism
d
circulation
period
and
leading
up
to
the
hearing
do
not
present
a
fair
argument
that
a
significant
effect
would
occur.
That
has
not
already
been
identified
and
mitigated
in
this
ism
d
and
associated
mmrp.
F
Therefore,
staff
recommends
the
adoption
of
the
geshwin
residence
project,
mitigated
negative
declaration
and
associated
mmrp.
The
project's
biologist
and
environmental
consultant
are
present
and
able
to
respond
to
any
technical
questions
and
city
staff
is
also
available
to
answer
questions.
This
concludes
my
presentation.
Thank
you.
C
L
You
do,
can
you
hear
me.
M
L
N
L
N
L
My
name
is
marcus.
Thank
you
so
much
for
giving
me
this
opportunity
and
thank
you
so
much
to
the
city
of
staff
at
san
jose,
who
have
done
a
very
long
hard
journey
with
me
in
regards
to
helping
me
better
understand
how
we
can
best
meet
all
the
criteria
and
really
working
through
that.
I
really
appreciate
that
and
thank
you
for
listening
to
me
today
for
my
request
to
be
able
to
get
my
conditional
use.
L
Permit
I'm
going
to
walk
through
a
little
bit
of
who
we
are
the
lot
zoning
details
just
to
kind
of
give
some
context,
our
green
home
design,
as
well
as
our
community
approach
and
our
compromises
that
we've
done
over
the
period
of
time.
First
off
it's.
This
is
my
wife
and
I,
and
our
six-year-old
daughter
and
our
dog
I
was
born
and
raised
in
san
jose.
In
fact,
I
grew
up
in
the
neighborhood
I
learned
to
golf
at
santa
teresa
golf
course.
L
There
I
went
to
martin
murphy
junior
high,
where
I
took
county
champ
and
have
my
banner
hanging
in
there
with
my
name.
I
went
to
los
paseos,
I'm
a
group
in
the
neighborhood.
There
in
the
paseo
area-
and
it's
been
a
dream
to
come
back
and
own
a
piece
of
land
and
desire
to
build
a
home
where
I
can
raise
my
family
and
put
down
roots
as
well.
I
also
just
like
to
communicate.
You
know,
I'm
not
a
developer,
I'm
not
trying
to
sell
this
place.
L
This
is
a
personal
project
for
me,
a
little
bit
just
about
the
particular
lot
for
some
details
here,
there's
technically
two
governing
jurisdictions
jurisdictions,
there's
the
county
portion,
which
is
the
zero
zero
five,
which
is
where
the
driveway
is
located
and
then
we're
building
right
here
in
the
area
for
the
city,
and
so
one
thing
I
want
to
call
out
here
is
that
it
is
one
legal
lot
with
two
different
governing
zonings
and
actually
in
that
zero,
zero.
Five
there's
the
right
to
build
a
home
by
right.
L
In
addition,
the
lot
in
front
of
it
014,
which
is
owned
by
the
california
water
district,
is
also
a
residentially
zoned
lot
and
the
land
above
us,
which
is
another
hillside,
lot:
zero
zero
six
is
residentially
zoned
with
agricultural
as
well,
and
then
the
zero
zero
one
as
well.
So
we're
currently
building
in
an
area
that
has
the
residential
zoning
for
it,
and
so
we're
not
trying
to
do
anything
that
is
un.
You
know
savory
with
the
particular
zoning
here
that
we're
speaking
about,
as
I
mentioned.
L
This
would
be
the
particular
area
that
meets
the
setback
requirements
to
build
in
the
county,
but
that's
not
the
area
necessary
that
we
thought
would
be
best
for
a
home
and
for
the
environment
there.
If
you
want
to
zoom
in
a
little
bit
more.
This
is
kind
of
the
plans
that
you
can
see
for
some
of
those
people
who
really
are
concerned
about
the
canal
and
perhaps
wildlife
corridor.
The
area
that
we're
proposing
to
build
is
the
furthest
from
the
canal
on
the
property,
as
well
as
from
the
other
neighboring
homes.
L
L
In
addition
here,
the
particular
area
has
an
existing
footprint
of
humans
and
some
development
first
off,
there's
a
road
on
the
bottom
area
of
the
canal.
That
runs
the
canal
that
is
driven
there's
also
a
four
main
instrument
for
maintenance,
there's
also
a
road
on
the
top.
These
are
dirt
roads
by
the
way
on
the
top
of
the
particular
property,
and
then
there's
one
that
goes
through
the
property
as
well
that
we're
using
partially
for
our
driveway.
L
There
is
a
well
with
a
concrete
pad,
and
then
there
are
some
pg
e
power
poles
in
the
outskirts
of
the
area.
So
this
is
an
area
as
well
as
it
has
a
concrete
canal
that
people
walk
often
and
so
there's
a
presence
here.
There's
a
maintenance
done
on
the
on
the
actual
canal
of
kicking
down
weeds.
You
know
this,
isn't
an
area
that
hasn't
been
touched
by
a
man
is
what
I'm
trying
to
communicate.
L
There's
also
we
are
the
last
residential
wants
until
you
get
into
the
thousands
of
acres
of
open
space
that
has
already
been
preserved.
So
you
know
this
is
an
area
that
I
think
would
be
appropriate
for
building
our
home
design.
We've
also
been
able
to
build
it
in
a
way
that
is
consistent
with
our
values
as
well.
We're
planning
on
using
recycled
concrete
for
the
home
as
well
as
some
benefits,
that's
going
to
provide
it's
going
to
save
trees
and
lumber.
It's
going
to
minimize
landfill
with
concrete.
L
We
also,
you
know,
provide
a
fire
safety,
that's
great
for
the
california
we're
doing
100
solar
generated
for
our
home
for
all
the
solar
generated
in
the
property,
as
well
as
we
have
a
low
energy
water.
Well,
that
will
provide
us
water
and
septic
systems
that
provides
continual
water,
replication
or
replenishment,
and
then
the
last
thing
is
we're
adding
trees
to
the
property
which
we're
happy
to
be
able
to
do,
and
that's
part
of
our
plans,
a
couple
things
just
us
on
the
process
that
we've
gone
through.
L
We've
gone
through
this
process
for
quite
some
time
we
actually
voluntarily
without
any
requests,
knowing
that
there
might
be
some
opposition
against
us.
My
wife
and
I
knocked
on
every
one
of
these
doors
to
introduce
ourselves,
communicate
we're
going
to
be
your
neighbors
happy
to
meet
you.
I
grew
up
in
the
area.
Many
people
support
our
project.
Many
also
did
not.
There
are
some
people
who
believe
definitely
that
you
should
not
build
any
time
any
place
outside
the
city
limits
anymore,
and
we
have
disagreement
with
that
by
using
land
appropriately.
L
We
think
that
that's
okay,
as
long
as
it
meets
the
city's
owning
criteria,
a
couple
things
that
we
had
to
address
when
we
did
a
community
meeting,
the
environmental
groups
did
come,
the
neighbors
came,
they
were
able
to
share
all
their
concerns,
and
some
misinformation
came
up
as
well
that
we
had
to
or
incorrect
information
might
be,
the
better
way
to
be
able
to
address
that
some
of
things
that
was
communicated
was
that
the
lot
was
owned
by
the
city
and
county
and
somehow
we
took
it
from
them.
Just
not
true.
L
There's
communicated
that
you
know
no
endangered
that
basically
there
was
endangered
or
threatened
plant
animals
were
detected
within
the
project
site,
which
is
not
the
case.
You
know
we're
not
some
rich
developers.
They
thought
we're
trying
to
put
up
multiple
duplexes
and
homes.
That's
not
the
case.
L
You
know
once
again
they're
trying
to
think
we're
just
changing
the
zoning
once
again,
not
the
case,
you
know
and
that
the
lot
did
not
have
some
residential
use
in
its
zoning
and
it
does
and
there's
some
other
things
which
aren't
worth
mentioning
more
personal
attacks.
In
addition,
there
was
some
big
changes
we
made
patrick
hit
on
some
of
those.
We
directly
moved
the
entire
location
of
the
house.
We
would
have
made
it
less
visible.
L
L
Years
to
the
project,
it
added
cost
to
the
project.
These
compromises
and
working
with
them
particularly
add
in
the
slowdown
of
covid
for
everything
you
know
brought
down
a
a
great
cost
to
be
able
to
adhere
to
all
these
criteria,
but
we're
happy
we're
able
to
do
so.
In
addition
to
that,
we
went
ahead
and
we've
had
some
orchard
that
we
put
there
with
some
trees
to
provide
some
screening
for
some
neighbors
who
still
might
think
that
the
visual
nature
might
be
difficult.
L
So
we
went
ahead
and
made
that
concession
as
well
recently
and
we've
always
been
welcome
to
feedback
throughout
the
entire
time
sierra
club,
I
had
some
concerns,
and
so
I
actually
called
them
after
they
came
to
the
meeting,
and
I
spoke
with
them
asking
how
they
can
support
my
project.
They
couldn't
think
of
anything
necessarily,
but
you
know
there
were
conversations
that
I've
continually
been
able
to
have
and
work
with
folks
who
are
interested
in
providing
some
constructive
feedback,
and
that's
been
a
little
bit
of
the
journey
that
we've
been
doing.
L
D
A
P
Good
evening
and
commissioners,
my
name
is
anna
yang,
I'm
the
chair
of
the
santa
clara
valley,
audubon
society's
environmental
action
committee,
and
I
speak
for
this
organization.
Scvas
has
engaged
in
the
process
that
led
to
the
hearing
tonight,
since
the
public
first
heard
about
the
project
and
the
neighbors
alerted
us
to
it.
P
We
and
other
organizations
relied
on
substantial
evidence,
including
expert
opinion
from
pathways
for
wildlife
and
the
voluminous
scientific
evidence
provided
in
the
valley.
Habitat
plan
to
show
that
impacts
to
biological
resources
will
be
significant,
potentially
unmitigable
and
requiring
eir
to
study,
disclose
and
mitigate.
You
received
other
communications
that,
in
all,
provide
fair
argument
based
on
the
substantial
evidence
that
an
eir
must
be
prepared
before
this
project
may
be
approved.
These
communications
showed
a
flawed
sql
review
due
to
a
host
of
reasons.
Please
require
an
eir.
Thank
you.
A
Good
evening
dave
poche
resident
of
san
jose,
the
nmd
did
not
adequately
inform
you
about
the
significance
of
the
wildlife
linkage
in
the
santa
clara
valley,
habitat
plan
and
implies
that
the
only
possible
disturbance
to
wildlife
linkages
is
fencing.
This
simply
is
false.
As
discussed
in
the
pathways
for
wildlife
expert
opinion
provided
and
supported
by
a
large
body
of
science,
would
it
take
offense
to
keep
you
out
of
a
dark
alley
in
a
sketchy
neighborhood?
A
The
nmd
does
not
adequately
inform
you
about
the
potential
health
impact
on
mountain
lion,
populations
that
depend
on
genetic
flow
through
the
linkage
between
the
santa
cruz
mountains
and
diablo
range.
Mountain
lions
aren't
even
mentioned
in
the
nmd
okay,
both
the
maloney
and,
I
believe
in
eir
and
tribal
constant
consultation.
It
are
required
to
proceed
with
this
project.
Thank
you.
Q
Good
evening
brian
schmidt
for
greenfoothills,
speaking
in
opposition
to
this
project,
and
while
I
do
not
represent
or
speak
for
the
milwaukee
maloney
tribe,
I
have
had
some
discussions
with
them
about
this
project.
There
are
two
problems
with
it
and
you
received
extensive
comments,
problems
with
process.
It
is
their
contention
that
they
have
not
been
consulted.
Q
What
staff
just
said
right
now
about
being
there
being
a
comment
list
is
news
to
me.
I
think
the
simplest
way
to
fix
that
is
to
delay
any
action
now
and
go
consult
with
the
molekama
only
tribe
and,
secondly,
that
there
is
a
substantive
problem
with
the
cultural
impact
of
this
project
that
very
long
road
along
the
canal
and
the
house
are
impacting
on
a
cultural
landscape.
Q
A
Yeah
hi.
Thank
you.
I
am
a
resident
of
talari
hill
across
the
street
across
santa
teresa
from
the
proposed
project,
and
I
am
opposed
to
the
project.
I'm
left
with
mostly
questions.
Listening
out
to
this
presentation.
Do:
does
wildlife
only
travel
in
canals
because
that
canal
didn't
used
to
be
there
and
wildlife
was
still
traveling
across
there.
A
So
I
think
any
any
development
along
the
ridge
line
there
is
going
to
affect
wildlife,
wildlife,
the
wildlife
corridor,
and
you
know,
planting
trees
and
all
the
things
that
people
do
on
their
properties
is
going
to
be
changing
that
ecosystem.
A
D
R
Yes,
my
name
is
craig
fyfe,
I'm
a
resident
of
district
2
long
time,
san
jose
resident,
and
I
support
the
westland
resident
project.
I
would
request
that
this
is
approved
and
moved
forward
seems
like
significant
work,
and
time
has
been
invested
in
making
sure
that
it
aligns
with
the
city
ordinances
as
well
as
a
very
significant
environmental
impact
has
already
been
presented,
and
I
think
it
was
really
thorough.
H
Hi
this
is
carolyn
mitchell
and
I
am
a
long
time
friend
of
the
gershwin
family.
I've
lived
here
in
south
san
jose
actually
on
calero
for
over
20
years,
and
I'm
very
much
in
favor
of
them
being
approved
for
this
building
permit.
I
I'm
very
impressed
not
just
with
their
patients,
but
their
willingness,
just
the
show
of
integrity
to
work
with
the
city
to
work
with
the
environmental
groups
to
speak
to
the
neighbors,
and
that's
just
the
type
of
people
they
are.
H
P
Thank
you
jill
borders.
I
want
to
ask
you
all
a
question:
how
did
san
jose
become
the
sprawling
fiscally
challenged
bedroom
community
that
it
is,
and
I
will
tell
you
it
happened,
one
decision
at
a
time
I'm
not
going
to
spend
my
time
going
over
all
of
the
wildlife
impacts.
All
of
that
is
well
documented
and
researched.
We
should
do
a
full
eir,
but
what
I
am
going
to
mention
is
that
we
have
a
city
document
that
is
telling
us
to
move
away
from
this
type
of
development.
P
We,
the
voters,
have
voted
for
measure
q
for
measure
t
for
an
urban
growth
boundary
for
urban
villages
to
stop
the
sprawl.
It
has
to
mean
something
we
have
to
care
enough
to
vote
against
these
projects,
even
though
I'm
sure
mr
geshwin
is
a
wonderful
person
has
nothing
to
do
with
it.
We
have
to
stop
making
bad
fiscal
and
environmental
decisions.
A
I
A
Eir,
a
lot
of
things
have
been
neglected
in
the
study
for
this
project.
One
there's
a
lot
of
talk
about
the
house
being
away
from
the
canal,
but
the
driveway
will
be
right
next
to
the
canal
hannah
teresa,
it
will
be,
it
will
prohibit
animals
from
using
the
canal
to
cross
under
santa
teresa.
The
driveway
will.
A
Further
down,
and
now
there
this
yeah,
the
city
keeps
ignoring
the
laws
of
physics
on
this
where
they
say
the
house
is
further
away,
but
also
you're,
looking
down
inside
when
you're
above
the
canal
on
the
property
versus
the
residents
that
are
below
looking
up
the
canal
hides
the
animals
from
them.
That
way,
so
I
want
to
request
an
eir.
A
D
We'll
move
on
to
the
next
speaker
and
we'll
come
back
to
carolyn.
We
have
zoe
siegel.
P
Hi,
my
name
is
zoe
siegel
and
I
am
the
director
of
climate
resilience
at
greenbelt
alliance.
I
wasn't
actually
originally
here
to
speak
on
this
item
so
I'll.
Keep
this
short
green
health
alliance
is
an
environmental
organization
that
knows
how
important
it
is
to
build
more
housing
to
address
our
climate
crisis.
But
this
single
family's
home
outside
of
the
urban
growth
boundary
is
absolutely
not
the
type
of
housing
we
need
to
build.
This
shouldn't
even
be
an
item
up
for
discussion
if
we
can
build
single-family
homes
outside
the
urban
growth
boundary.
P
A
They
have
operated
with
integrity
and
been
very
sensitive
to
the
potential
environmental
impact
and
have
designed
a
sustainable
home
in
this
area,
and
I
believe
it
is
their
right
to
be
able
to
build,
and
I
would
just
hope
that
council
votes
in
favor.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
I
have
an
office
at
los
gatos
and
am
a
resident
of
san
jose,
and
I
request
an
eir
and
I
am
in
opposition
to
approval
in
the
state
that
this
is
in
right
now
for
all
of
the
factors
mentioned
by
those
in
opposition
with
respect
to
wildlife,
as
well
as
economic
impact,
and
you
know
want
to
point
out
that
you
know
this
is
going
to
have
a
if
this
were
to
go
to
fruition
would
have
a
permanent
impact
in
the
area,
and
so
you
know
simply
because
a
lot
of
work
has
been
done
doesn't
mean
that
it
gets.
A
You
know
it
should
be
kind
of
gone
forward
with,
because
it
seems
to
me
that
through
what's
been
voiced
here,
there
are
a
lot
of
things
that
have
been
left.
Undone
like
talking
to
the
tribes
and
you're
doing
a
formal
ear,
and
there
are
a
lot
of
gaps
that
still
need
to
be
done,
and
so
it's
really
premature
to
even
think
about,
but
proving
this
at
this
time
very
premature,
and
I
really
strongly
oppose
it.
D
A
Yes,
yeah,
I
live
on
manresa
court,
wife
and
I
and
we've
been
here
over
30
years.
I've
walked
that
property
matter.
E
A
A
You
know,
we
see
the
coyotes
it's
happening
and
I
think
you
know
I
appreciate
those
that
are
opposing
it,
but
I
for
one
firmly
support
it
and
the
house
would
be
seen
from
my
front
yard
and
my
second
bedroom
window.
My
only
advice
would
be
since
you
talked
about
trees.
Is
it
made
me,
have
some
valley
oak
trees
planted
below
the
house
so
that
will
kind
of
help
screen
out
the
house
without
interfering
with
the
view
of
the
valley,
but.
D
Yes,
good
evening,
my
name
is
sharon
luna,
and
I
just
wanted
to
comment
on
behalf
of
the
wildlife.
How
would
you
feel
if
you
had
to
live
with
mitigations?
I
find
that
that
the
project
is
a
lovely
project,
but
if
there's
mitigations
even
prior
to
having
a
full
eir
there's
a
problem,
animals
don't
always
understand
those
mitigations.
D
P
Good
evening,
chair
bonilla
and
commissioners,
my
name
is
shawnee
kleiners,
I'm
the
environmental
advocate
for
santa
clara
valley
of
the
bond
society.
I
wish
to
emphasize
that
the
proposed
project
is
not
adjacent
to
the
wildlife
connectivity
corridor.
It
is
the
wildlife
movement
language
movement
linkage,
identified
as
such
by
the
habitat
plan
pathways
for
wildlife
and
the
habitat
plan
provide
substantive
evidence
that
the
entire
property
is
critically
important
to
wildlife
movement.
P
The
moving
the
house
from
one
side,
location
to
another,
should
have
been
studied
as
well,
because
in
this
whale
it's
probably
more
impactful
to
wildlife
movement
than
it
was
where
it
was
initially
proposed,
and
this
home,
it's
rare
that
so
many
organizations
are
concerned
with
one
house,
one
home.
We
don't
usually
engage
to
this
level
and
take
that
please
into
consideration
and
ask
for
an
air.
Thank
you.
C
L
Appreciate
the
engagement
by
the
community
and
those
who
have
spoken
favor-
and
you
know
even
those
who
spoke
against
it's
always
good-
to
share
our
opinions
and
our
hearts
on
what
we're
feeling
and
thinking.
I
think
that
the
some
of
the
feedback,
particularly
around
studying
the
home
and
the
duplication
that
did
take
place,
just
to
kind
of
reiterate
that
once
again,
that's
part
of
the
reason
why
the
last
couple
years
have
taken
place
was
to
after
the
home
was
moved
to
make
sure
that
the
study
addressed
the
current
proposal
before
the
board.
L
So
there
is
that
was
already
addressed
in
those
areas.
There's
also
once
again,
the
full
studies
have
kind
of
communicated
to
address
a
lot
of
the
concerns
that
have
been
shown,
and
that
was
covered
in
the
beginning
portion
of
the
presentation
by
the
city
and
the
environmental
agent
who
cassandra
who
was
covering
that
area.
L
I
really
appreciate
once
again
everyone
for
giving
me
the
opportunity
to
speak.
You
know
my
door
is
still
always
open.
I
did
hand
out
my
contact
information
to
the
community
who
wants
to
give
constructive.
You
know
feedback
and
who
wants
to
kind
of
be
able
to
communicate
with
me,
but
we've
definitely
provided
many
years
of
that
opportunity
and
we've
taken
those
feedback
and
we've
dedicated
the
last.
L
A
C
Okay,
well,
thank
you
for
that.
With
that,
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
open
the
commissioner
question
portion.
I
am
not
going
to
close
the
public
hearing
as
I
always
do.
I
do
keep
it
open
in
order
to
allow
my
colleagues
to
also
ask
questions
directly
of
the
applicant.
So,
mr
krishwan,
if
you
can
just
kind
of
stand
by
as
you
may
get
a
couple
of
questions
coming
your
way
all
right.
Colleagues,
with
that
do
we
have
any
of
you
wanted.
Q
F
An
ear
typically
to
prepare
can
take
anywhere
between
nine
months
to
several
years,
just
depending
on
the
time
it
takes
to
prepare
the
document,
but
the
biggest
distinction
between
an
ism
and
d
and
an
eir
is
that
an
ism
d
in
terms
of
length
of
time,
an
ism
d
is
circulated
for
public
comment
for
either
20
days
or
30
days.
If
state
agencies
are
requested
for
comment
and
that's
when
they're
of
a
significant
wide
importance
where
an
eir
is
a
45
day
circulation
period.
Q
Okay-
and
there
seems
to
be
some
disparity
between
the
belief
that
a
proper
impact
study
was
completed.
How
does
this?
How
does
this
occur,
why?
Why
are
so
many
in
the
community
that
don't
believe
this
work
was
done
appropriately.
F
There
might
be
a
confusion
about
what
an
environmental
document
is
reviewing.
So
when
we
prepare
an
environmental
document-
and
we
know
it's
not
going
to
be
a
categorical
exemption,
we
prepare
an
initial
study
that
analyzes
all
of
sql's
resource
areas
and
if
we
find
that
any
impacts
that
are
identified
can
be
reduced
to
a
less
than
significant
level
through
mitigation
measures,
then
we
can
issue,
what's
called
a
mitigated,
negative
declaration.
F
If
we
determine
that
there
are
certain
impacts
that
even
with
mitigation
measures
cannot
be
reduced,
then
you
go
through
the
process.
That's
the
environmental
impact
report
eir
in
terms
of
those
two
documents.
Besides
the
public
circulation
period.
Another
big
distinction
is
that
an
eir
is
required
to
analyze
project
alternatives
that
consider
other
other
project
designs.
That
may
reduce
impacts
and
then
decision
makers
can
one
understand
the
impacts
of
the
project
and
also
understand
impacts
of
alternative
projects.
If
they
would
like
to
pre
proceed
with
an
alternative
design.
Q
One
last
question:
how
do
we,
how
do
we
actually
kind
of
justify
the
difference
in
the
types
of
wildlife
present
based
on
you
know?
What
I've
heard
is
that
well,
mountain
lions
were
never
discussed.
I
ain't
heard
no
discussion
of
coyotes.
I
I'm
curious.
F
I
can
briefly
touch
on
it
and
I
believe
it
would
like
a
more
detailed
response.
I
may
call
on
the
biologist,
but
for
squad
biologists
do
what's
called
protocol
surveys.
So
it's
it's
not
an
absence
present
survey
to
determine
every
single
species.
That's
there
it's
to
look
at
the
habitat
and
determine
what
the
site
can
potentially
support.
F
R
Well,
david
kant,
supervision,
principal
planner
in
the
city's
environment
review
team.
Thank
you
for
the
question.
So
the
the
study
goes
into
what
is
a
threatened
species
and
we
do
have
the
project
biologists.
That
could
also
go
into
more
detail
about
what
goes
into
those
studies.
But
if
there's
common
species
like
raccoons
deer
coyotes,
those
aren't
considered
threatened
species.
G
Thank
you
chair.
Let's
see,
I'm
going
to
ask
my
colleagues
indulgence
because
I
have
a
number
of
questions,
but
I
think
it's
going
to
be
information
that
will
be
helpful
to
all
the
commissioners.
G
First
of
all,
we
received
an
extraordinarily
high
amount
of
emails
on
this
project.
More
than
I've
ever
received,
I've
been
on
the
commission
a
little.
Under
a
year
I
received
over
50
emails
with
concerns
about
the
project.
G
G
Sorry,
environmental
advocacy
groups
as
well
as
a
legal
opinion
that
was
attached
to
one
of
those
as
well,
and
so
I
I
visited
the
site
yesterday
I
I
went,
I
started
at
the
community
garden.
I
talked
to
a
couple
of
residents
there,
which
was
great.
I
walked
up
the
trail.
I
walked
the
road
along
the
canal
down
to
santa
teresa
boulevard,
and
so
I
think
I
have
a
good
idea
of
the
delay
of
the
land
there.
G
So
it's
a
pretty
special
piece
of
property
and
I
I
think
it
requires
special
consideration.
I
guess
is
what
I
would
say
so
before
I
ask
my
question.
I
want
to
point
out
to
me:
what
is
the
question
here?
I
don't
think
the
question
is
whether
the
property
should
be
developed
or
what
the
house
should
look
like.
G
I
am
firmly
convinced
that
the
schwenn
family
is
very
upstanding.
Wonderful
people,
that's
not
the
question.
The
question
to
me
is:
should
a
fully
ir
be
required
on
this
project
before
we
consider
it
further?
That's
the
question
so
with
that
I
have
a
question
for
the
applicant,
mr
geschwend.
I
notice
there's
a
for
sale
sign
on
the
property,
so
are
you
planning
to
sell
the
property
before
the
house
has
developed
or
after
or
could
you
clarify
that
for
us.
L
Unsolicited
offers
come
in
about
every
other
month
for
the
particular
lot,
and
so
you
know
our
desire
has
not
been
to
sell,
but
with
the
housing
market
being
one
of
the
best
it
is,
we
thought
you
know
it
might
behoove
to
see
an
offer
that
we
can
get,
but
once
again
our
first
and
foremost
desire
is
to
build
and
to
continue
that
process,
which
is
why
we're
here
today.
G
Okay,
I'm
a
little
confused
by
that
answer.
So
there
is
a
for
sale
sign
on
the
property,
correct,
okay,
so
your
first
desire
is
to
build,
but
you
also
have
it
for
sale.
That's
confusing
to
me.
L
L
Our
first
desire
is
to
build
and
to
continue
going
with
this
process,
but
if
someone's
willing
to
give
make
me
move
money
in
short,
because
people
keep
contacting
me
for
that,
then
I
would
all
be
open
to
that,
and
so
that
is
kind
of
why
the
sign
is
up
there
right
now,.
G
G
Okay,
great,
I
had
made
a
request
of
planning
staff
that
a
representative
of
the
santa
clara
habitat
agency
be
present
is.
Did
that
take?
Is
there
a
representative
present.
G
R
Yeah,
the
habitat
is
just
to
clarify
the
santa
clara
valley.
Habitat
agency
is
an
independent
entity
of
the
city
of
san
jose.
The
city
is
a
partner
agency.
We
are
the
ones
who
review
applications
for
conformance
and
then
submit
them
to
the
have
a
date
agency,
but
given
their
role,
it
is
not
really
appropriate
for
them
to
be
attending
meetings.
G
G
F
The
project
biologist
works
with
lsa,
who
is
an
environmental
consultant
and
per
city
policy.
The
environmental
consultant
is
hired
by
the
applicant.
However,
all
the
documents
before
they're
posted
online
are
reviewed
by
city
staff
to
ensure
that
they
meet
city
standards
as
well
as
sequa
standards.
F
So
we
make
sure
that
it
expresses
the
thoughts
and
the
thoughts
of
the
city
and
doesn't
represent
review
by
an
app
by
the
applicant.
If
that
makes
sense,.
G
Okay,
great
well,
cassandra.
Could
we
have
the
project
biologists
specifically
talk
about
the
wildlife
corridor
issue,
because
that's
my
major
concern-
and
I
I
think
I
shared
that
with
city
planning
staff
before
this
meeting-
and
you
know
I
understand-
the
house
has
been
moved
away
from
the
canal-
that's
great,
but
the
driveway
is
still
next
to
the
canal.
The
house
looks
down
into
the
canal
as
one
of
the
residents
reported,
so
my
concern
is
well.
I
have
a
couple
I'll
just
say
one.
G
I'm
concerned
that
mountain
lions
were
not
included
in
the
study
and
I'm
not
sure
why
that
was.
Maybe
the
biologist
could
comment
on
that
and
secondly,
whether
the
biologist
has
any
concerns
that,
because
badgers-
and
I
would
imagine-
mountain
lions
like
to
migrate
at
night-
that
if
you
have
a
house
and
a
driveway
with
lighting
and
activity-
isn't
that
going
to
create
a
hesitancy
for
those
animals
to
move
through
the
canal.
E
Hello,
my
name
is
steve
forman,
I'm
with
lsa
associates
I'm
principal
and
certified
wildlife
biologist
with
the
firm
to
your
first
question
regarding
mountain
lions,
the
current
protections
for
mountain
lions
under
the
state
are
to
prohibit
killing
direct
taking
of
the
animals,
the
the
protections
that
are
currently
afforded
don't
address
habitat
modification
or
effects
to
movement,
or
other
things
like
that.
E
E
E
The
plan
designates
or
understands
and
is
considered
development
could
occur
within
these
parcels.
They
have
a
certain
designation
within
the
fee
categories
and
everything
else
based
on
their
current.
You
know
the
zoning
at
the
time
the
plan
was
done,
the
plan
basis,
their
the
mitigation
requirements
for
habitat
alteration
and
everything
on
the
fee
payment
schedule.
E
The
property
that
we're
looking
at
now
lies
outside
the
wildlife
survey
area,
there's
a
little
bit
of
an
area
along
santa
teresa
that
will
require
our
plant
surveys
to
be
covered
under
the
plant
and
that
plant
is
providing
incidental
take
coverage
for
a
variety
of
covered
species
under
that
plant
now
to
the
corner.
That
area
is,
it
is
a
corridor
there's
no
doubt
about
it.
There's
a
lot
of
good
information
available
and
the
main
pinch
point
of
that
corridor
for
safe
passage
under
santa
teresa
is
the
culvert
of
the
canal.
E
All
right-
and
so
that's
really
a
significant
point.
Once
the
animals
are
through
the
canal,
they
can
move
through
a
pretty
broad
area
and
probably
do
well.
Actually
they
do.
If
you
look
at
some
of
the
data
in
the
comment,
letters
that
we
received
from
telemetered,
bobcats
and
other
species,
the
presence
of
a
single
family
home
on
a
large
parcel
with
large
boundaries.
E
E
They
can
become
very
habituated
to
human
activity,
where
they're
not
threatened.
So
if
nobody
is
out
chasing
them,
shooting
at
them
yelling
at
them,
they
are
pretty
habituated
to
people
and
moving
through.
So
that's,
basically
the
reason
we
didn't
think
there
would
be
a
significant
barrier.
There's
no
physical
barrier
created
by
the
house,
there's
plenty
of
room
to
move
around
it
on
either
side
and
in
my
experience,
the
lighting
associated
with
that
type
of
residence
wouldn't
would
not
create
a
significant
barrier
to
wildlife.
G
Thank
you,
I'm
almost
done
chair
and
then
I'll
I'll.
C
G
A
If
that
the
person
who
bought
it
wants
to
build
us
approved
yes,
but
if
they
what
they
make
changes,
they
have
to
come
back
to
the
city.
G
Okay,
but
if
they
want
to
build
as
improved,
they
would
have
the
right
to
do
that.
Correct.
G
Okay,
great,
that's
all
I
have
now
you
know.
Clearly
I
think
I
have.
I
have
concerns
about
this
project.
I
have
concerns
whether
the
mitigation
measures
are
sufficient,
but
I'll
I'll
I'll
stop
talking.
Now,
I'm
curious
to
hear
what
the
other
commissioners
have
to
say
and
then
I'll
when
we're
done
with
questions
I'll,
I
can
come
back
with
further
thoughts.
Thank
you.
I
appreciate.
J
Thank
you
chair
and
apologies
every
one
of
my
voice,
a
little
often
kind
of
under
the
weather
today.
So
first
off,
I
just
have
a
process
question
about
why
we're
having
this
discussion
right
now,
because
so
my
understanding
is
that
the
proper
current
land
use
designation,
at
least
under
the
city,
is
open,
hillside
right
and
that
does
allow
this
type
of
development,
and
my
understanding
is
that
if
someone
wants
to
build
something,
that's
consistent
with
the
current
land
use,
they
don't
need
an
entitlement.
They
can
just
go,
get
the
permits.
K
Commissioner,
the
in
this
particular
general
plan
designation,
single
family
houses,
are
allowed
with
a
conditional
use
permit
through
a
discretionary
process.
So
that's
why
we
did
it
yeah.
J
Okay,
thank
you
for
clarifying
that.
So
it's
specific
to
this
particular
language,
designation,
okay
and
then
also
just
want
to
clarify
based
on
how
the
agenda
was
written.
Would
we
be
tonight
voting
on
a
recommendation
for
the
city
council,
or
would
we
be
making
the
final
decision
on
this
project.
K
You'd
be
making
the
final
decision
on
the
project.
Okay,.
J
Thank
you
for
clarifying
that
yeah,
so
I
just
want
to
echo
the
concerns
of
commissioner
cantrell,
commissioner
young.
I
the
we
received
multiple
legal
opinions
from
the
public
that
mentioned
animal
species
that
are
not
mentioned
at
all
in
the
staff
report
like
coyotes
were
discussed,
but
also
mountain
lions
and
butterflies.
I
and
then
just
in
general.
J
I
am
concerned
about
the
overall
prospect
of
further
development
outside
the
urban
growth
boundary.
This
some
ways
excuse
me
even
myself.
I
see
parallels
to
our
to
the
coyote
valley
discussion
late
last
year,
although
obviously
this
is
a
much
smaller
scale.
J
So
that's
kind
of
I
guess
I
I'm
a
little
I'm
between
like
okay,
this
is
on
paper.
A
project
that
is,
you
know,
is
the
type
of
project
that
this
land
use
designation
allows,
but
at
the
same
time,
I'm
concerned
that
the
mitigated
negative
declaration
that
we're
being
asked
to
approve
does
not
adequately
address
the
environmental
impacts,
so
I
guess
also.
J
I
don't
know
if
this
is
helpful
or
not,
but
I
this
is
the
first
time
I've
come
across
this
open
hillside,
designation,
I'm
just
curious
again,
I
don't
know
if
it's
helpful,
but
I'm
curious
if
staff
can
recall
any
recent
examples
of
projects
that
were
approved
for
development
in
that
on
properties,
under
that
land
use,
designation.
F
I
was
going
to
speak
to
recently
cp
18-0-3
was
presented
to
the
commission
probably
three-ish
months
ago,
for
a
project
on
fleming.
In
that
particular
meeting,
commissioner
benia
had
to
recuse
himself
that
helps
spark
any
reminder.
F
House
was
open
hillside
with
an
agriculture
zoning
district,
so
a
little
bit
different.
It
actually
had
a
more
limiting
zoning
district,
see.
B
I
I
I
have
to
echo
a
lot
of
the
same
concerns
in
regards
to
the
environmental
impacts,
and
you
know
I
am
looking
at
you
know.
I
had
looked
at
the
initial
study.
It
looked
really
thorough.
I
mean
it
was
like
very
very
long,
but
some
of
the
things
that
I
had
concerns
with
was
general
plan
policy.
Lu-19.8
states
in
part
incorporated
measures
within
new
development
to
ensure
substandard
wildlife
corridor
protection.
B
When
I'm
looking
at
the
mitigation
measures
in
the
you
know,
mitigated
negative
declaration,
I
see
proper
mitigation
measures
for
what
has
been
identified,
but
I
don't
see
specific
review
in
regards
to
protection
or
reviewing
the
wildlife
corridor,
and
it
seems
to
be
that
there
is
significant
evidence
that
this
is
seen
as
a
wildlife
quarter
area.
In
fact,
when
I
was
young
when
I
was
about,
like
maybe
10
13
years
old,
something
like
that,
we
went
to
a
party
in
morgan
hill.
B
We
were
taking
santa
teresa
back
and
we
had
a
little
van
and
a
deer
came
off
the
mountain
like
right
there
and
we
actually
ran
it
over.
So
I
know
for
certain
that
wildlife
passed
through
there
because
of
that
situation
when
I
was
a
kid
so
some
of
these
policies
that
I
see
in
the
general
plan-
and
I
don't
see
the
any-
that
it's
not
being
addressed
another
another
concern
of
mine-
was
the
cultural
resources.
B
B
You
know
the
trail
of
tears,
so
I
can't
help
but
be
concerned
with
the
analysis.
I
know
extensive
work
was
done.
I
see
it
there.
If
I
I,
if
there
was
a
new
biology
report,
I
don't
think
that
I
I'm
not
sure.
If
we
have
a
nexus
here
to
require
an
eir
I
would
require.
I
would
suggest
a
new
biology
report
that
addresses
the
wildlife
corridor
protection.
B
You
know
and
really
looks
at
those
general
plan
policies
and
maybe
add
some
mitigation
measures
to
that
or
really
discuss
that
a
little
further.
I
would
like
that.
I
would
like
yeah
that
the
archaeology
report
and
some
communication
with
the
tribes
that
would
be
what
I
think
is
missing
from
the
environmental
document,
and
you
know
once
that
would
be
disclosed.
B
I
think
you
know
I
would
feel
more
confident
moving
forward
with
the
project
you
know,
given
the
amount
of
grading
and
length
of
the
road,
I
just
think
that
some
of
the
stuff
should
should
be
should
have
been
included
in
in
the
environmental
review.
That's
what
I
have
to
say
so,
thanks.
C
Thank
you,
commissioner.
I'm
sorry
I'm
sorry,
that's
why
I
apologize.
Let
me
go
ahead
and,
commissioner
is
your
hand.
Up
still
is.
A
A
A
C
We're
gonna
we're
gonna,
I'm
gonna
weigh
in,
but
before
that,
let
me
do
you
have
any
other
questions
from
colleagues.
C
O
Thank
you
chair.
I
just
I
wanted
to
weigh
in
I've,
been
listening.
I've
been
reading
about
this
project
for
a
long
time,
and-
and
I
just
came
tonight
with
a
very
open
mind
to
to
you-
know
because
that's
what
our
job
is
as
planning
commissioners
is
to
look
at
what
we
are
presented
and
listen
to
all
sides
and
then
make
our
best
decision,
and
so
I
just
want
to
first
appreciate
the
applicant
mark.
I'm
sorry,
I'm
having
a
hard
time
pronouncing
your
last
name,
so
I'm
not
going
to
say
it
so
mark.
O
Thank
you
for
coming.
I,
as
a
neighborhood
person,
really
active
in
my
neighborhood.
I
appreciate
the
fact
that
you
went
around
to
all
those
homes
to
introduce
yourself
and
to
try
to
be
a
good
neighbor,
and
I
I
really
admire
and
respect
that
and
that
you've
been
at
this
for
a
long
time.
What
I've
heard
tonight
is
that
the
the
staff
recommendation
is
that
we
approve
the
conditional
use
permit
and
that
due
diligence
has
done
been
done
on
the
part
of
the
city
to
mitigate
any
negative
effects
and.
O
O
It's
within
you
know
his
legal
right
to
to
build
this,
and
I
I
just
know
I
have
in-laws
who
live
on
property
up
in
sonoma
county
on
three
acres
and
wildlife
does
still
travel
through
there
and
having
a
home
of
this
size
on
16,
17
acres.
O
It
still
really
does
give
the
wildlife
room
to
move
just
as
they
have
before.
So
those
are
just
some
thoughts.
I
wanted
to
add
to
this
discussion.
I
appreciate
those
who've
spoken
for
and
against
the
project.
I
I
really
get
both
sides
and
I'm
not
sure
how
I'm
voting
tonight,
but
I
just
felt
like
I
needed
to
add
that.
B
You
know
I
you
know,
I
know
that
the
the
owners
and
the
staff
have
done
so
much
work
to
get
to
this
point
point
is:
is
there
a
way
of
maybe
not
denying
the
project
but
just
asking
them
to
make
some
modifications
with
the
new
biology
report
and
archaeology
report?
And
maybe
you
know
some
meetings
with
some
of
the
tribes?
F
I
I'll
let
pat
speak
to
how
that
motion
could
potentially
look.
I
did
want
to
identify
an
archaeologist
archaeological
study
was
conducted.
F
Those
aren't
made
publicly
available
because
they
are
sensitive,
so
I
did
want
to
confirm
that
that
was
provided
and
that
consultation
did
occur
with
one
tribe,
but
we
certainly
depending
on
the
motion,
could
reach
out
to
the
tribe
that
sent
in
comments
yesterday.
K
So
a
point
of
order,
question
for
city
attorney.
I
believe,
if
the
commission
wanted
to
consider
the
project
with
updated
biological
information
and
any
recommended
changes
to
the
project
based
on
that
report,
that
it
would
require
the
project
to
be
continued.
However,
we
don't
have
a
date
certain
by
the
time.
We'd
have
that
information,
so
it
would
probably
have
to
be
not
sure
if
it
would
be
re-noticed
dropped
and
re-noticed
or
what
what
the
exact
terminology
is.
R
In
considering
an
approval
of
a
negative
declaration
or
mitigated
negative
declaration,
the
municipal
code
does
allow
the
planning,
commission
or
any
decision-making
body
to
either
require
the
preparation
of
an
er
require
that
the
mitigated
negative
deck
be
revised
or
undergo
additional
public
review
or
withdraw
the
negative
declaration.
If
the
public
or
if
the
applicant
withdraws
a
project
in
terms
of
moving
forward.
R
My
suggestion
would
be
to
because
there's
not
a
date,
certain,
perhaps
with
schedule
for
a
later
date
to
come
back
when
all
those
documents
are
completed,
as
opposed
to
just
continuing
it
for
future
hearings.
Until
that,
until
that's
done.
B
No,
that
that's
good,
I
I
don't
know
how
the
rest
of
the
commissioners
feel
in
regards
to
you,
know
continuing
the
item
and
having
them
do
some
modifications
to
the
environmental
document
that
was
prepared
and
updating
the
biology
report
to
include
you
know:
additional
research
on
wildlife,
corridor
protection.
C
I
Thank
you
chair.
I
think
the
suggestion
by
commissioner
arnelis
wise
is
wise
in
that
you
know
we
have
a.
I
I
there's
a
process
that
went
through
with
the
mega
neb
deck
and
staff,
and
what
she's
asking
for
is
a
little
bit
more
information,
and
I
think
the
also
the
important
part
that
she
mentioned
was
you
know
things
come
up
during
these
public
hearings
where,
in
this
particular
case,
a
particular
tribe
was
not
involved.
I
Apparently,
although
there
was
other
interactions
with
another
tribe,
but
perhaps
this
could
be
a
time
then
for
that
meeting
to
occur
and
if
staff
is
willing
and
the
applicant's
willing
to
maybe
hold
it
as
a
another
public
hearing
where,
where
the
variety
of
interest
groups
and
residents
can
speak
and
have
staff,
even
though
st
has
done
an
eloquent
job
tonight,
but
also
basically
present,
I
I
don't
like
personally
being
in
a
position
where
I
think
professional
planning
staff
has
done
the
work.
I
But
there's
still,
this
fear,
doubt
and
uncertainty
of
the
work,
and
perhaps
the
the
suggestion
by
commissioners
wise
would
provide
the
more
information
that
has
been
asked
for
by
speakers
tonight
by
other
colleagues
on
the
commission
plus
provide
that
opportunity
for
the
community
to
just
really
understand
that
everything
has
been
answered
fully
and
doodly,
and
that
this
could
come
back
when
that
work
is
complete.
I
We
don't
put
a
date
certain
on
it,
but
when
that
work
is
complete
and
we
go
from
there
if
the
applicant
thinks
it's
it's
not
a
good
idea,
they
could
withdraw.
But
ultimately,
if
the
applicant
feels
that
this
is
where
they
want
to
live
and
they
need
to
go
through
this
extra
step
to
get
planning
commission
approval,
I
think
that
would
be
a
worthy,
a
worthy
consideration.
C
C
R
Yeah,
both
of
them
are
correct
methods
for
dealing
with
the
motion.
That's
presently
on
the
floor.
R
B
A
Well,
my
motion's
already
been
seconded,
so
I
believe
we
have
to
vote
on
it,
but
I
don't.
I
don't
see
no
I'd
like
to
vote
on
it.
C
C
Let's,
let's
make
sure
that
you're
paired
mark,
can
you
step
in
here
to
make
sure
that
the
language
is
appropriate
in
order
for
us
to
do
this
right.
R
Yes,
my
understanding
of
the
motion
is
to
follow
the
procedure
under
the
municipal
code
for
either
having
the
applicant
conduct
an
eir
or
revising
the
mitigated
negative
deck.
I
can
put
up
the
relevant
section
as
well.
If
the
commissioners
would
like
to
see
that,
if
I
can,
I
can
share
my
screen.
That
would
be
great
that
we
all
have
clarity,
yeah.
Here's.
R
Q
G
G
Right
so,
and
that
would
be
my
feeling
as
well.
I
think
I
think
the
amended
motion
I'm
concerned
that
we're
really
foggy
here
on.
What's
going
to
happen,
I
think
it
would
be
better
just
to
go
with
the
fully
ir
thanks.
C
R
And
before
I
want
to
interrupt,
I
just
want
to
clarify:
there
are
two
actions
that
the
that
staff
is
recommending,
acceptance
or
certification
of
the
mnd
and
then
approval
of
the
project.
I
just
want
to
clarify.
It
sounds
like
the
motion.
That's
presently
on
the
floor
is
to
deny
both
those
actions
correct.
K
And
a
further
point
is
that
staff
would
need
to
return
to
the
planning
commission
with
a
resolution
for
denial
documenting
the
reasons
why,
and
so
we
would
need
to
as
part
of
that,
recommend
that
the
planning
commission
continue
the
hearing
to
july
13th
in
order
to
allow
staff
to
return
with
the
resolution
of
denial.
B
Yeah
I'd
like
to
make
a
second
second
motion
to
continue
the
item
to
revise
the
mitigated
negative
declaration
to
include
wildlife
corridor
protection
through
a
new
new
biology
report
and
additional
conversations
with
the
tribal
community
on
this
project.
C
D
J
Sorry,
if
I
could
just
pour
order
myself,
it's
a
question
for
mark,
I
know
earlier
we
talked
about
this
substitute
motion
being
for
a
modified
mitigated,
negative
declaration
or
a
full
eir.
I'm
just
wondering
like
is
there?
What's
the
substantive
difference
between
the
motion
just
saying
a
modified
mitigated,
negative
declaration
versus
that
or
a
fully
ir.
R
Well,
I
mean
it
would
just
be
if
there's
a
thing
in
the
mitigated,
negative
declaration
that
needs
to
be
revised
and
undergo
additional
notice,
public
review,
then
what
will
come
back
to
the
commission
will
be
that
revised
mitigated
negative
declaration
with
that
public
review.
If
the
commission's
direction
is
to
do
a
fully
ir,
then
a
full
eir
will
come
back
and
then
the
consequences
as
cassandra
mentioned
there.
You
know
fully
ir
takes
a
little
bit
longer
for
the
notice
periods
as
well
as
the
standard
of
review
is
different.
R
I
I
did
to
the
maker
of
the
substitute
motion:
did
the
motion
or
would
the
motion
also
include
potentially
outreach
to
non-tribal,
meaning
members
of
the
community
or
members
of
the
environmental
groups
that
actually
tonight
have
asked
for
this
item
to
be
deferred?
I
Would
that
would
that
be
able
to
be
included
so
that
they'd
have
an
opportunity
to
have
questions
with
applicants
and
staff
and
really
resolve?
What
is
you
know
what
everyone
agrees
upon.
I
C
R
No
just
to
go
ahead
and
take
the
if
there's
any
confusion
or
clarification
on
what
the
motion
is,
then
my
suggestion
is
to
do
that
now.
Otherwise
take
the
vote.
C
C
These
things
aren't
perfect,
but
I
do
want
to
take
into
account
that
both
sides
have
legitimate
concerns
and-
and
both
sides
have
invested
time
into
getting
us
to
where
we
are.
I
I
I
just
I'm
not
comfortable
with
a
kind
of
throwing
the
baby
out
with
the
bathwater
approach,
although
I
understand
why
I
do
think
that
this
this
compromise
being
proposed
by
commissioners,
ornelas,
wise
and
oliverio,
gets
us
there,
because,
ultimately,
going
back
to
the
you
know
the
issue
of
questions.
C
The
question
was
more
time
more
conversation,
and
I
think
this
motion
does
that.
So
with
that
I
weighed
in
and
I
will
go
ahead
and
call
for
a
vote
o'neil.
Yes,
cantrell.
Q
B
O
C
B
N
N
N
So
over
the
whole,
the
years
the
city
has
been
reevaluating,
its
parking
requirements
and
transportation
demand
management
measures,
insistency
and
further
implementation
of
both
climate,
smart
and
the
envision
san
jose
general
plan.
This
work
has
actually
been
a
joint
effort
between
planning
and
the
department
of
transportation
and
it's
being
done
under
the
umbrella
of
the
american
cities,
climate
challenge
and
our
multi-departmental
climate,
smart,
san
jose
team.
N
So
as
such,
it's
not
just
planning
it's
the
tea,
so
joining
me
tonight
is
wilson.
Tamp
wilson,
who's
going
to
be
co-presenting
was
the
co-project
manager
of
this
work.
Also
from
d.o.t
is
ramses
madue
and
jessica.
Zang
ed
schreiner
is
the
planning
co-manager
of
this
project
he's
actually
sick
tonight.
I
think
he
is
in
bed
listening
to
what's
going
on
tonight,
but
I'm
going
to
be
pinch
hitting
for
him
tonight.
So
I'm
not
just
your
secretary,
I'm
also
pinch
hitting.
N
I
should
note
this
work
was
funded
by
the
american
cities,
climate
challenge,
which
is
sponsored
by
bloomberg,
philanthropies,
which
provide
resources
to
cities
such
as
san
jose
to
address
climate
change
by
reducing
greenhouse
gas
emissions
through
a
holistic
approach.
It
addresses
that
focuses
on
building
and
transportation.
N
So
what
we're
going
to
present
for
you
tonight
is
actually
not
an
ordinance
for
your
consideration.
It
is
we
want
to
get
your
feedback
on
policy
direction,
for
changes
for
a
new
parking
strategy,
parking
and
tdm
strategy,
which
would
will
ultimately,
we
anticipate
results
and
changes
to
our
zoning
code
regarding
parking
and
tdm.
N
So
we're
just
we're
asking
for
your
feedback,
we'll
be
taking
this
feedback
that
you
give
us
tonight
to
city
council
to
get
there
to
listen
to
our
our
proposed
direction
or
in
on
which
direction
we
should
ultimately
go,
and
then
over
the
summer
we
will
actually
prepare
the
ordinance,
bring
it
back
to
planning
commission
in
the
fall
for
its
consideration
and
then
to
counsel
for
its
consideration
as
well.
Next
slide,
so
I'm
gonna
just
oops,
I
gotta
minimize
all
your
photos
here.
N
There
we
go
so
I'm
we're
just
gonna
kind
of
give
you
an
overview
of
what
we're
doing
here
and
and
why
and
so,
what's
the
need
for
it
and
what
are
the
issues
that
we're
trying
to
address?
So
I
think,
as
you're
all
aware
is
that
we
do
have
parking
requirements
for
pretty
much
every
use
almost
everywhere
in
san
jose,
be
it
residential
retail
office,
industrial
and
in
schools.
N
There
are
very
limited
exceptions
to
this,
but
yeah,
so
the
required
parking
when
developers
come
in,
they
have
to
provide
parking
spaces
consistent
with
our
code
next
slide
yeah.
So
these
regulations
are
called
parking
minims.
They
live
in
our
zoning
code
and
they're
designed
so
that
the
supply
of
parking
always
exceeds
demand.
N
So
there's
almost
always
going
to
be
empty
spaces.
We
really
plan
around
those
very
rare
events,
so
minimum
parking
requirements
are
not
unique.
N
Most
communities
in
in
the
united
states
have
parking
requirements
somewhere
or
yes
have
them
somewhere,
maybe
not
everywhere,
but
in
in
many
many
places.
Next
slide
next
slide
so
parking
requirements.
I've
been
around
for
a
while
san
jose,
enacted
parking
requirements
in
1949.
N
We
required
one
residential
unit,
really
the
sort
of
more
more
comprehensive
parking
requirement
and
parking
code
came
about
in
1965,
where
we
began
to
require
parking
spaces
for
really
every
use,
and-
and
you
know
we
haven't
done
a
comprehensive,
relook
and
analysis
to
revisit
the
code
holistic
since
1965.
So
this
really
is
the
the
first
time
that
we're
we're
doing
this
since
that
period,
so
at
first
gland
parking
parking
minimums
seem
like
a
common
sense
policy.
N
You
know
that
the
idea
is
that
you
know
development
provides
more
than
enough
spaces
just
to
ensure
that
there
aren't
people
parking
on
the
street
and
there
isn't
spillover
parking
and
parking.
Minims.
Quite
frankly,
are
there
to
ensure
that,
on
at
oak
ridge,
mall
or
valley,
fair
mall,
though
there's
enough
parking
for
everybody
on
black
third,
after
thanksgiving
as
they
do
their
holiday
shopping.
N
But
the
issue
with
parking
is:
it
assumes
that
that
that
the
only
way
to
get
to
point
a
to
b
is
by
driving
and
that
everybody
is
driving.
N
So
parking
parking
parking
minimums
really
are
a
blunt
instrument
that
accommodate
parking
at
peak
demand
and
often
are
going
to
result
in
an
oversupply
of
parking
next
slide.
N
So
why
is
this
a
problem?
So
I'm
gonna
cover
sort
of
four
areas
and
talk
about
how
parking
or
requiring
a
minimum
amount
of
working
has
created
a
number
of
challenges
and
problems
for
us.
First,
we
have
the
issue
of
climate
choice
and
traffic,
how
it
affects
business,
flexibility
and
talk
about
parking
and
its
impact
and
space
and
ecology,
and
also
how
it
impacts.
Housing,
affordability
next
slide.
N
So
I
think
one
way
to
make
this
a
little
more
accessible.
A
little
more
fun
is
we're.
Gonna
we're
gonna,
create
five
imaginary
people
and
we're
gonna
walk
you
through
sort
of
what
king
looks
like
from
their
perspective.
So
we
have
hasang
who's,
a
renter,
julia,
homeowner,
trisha,
who's,
an
employer,
a
business
owner,
catherine
who's.
A
developer,
an
angel
who's,
a
staff
person
next
slide,
so
the
first
problem
I'm
going
to
talk
about
is
related
to
climate
choice
and
traffic,
so
parking
minimums
by
making
it
appear
to
free
free.
N
So
with
all
this
parking
available,
people
like
julie,
have
an
incentive
to
drive
it's
free.
Why
not?
I
there's
plenty
of
parking
and,
even
though
julia
is
open
to
walking
riding
transit,
even
biking
in
main
area,
where
there's
a
store
down
the
street,
they
tend
to
get
in
there.
She
tends
to
get
car
and
drive
there
next
slide,
and
so
most
people
in
san
jose
are
making
similar
decisions,
often
unconsciously.
N
So
a
city
designed
for
cars
and
means
more
driving
and
more
traffic
that
goes
with
it,
and
so
a
term
that
you
probably
have
heard
and
you'll
hear
a
lot
more,
for
it
is
what
we
call
vmt
and
it
really
what
it
stands
for
is
a
vehicle
miles,
trial.
Traveled!
Excuse
me:
it's
a
metric
for
how
much
people
drive
next
slide.
N
N
N
So
the
challenge
for
angel
or
for
us
myself
and
ed
and
and
wilson
is
trying
to
help
san
jose
become
climate
neutral
by
2030
and
frankly,
we
will
not
be
able
to
reach
our
city's
climate
goals
or
the
paris
accord
which
we
signed
up
for.
If
we
don't
tackle
transportation,.
N
N
More
and
more
people
are
driving
chevy,
volts
and
teslas,
and
we
anticipate
that
we're
going
to
continue
next
slide,
but
eds
won't
help
our
traffic
problem
because
they
take
up
ev's
electric
up
just
amount
of
space
as
as
conventional
cars,
and
you
know
also
it's
not
that
electric
vehicles
are
environmental
impact,
free,
have
life
cycle
emissions,
they
generally
need
electricity
and
there's
issues
with
disposing
them
and
there's
going
to
be
more
and
more
challenges
actually
with
getting
the
minerals
that
are
needed.
The
materials
that
need
to
create
batteries
next
slide.
N
The
next
issue
I'm
going
to
talk
about
is
how
minimum
parking
requirements
don't
facilitate
or
provide
business
flexibility
in
some
situations
next
slide.
N
So
the
example
we're
going
to
use
today
tonight
is
trisha,
who
trisha
has
a
booming,
I'm
going
to
say
it's:
a
booming
restaurant
business
and
she's
looking
to
open
a
new
location,
she's
doing
so
well,
she
wants
to
expand.
She
found
a
location
but
city
code.
She
cannot
rent
this
unless
she
provides
more
parking
than
currently
exists
and
she
can't
find
that
park.
You
cannot
occupy
that
space,
and
this
is.
N
So
so
we
also
acknowledge
that
preferences
have
been
shifting
even
before
the
pandemic.
For
example,
more
and
more
people
are
shopping.
Online
people
are
starting
to
use
uber
and
lyft.
More
and
people
are
working
from
home
next
slide.
N
These
trends
and
wants
to
convert
her
rear
parking
lot
into
a
pop-up
event
space.
This
is
something
that's
very
commonly
done
during
the
pandemic,
but
you
can't
again
because
of
parking
minims
take
a
a
timeout
or
stop
for
just
a
second
that
the
city
does
actually
have
alfredo
right
now.
In
effect,
it
was
really
a
temporary
code
version
that
allows
restaurants
and
other
businesses
to
put
move
their
business
out
into
the
parking
lot
using
required
parking
that
al
fresco
program
is
set
to
fire
in
december
22
december
of
this
year.
N
So
the
next
time
I
talk
about
the
parking
particularly
in
over
abundance
of
parking
has
in
on
land
space
and
ecology.
Next
slide
so
park,
not
appealing
places,
and
I
just
want
to
note
that
our
general
plan
envisioned
san
jose
2040
actually
has
a
subtext
which
says
creating
a
city
of
great
places
and
parking.
Lots
are
not
the
kind
of
thing
that
create
a
city
of
great
places,
and
I
just
want
to
note
one
of
my
professors:
alan
jacobs,
who's,
the
author
of
great
streets.
N
N
So
these
so
outside
of
functioning
in
car
parking,
these
parking
areas
do
not
add
a
lot
of
value
communities.
N
All
this
parking
pushes
destinations
apart,
creating
yucky
or
unfriendly
walking
and
bicycling
environments,
which
in
turn
makes
it
less
appealing
to
walk
bike
and
take
transit
and
again
creates
more
incentives
for
driving
us
and
and
and
and
creates,
and
in
turn,
more
traffic
parking,
of
course
takes
up
a
lot
of
space,
which
is
why
parking
often
contributes
to
a
unpleasant
environment.
N
So
what
you
see
here
is
how
much
parking
space
is
required
for
each
square
foot
of
a
particular
use.
You
have
a
restaurant,
you
have
a
gym
and
you
have
an
office
and
you
have
an
apartment.
I
think
there's
another
pop-up.
You
might
want
to
just
hit
that
pop-up
wilson.
So
what
you
can
see
is
this
particularly
in
the
restaurant
and
in
the
gym
and
even
the
office.
Is
that
a
lot
of
the
land
area?
Actually
more
of
the
land
area
is
occupied
for
parking.
N
N
This
isn't
really
I'm
not
even
talking
about
the
negative
ecological
impacts
of
ex
surface
parking,
so
lots
of
parking
can
create
habitat
loss.
It's
a
loss
of
open
space
for
people
to
play
in
it
creates
challenges
with
storm
water
and
drainage.
And
of
course,
it's
a
major.
A
cause
of
heat
island
of
urban
areas
actually
being
hotter
than
the
surrounding
non-urban
area
is
next
slide.
N
So
the
next
issue,
I'm
going
to
talk
about
our
problem
that
is
created
by
excess
parking,
is
a
housing
affordability.
N
And
I
think
this
you
know
this
is
people
don't
think
about
the
cost
of
parking.
They
just
think.
Oh,
it's
awesome.
I'm
gonna
go
to
the
store.
It's
it's.
Of
course
it's
free!
Why?
Wouldn't
it
be
free,
but,
as
we
know,
not
much
is
free
in
life.
So
parking
has
a
cost
next
next
next
leg
and
the
costs
show
up
everywhere
in
our
lives.
N
So
because
parking
is
expensive
to
build,
it
often
results
in
higher
rents
for
tenants
because
they
are
paying
rent
to
rent
and
the
actual
living
space
that
they
live
in,
regardless
of
whether
they
use
the
parking
or
not.
It
results,
often
in
higher
purchases.
Right,
because
you
know
the
developer
has
to
build
spaces
for
the
cars
for
housing
as
well
as
the
purchaser
of
the
home,
and
it
can
often
results
in
more
expensive
goods
and
services.
N
And
we
just
have
to
be
mindful
that
many
people
in
san
jose,
including
song
in
this
in
this
example,
don't
need
car
parking.
So
there
are
a
lot
of
people
that
are
young,
older
people
with
lower
incomes,
people
with
limited
vision
that
don't
use
cars
and
we've
really
planned
a
city
on
assuming
that
just
about
everybody
drives
and
not
for
people
not
for
those
that
that
either
can't
or
choose
not
to
drive
next
slide.
N
So
kind
of
moving
on
to
an
example
of
developers
sort
of
in
this.
In
this
hypothetical
example
developer,
katherine
would
like
to
build
without
parking
minims,
because
she
could
build
more
homes.
They
could
be
more
affordably
priced
next
slide
and
if
she
were
able
to
do,
I
sang
would
have
more
affordable
housing
options,
better
suited
her
budget
and
her
car
free
lifestyle.
She
just
have
to
pay
for
her
living
space
and
not
and
not
for
the
storage
and
car.
N
I
just
want
to
note
that
I
know
that
the
idea
of
eliminating
parking
requirements
is
sounds
like
a
very
bold
and
radical
move,
but
not
on
the
forefront
here.
As
you
can
see
from
this
map,
many
cities
around
the
country
have
removed
mandatory
parking
requirements,
minimum
parking
requirements
either
for
the
whole
city
or
in
certain
parts
of
the
city,
such
as
downtown
and
transit
areas
or
in
main
street
area.
N
So
you
can
see
even
down
in
mexico
and
canada
and
throughout
there's
lots
of
cities
that
are
moving
or
have
moved
in
this
direction,
and
with
that,
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
wilson.
Who's
going
to
talk
about
transportation,
demand
man
aspect
of
our
proposed
policy
framework.
Thank
you,
michael.
M
Good
morning,
good
evening,
commissioners,
this
is
wilson
transportation,
planning
manager
at
dlt
and
michael
just
shared
or
search
presented.
One
side
of
the
point,
which
is
the
parking
strategy
and
just
to
return
to
just
to
reiterate
our
style
recommendation,
is
to
eliminate
the
parking
minimum
requirements
citywide
and
just
want
to
share
that
like
just
reducing
or
removing
the
parking
minimum
requirement.
City-Wide
does
not
solve
the
climate
and
transportation
issues.
M
We
also
want
to
make
sure
that,
as
as
the
you
know,
the
developers
are
going
to
build
the
number
of
parking
spaces
that
are
needed
by
the
market
and
the
community.
M
We
want
to
make
sure
that,
in
order
to
reduce
traffic
or
reduce
transportation
vehicular
footprint,
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
are
able
to
improve
the
transportation
options
for
the
community,
so
that
people
see
that
there
are
a
wide
range
of
transportation
options
such
as
walking
biking
and
taking
transit
to
address
their
daily
transportation
needs,
and
so
I'm
going
to
talk
about
the
second
side
of
the
coin,
which
is
the
tdm
strategies.
M
M
We
have
a
set
of
tdm
measures
related
to
land
use
such
as
more
mixed-use
settings,
more
higher
density
or
more
affordable
housing.
We
have
another
bucket
of
tdm
measures
called
street
infrastructure
and
they
are
more
related
to
building
the
street
infrastructure
improvements
related
to
pedestrian
environment
and
transit
environment.
Things
of
that
nature,
so
that
people
could
enjoy
walking
biking
and
taking
transit
around
the
third
bucket
is
related
to
parking
and
as
michael
presented
in
the
first
part
of
the
presentation.
M
There
are
a
series
of
parking
strategies
in
the
tdm
manual
that
the
developers
can
choose,
for
example,
building
more
bike,
parking,
shared
parking,
etc.
Last,
but
not
least,
we
have
the
programmatic
programmatic
measures,
such
as
providing
transit
subsidies
to
the
tenants
and
also
unbundling
parking
and
other
bike
share.
Car
share
subsidy
things
of
that
nature,
and
you
know
these
four
categories
of
tdm
measures
with
a
total
of
30
options
would
be
provided
to
the
developers,
and
this
flowchart
gives
us
some
understanding
about
the
flow
or
the
workflow
about
how
tdm
work
in
the
city.
M
We
would
like
to
propose
that
we
are
able
to
streamline
this
development
review
process
so
that,
when
city
staff
provide
a
menu
of
options
to
the
developers,
they
will
see
hey.
These
are
the
options
that
I
can
choose
from
to
satisfy
this
tdm
requirements.
M
We
do
not
talk
about
the
point
system,
but
this
is
the
framework
that
we
are
trying
to
develop
in
order
to
streamline
the
process
so
that
the
development
can
just
check
the
boxes
and
select
the
options
that
would
help
them
meet
the
requirement
and
these
options
will
be
provided
to
the
future.
Tenants
such
as
the
renter,
hassan
or
homeowner
julie,
they
will
be
enjoying
these
tdm
measures
moving
forward
when
we
meet
with
the
our
our
cpo
partners
and
work
with
the
community
about
these
options
and
this
workflow
we
were.
M
We
understand
that
the
major
concerns
is
really
about
addressing
equity
and
also
from
the
developer
stance
point.
They
really
want
us
to
streamline
the
process
so
that
so
that
we
can
provide
more
clarity
so
that
they
know
exactly
what
they
need
to
build
in
order
to
proceed,
and
also
wanting
to
make
sure
that
these
tdm
measures
are
not
unintentionally
causing
some
cost.
M
You
know
implications
for
the
developability
of
the
the
projects,
and
so
once
we
are
able
to
get
an
input
from
you
tonight
and
also
the
council
next
week,
based
on
the
direction
we'll
be,
you
know,
devising
our
owners
updates
accordingly,
in
order
to
address
equity,
streamlining
and
cost
of
the
development
to
bring
forth
a
legal
ordinance
for
the
council
to
consider
later
in
the
year,
and
so
after.
M
Just
highlighting
the
staff
recommendation
for
tdm
just
want
to
take
a
step
back
about
like
why
we
are
proposing
to
establish
a
city-wide
tdm
program.
So,
as
we
know,
the
city
is
going
to
grow
by
at
least
40
percent
in
the
next
20
years,
and
so
more
development
means
more
people
coming
to
the
city,
and
so
tdm
is
actually
the
framework
or
the
program
that
provides
all
sorts
of
great
things
for
the
community
to
enjoy
and
without
negatively
impacting
traffic
and
parking.
M
The
combination
of
these
two
things
right.
We
just
talked
about
the
parking
strategy
trying
to
eliminate
the
parking
minimum
requirement
so
that
we
won't
incentivize
driving
over
other
means
of
transportation.
M
On
the
other
side
of
the
coin,
we
would
like
to
promote
all
sorts
of
transportation
options
with
high
quality
infrastructure
and
programs
and
for
yeah.
So
so
this
is
it,
and
this
removing
parking
or
reducing
or
removing
parking
minimum
requirements
would
not
stop
a
developer
from
building
more
parking
if
he
or
she
thought
that
market
conditions
warranted
it.
M
And
that
could
mean
that
this
could
fulfill
a
huge
part
of
the
tdm
requirements
and
they
may
require
a
less
tdm
for
for
for
satisfying
the
city
requirement
because,
like
low
parking,
shared
parking
and
unbundling
parking
are
already
on
the
main
of
tdr
tdm
strategies.
M
M
You
know
many
options
for
the
future
tenants
and
causing
them
to
to
rely
less
on
automobile
and
and
in
effect,
it
would
reduce
congestion,
pollution
and
greenhouse
gas
emission
and
because
we
know
that
more
parking
means
more
traffic
and
in
other
words,
we
really
want
to
align
our
policies,
which
is
what
we
are
discussing
tonight
with
our
shared
goals,
which
is
to
address
climate
issues
and
transportation,
issues
and
affordability,
issues
and
the
four
problems
that
michael
just
shared
at
the
beginning
of
the
presentation
and
together.
M
This
is
our
opportunity
to
address
climate
by
reducing
our
carbon
emissions.
It
improves
the
choices
so
that
it
provides
more
transportation
options
for
the
community.
It
addresses
traffic
because
it
would
reduce
incentives
to
drive.
It
would
create
flexibility
by
increasing
options
for
the
businesses
deciding
on
how
much
parking
they
would
provide
and
how
many
tdm
measures
they
would
provide
their
future
tenants
and
also
allocating
more
space
for
people,
jobs
and
and
other
sorts
of
land
uses.
M
It
also
addresses
housing
by
providing
more
housing,
more
affordable
housing
and
more
clarity
to
the
developers
and-
and
we
just
presented
five
personas
right,
but
as
more
people
come
to
the
city,
we
have
various
or
diverse
needs
of
of
transportation,
and
so
like
these
strategies
like
parking
and
tdi
really
create
an
environment
to
address
diverse
needs
of
people
a
lot
more
than
what
we
just
presented
tonight
in
terms
of
the
five
personas.
M
So
this
slide
kind
of
summarizes
the
staff
recommendation
and,
as
michael
said
earlier,
we
would
like
to
present
to
you
and
the
council
next
week
two
additional
alternatives
in
terms
of
parking.
M
If
you
ask
us
like
why
we
are
proposing
the
preferred
alternative
or
the
staff
recommendation
and
additionally
to
other
alternatives,
when
we
are,
we
presented
the
staff
recommendation
to
our
communities
and
also
our
council
officers
and
council
members
in
the
last
few
months,
and
we
were
advised
that
it
would
be
great
to
accompany
the
staff
recommendation
with
other
alternatives
for
the
council
to
see
the
whole
spectrum
of
possibilities.
M
Knowing
that
other
cities,
some
cities
may
have
eliminated
the
parking
minimum
as
a
city
citywide
and
some
other
cities,
as
micro
presented
earlier,
have
eliminated
parking
minimum
in
only
certain
areas
of
the
city.
And
so,
therefore,
we
are
presenting
two
scenarios
here,
one
with
aluminium
parking
everywhere,
except
for
the
single
single-family
zones.
M
Knowing
that
you
know
we
have
a
state
housing
bill,
such
as
sb9
that
really
allows
a
single-family
housing
to
with
the
adus
to
get
by
or
get
around
the
city-wide
parking
minimum
requirement
to
build
less
parking.
And
so
we
feel
that,
like
single
families,
housing
is
a
concern
in
the
city
and-
and
this
alternative
may
present
a
scenario
where
we
allow
some
flexibility
still
for
the
single
family
housing
to
determine
how
many
parking
spaces
they
would
provide,
given
the
backup
for
the
state
laws
such
as
sb9
and
others.
M
And
we
did
a
high-level
assessment
about
those
three
alternatives
and,
as
you
can
imagine
in
there
are,
you
know,
all
three
areas.
All
three
scenarios
help
you
know
they
have
some
level
of
elimination
of
property
minimum
and
so,
but
they
have
varying
levels
of
benefits,
benefits
associated
with
what
we
just
presented
earlier
in
this
presentation,
and
so
as
staff.
We
really
would
like
a
planning,
commission
and
a
council
to
really
consider
the
staff
recommendation,
which
is
to
eliminate
the
minimum
parking
requirement.
M
Yeah,
so
this
is,
this
slide
summarizes
the
stack
recommendation
with
parking.
We
would
like
to
propose
to
eliminate
the
mandatory
parking
minimum
city
wide
and
on
the
tdm
side
of
the
things
we
would
like
to
propose
to
update
the
tdn
requirements.
M
Cdy
streamlined
the
sql
process,
so
they
provide
more
clarity
and
more
pro
and
less
vagueness
with
the
developers
and
also
to
develop
a
tdm
program
for
the
ongoing
monetary
monitoring
and
compliance
process
with
the
developers
ensuring
that
the
tdm
measures
that
are
selected
by
the
developers
to
satisfy
the
city's
requirement
are
going
to
be
eventually
provided
to
the
future
tenants
of
the
building
as
they
as
they
are
occupied.
C
N
N
M
So
much
yeah
so
with
that,
let
me
hand
it
back
to
michael
to
wrap
this
up
with
the
timeline.
N
Yeah
sure,
actually
I
let
you
keep
going,
but
that's
okay,
so
the
so
just
kind
of
this
is
kind
of
a
timeline
where
we've
been
then
I
think,
what's
really
really
important,
though,
is
thinking
about
where
we're
going
by
the
way,
I
think
there's
only
a
couple
of
you
that
were
in
the
we
had
a
planning
commission
study
session
with,
but
I
think
there
was
only
a
couple
of
you
that
were
there
back
in
2022,
some
other
milestones.
N
We
already
have
a
tdm
and
parking
approach,
which
this
is
is
very
similar
to
that's
been
approved
by
council
on
the
various
of
our
urban
village
plan.
N
N
And
that
concludes
our
presentation
and
we
will
turn
it
back
for
over
to
you
all
for
questions
and
discussion.
C
Thank
you
for
that.
Yes,
can
I
get
a
show
at
hand
as
to
who
wants
to
go
on
public
comment,
as
of
right
now
looks
like
we've
got
9
10.
P
Hi,
my
name
is
zoe
siegel
and
I'm
the
director
of
climate
resilience
at
green
belt
alliance.
Thank
you
so
much
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
on
reviewing
parking
minimums
tonight.
As
you
know,
san
jose
has
ambitious
climate
and
housing
goals
that
cannot
be
met
without
addressing
parking
minimums
part
pillar
2
of
climate,
smart,
san
jose
has
policies
and
actions
to
reduce
thirteen
hundred
thousand
tons.
Thirteen
hundred
thousand
tons
of
carbon
reduced
per
year
and
vnt
per
capita
per
day
reduced
by
57
by
2050,
and
this
cannot
happen
without
significant
changes
to
parking
minimums.
P
This
will
also
further
so
many
other
goals.
The
city
staff
has
identified
throughout
the
the
general
plan.
There's
approximately
80
general
plan
policies
that
the
removal
of
mandatory
parking
minimums
and
the
expansion
of
tbm
would
advance.
I
would
like
to
urge
you
to
support
the
staff
recommendation
to
prepare
a
parking
reform
ordinance
that
removes
mandatory
minimum
parking
requirements,
updates
the
city
t
dm
program
and
develops
a
program
for
ongoing
monitoring
compliance.
I
would
like
to
urge
you
to
remove
staff
recommendation.
Thank
you.
P
Hello,
this
is
joanna
gubman,
I'm
executive
director
of
urban
environmentalists,
and
we
work
to
support
transformation
of
cities
and
towns
into
more
sustainable
and
just
communities
through
land
use
policy
reform.
I'm
also
calling
in
support
of
the
staff
recommended
option.
P
As
the
staff
noted,
there
are
so
many
positive
environmental
benefits
to
parking
reform,
and
these
include
urban
info
can
be
made
easier
as
well
as
so
much
besides.
Less
driving,
of
course,
and
it's
also
an
environmental
justice
issue
having
less
infrastructure
for
cars,
means
less
pollution
and
less
urban
heat
island
effect
and
other
negative
impacts
that
particularly
affect
low-income
and
communities
of
color.
So
once
again,.
D
R
I'm
alex
shore
with
catalyze
sv
every
month,
catalyze
sv
members
evaluate
developments
when
we
do
we
see
project
after
project
burdened
by
outdated,
problematic
parking
mandates.
The
current
1965
mandates
are
bad
for
us,
too
much
parking
means
fewer
community
benefits
and
homes.
We
actually
need
san
jose's.
1965
population
was
one-third
of
what
it
is
today.
Orchards
were
all
around
traffic
was
much
lighter,
but
san
jose
trolleys
had
disappeared,
vta
hadn't
even
started
service
yet
and
scooters
didn't
exist
back
then.
The
car
was
undisputed
king
in
california.
R
Really
the
car's
been
a
dictator
dominating
too
many
facets
of
our
lives,
while
trapping
us
in
traffic
and
polluting
our
air.
It's
time
for
us
to
plan
san
jose
more
democratically,
give
us
healthy,
safe
and
sustainable
choices
on
how
we
get
around
the
time
has
come
for
change.
Our
city
has
changed.
Our
community
is
innovative.
Our
people
are
adaptable.
A
All
right,
thank
you.
As
a
middle
class
member
of
the
community,
I'm
a
latino
from
san
jose.
I
I
kind
of
it
sounds
to
me
kind
of
like
a
bad
idea.
It's
already
hard
enough
for
people
to
survive
in
san
jose,
as
it
is
now
so
taking
away
parking.
Lots,
sounds
kind
of
like
a
power
grab
to
me
to
force
people
not
to
drive,
and
it's
clearly
what
they
said.
It's
to
force
people
not
to
drive.
A
We
shouldn't
be
forced
out
of
our
comfort
zone
because
you
feel
like
we
shouldn't
be
driving
to
so-called
save
the
planet.
Driving
is
necessary.
A
lot
of
people
have
to
drive
for
living
and
to
get
to
work.
We
depend
on
parking
lots
to
go
places
when
we're
out
in
the
public.
It
actually
makes
it
convenient
for
people
when
there's
more
parking.
People
do
not
want
to
go
out.
A
If
there's
no
parking,
you
guys
work
hard
to
try
to
make
us
middle-class
people
in
the
community
sacrifice
for
something
that
doesn't
benefit
the
community
in
any
way,
not
in
my
opinion,
it
makes
people
want
to
be
stuck
at
home.
We
want
more
reasons
to
be
out,
not
less
and
be,
and
you
know
it's
driving
can
be
therapeutic
and
soothing,
and
you
know
people
shouldn't
have
to
walk
a
mile
from
their
home.
I
mean
from
their
parking
to
get
to
their
home.
A
D
Chair,
I
was
just
unmuted.
Is
it
okay.
D
Good
evening,
chair,
bonilla
and
planning
commissioners,
my
name
is
ali
saberman
and
I'm
here
on
behalf
of
the
housing
action
coalition
to
speak
in
strong
support
of
the
stock
recommendation
to
prepare
a
parking
reform,
ordinance
that
removes
mandatory
parking,
mandatory
minimum
parking
limits,
updates
the
city's
tdm
requirements
and
developed
a
program
for
ongoing
monitoring
and
compliance
across
our
state.
More
than
97
percent
of
cities
and
counties
have
been
unable
to
produce
enough,
affordable
housing.
D
If
we're
going
to
take
our
state's
housing
prices
seriously,
we
need
to
use
every
possible
tool
to
build
more
housing,
we're
raising
money
to
fund
more
affordable
housing,
but
cities
and
developers
are
running
into
these
challenges.
With
these
antiquated
parking
requirements,
this
means
we're
getting
even
less
housing
and
even
less
affordable
housing.
Meanwhile,
we're
wasting
money,
maintaining
unused
parking
lots.
Please
support
the
staff's
preferred
recommendation
to
eliminate
parking
minimums
city-wide.
Thank
you.
So
much.
P
Oh
thank
you
good
evening.
Everyone,
my
name
is
sarah.
P
This
proposal
is
a
critical
tool
to
reduce
the
biggest
source
of
emissions,
while
also
making
san
jose
homes
more
affordable
parking
and
tdm
policies
are
critical
to
increasing
access
and
affordability
for
all
people,
especially
for
those
in
san
jose
who
use
public
transportation,
the
most,
which
are
people
of
color
and
low
and
middle
income
people.
This
is
one
of
the
most
important
actions
you
can
take
to
promote
social
equity
and
economic
security.
P
A
Good
evening
planning
commissioners,
my
name
is:
I'm
the
project
development
specialist
for
cadillac
cssv,
but
tonight
I'll
be
speaking
on
my
own
personal
behalf.
I
am
here
to
urge
you
to
support
the
staff's
recommendation
to
modernize
san
jose's
parking
policies
and
tdm
measures.
As
we
heard
tonight,
building
parking
can
be
very
expensive
and
these
costs
are
often
passed
down
to
renters
people
like
me,
who
are
rent
burden
more
than
ever.
A
This
change
will
make
it
easier
and
cheaper
to
build
a
large
housing
projects
by
building
parking
by
demand,
not
following
a
mandate
from
50
years
ago.
We
can't
also
forget
about
the
tdm
measures.
I
grew
up
as
the
son
of
a
single
mom.
We
are
immigrants.
I
took
the
bus
everywhere.
I
took
it
every
single
day
to
bunsen
burgers
across
town.
A
I
took
it
almost
every
day
to
go
and
access
classes
in
my
local
community
college
so
having
a
robust
bus
system
is
what
allowed
me
to
thrive
and
be
pursuing
a
master's
degree
here
in
san
jose
today.
So
I
hope
that
you
take
into
consideration
how
successful
this
policies
can
be
implemented
right,
and
I
urge
you
to
support
the
staff's
recommendation
tonight.
Thank
you.
P
Organizer
at
save
the
bay.
Thank
you
so
much
for
the
opportunity
to
provide
comment
tonight.
I'd
like
to
urge
the
planning
commission
to
support
the
staff
recommendation
to
prepare
a
parking
reform,
ordinance
that
removes
mandatory
minimum
parking
limits,
updates
the
city's
tdm
requirements
and
develops
a
program
for
ongoing
monitoring
and
compliance.
P
San
jose
has
set
forth
ambitious
climate
goals,
including
pledging
to
go
to
carbon
neutral
by
2030.
However,
if
driving
is
still
incentivized
through
minimum
parking
requirements,
emissions
from
vehicles
will
make
it
difficult
to
meet
these
goals.
Removing
parking
minimums
will
also
help
protect
the
bay
from
polluted
runoff
parking.
Lots
tend
to
be
large,
paved
areas
that
increase
polluted
storm
water,
runoff
negatively,
impacting
water
quality
in
san
jose's,
creek
servers
and,
ultimately,
the
bay
san
jose
is
seeking
to
be
a
leader
in
climate
action
and
removing
parking
minimums
would
be
a
significant
step.
For
example.
Q
Q
Q
What
it
eliminates
is
a
mandated
minimum,
and
so
it
allows
project
specific
decisions
to
be
made:
flexibility
in
the
hands
of
developers
and
even
responsiveness
to
community
in
a
situation
in
which
otherwise,
the
current
policy
is
really
standing
in
the
way
of
progress
and
flexibility.
Thank
you.
D
Good
afternoon,
chair,
bonilla,
commissioners
and
members
of
the
public,
my
name
is
erica
pinto
san
jose
planning
policy
manager
with
spur.
We
truly
appreciate
the
work
done
by
city
staff
to
analyze
options
and
propose
strong
actions
to
address
the
impacts
of
parking
requirements
on
san
jose's
future.
D
The
item
you
have
before
you
today
has
the
potential
to
address
long-standing
policy
issues
related
to
parking
minimum
requirements
that
curtail
the
city's
goals
to
make
housing
more
affordable,
build
density
and
support
public
transit,
as
well
as
as
well
as
advance
the
city
as
an
environmental
leader
in
order
to
meet
the
need
to
reshape
the
city
around
people
instead
of
cars.
The
city
must
pursue
strategies
like
these
to
change
and
contribute
to
removing
the
over
and
over
abundance
of
parking.
D
Staff's
proposal
to
eliminate
mandatory
parking
requirements
is
a
bold
step
that
will
guide
future
development
and
will
go
far
to
address
housing,
affordability
via
the
upfront
of
construction
costs
and
later
through
potential
options
like
unbundling
parking
from
housing.
We
strongly
support
the
recommendations
put
forth
by
the
city
staff
and
stand
ready
to
continue
to
partner.
A
A
This
should
be
considered
as
part
of
the
planning
process
and
taken
into
account
for,
and
my
big
question
is,
how
will
the
municipality
and
its
departments
correct
for
any
of
these
spin-off
problems
that
may
occur?
I've
sent
each
of
the
commissioners
in
the
email
regarding
this.
Please
read
that
and.
A
Good
evening,
commissioners,
my
name
is
patrick
sigmund,
I'm
a
transportation,
planner
and
economist.
I've
lived
the
development
of
dozens
of
parking
studies
throughout
california
and
I've
helped
many
cities
remove
minimum
parking
regulations,
and
I
want
to
make
two
points.
First
of
all,
to
address
the
previous
speaker's
point.
We
now
know
how
to
manage
on-street
parking
in
ways
that
make
sure
to
protect
existing
residents
in
ways
that
let
existing
residents
continue
to
park
for
free
and
yet
keep
out
spillover
parking
possibilities
from
new
developments
or
actually
any
existing
problems
with
spillover
parking
from
other
places.
A
A
P
Yes,
we
can
hear
you.
Thank
you.
My
name
is
ruth
callahan,
I'm
the
president
of
the
couser
woods
neighborhood
association,
and
we
have
a
specific
problem
with
any
elimination
of
single-family
homes,
parking
spaces.
You
need
a
garage,
we
need
a
driveway,
we
need
a
parking
space
on
the
street
for
our
guests.
Spillover
parking
is
going
to
be
a
very
hard
thing
to
manage.
P
We
have
down
the
street
across
from
our
homes,
188
unit
being
developed
with
74
parking
spaces,
and
the
city
council
removed
all
parking
requirements
in
affordable
housing
bills
already
in
planned
or
unplanned
villages.
You
are
going
to
have
a
terrific
problem.
We
are
totally
against
this.
Please
do
not
eliminate
single
family
housing
parking
and
stop
the
infill
density
of
this
city.
I
N
Martina,
do
you
want
to
answer
that
I
mean:
do
you
want
to
answer
that?
One.
A
Yeah,
so
it's
not
going
to
be
exempt.
Martina
davis
division
manager,
hello,
everybody
we
don't
plan
to
have
it.
It
will
not
be
an
exempt
from
sequa.
There
will
be
a
review,
although
we,
I
believe
at
this
point-
are
anticipating
consistency
with
the
general
plan
eir,
because
this
is
policy
making
and
so
individual
projects
would
be
evaluated
for
impacts.
A
I
So,
thank
you
so
assuming
planning,
commission
and
city
council
proves
something
and
then
a
project
and
and
it's
and
a
project
comes
forward.
A
Is
robert
manford
deputy
director
for
planning
packing
is
no
more
a
sql
impact
issue
area
to
address
unless
there
is
a
nexus
between
that
and
a
physical
environmental
impact.
Okay.
I
A
This
will
be
actually
woven
into
the
city
code.
So
if
a
project
complies
with
it,
then
it's
okay,
but
packing
is
not
going
to
be
it's
a
social
impact,
no
more
an
economic
impact.
I
I
Oh
and
then
what
is
the
the
planning
want
from
the
commission?
Do
you
want
comments,
or
do
you
want
us
to
choose
one
of
the
options.
N
Well,
so
staff
has
our
preferred
direction,
which
we
presented.
There's
two
alternatives:
we're
just
seeking
back
and
input
comments
from
the
planning
commission
that
we
will
then
take
report
to
the
city
council
as
they
consider
the
direction
to
give
staff.
N
So
it's
accept
the
staff,
I
think
it's
an
agenda
except
the
staff
we'll
provide
comments
to
staff
that
we
will
relate
to
the
to
the
city
council.
Let
me
pull
up
the
agenda
on
my
other
computer,
but
go
ahead
continue.
I
Sir,
thank
you.
No,
I
know
there's
a
lot
of
feedback
we
received
in
the
in
the
past
week,
much
of
it
from
organized
groups
that
and
residents
don't
don't
live
in
san
jose
and
that's
fine.
You
can
advocate
wherever
you
like.
However,
I
do
feel
you
know.
The
public
needs
an
opportunity
to
hear
about
this,
and
that
certainly
comes
through
meetings
like
this
and
then,
of
course,
the
other
three
meetings
you've
denoted
on
a
personal
preference.
I
I
think,
when
you
eliminate
parking
requirements
in
single
family
home
zoning
for
san
jose
residents,
because
this
impacts
as
we're
talking
about
san
jose,
you
lose
all
goodwill
that
went
into
the
general
plan
2040,
where
we
decided
to
grow
the
population
by
40
with
an
additional
400
000
people
in
strategic
areas,
and
I
think
when
you're
looking
at
those
residents,
it
will
be
very
impactful.
I
So
I
think
we
need
just
to
acknowledge
that,
whether
you're
on
one
side
of
the
issue
or
not,
that
is
opening
up
at
large
contingent
of
people
to
perhaps
be
unhappy.
So
I
think
that's
something
we
need
to
take
in
account
and
then
sb9
has
already
done
a
portion
of
this
by
eliminating
all
parking
requirements
within
a
half
mile
of
a
bus
line.
I
So
there
has
been
a
change
in
single-family,
home
neighborhoods
based
on
state
legislation,
but
from
what
I
understand,
part
of
the
one
of
the
potential
proposals
would
be
to
impact
every
other
single
family
home,
and
I
just
would
say
we
should
tread
lightly.
Otherwise
we
will
lose
community
support
for
what
the
city
is
trying
to
do
in
building
housing
in
the
right
places
and
at
the
right
densities
next
to
transit,
et
cetera.
Thank
you
so
much.
N
So
I
just
want,
I
do
want
to
make
a
note.
I
didn't
get
into
it
because
I
think
we're
the
commission
one
a
lot
of
discussion,
but
we
have
done
a
lot
of
outreach
on
this.
We've
actually
connected
with
over
1200
discrete
individuals
getting
their
input
on
this
on
this
proposed
direction
and
we're
going
to
continue
to
do
that
over
the
summer.
So
I
just
wanted
to
acknowledge
that
and
that's
all.
I
N
Yeah
so
we've
gone,
we
we've
gone
to
neighborhood
meetings.
We've
had
most
of
it
has
been
online
because
we
were
forced
to
do
it
online,
but
initially
we
did
it
in
person.
Remember
we
went
to
the
was
it
the
willow
glen.
I
think
it
was
either
lincoln
avenue
or
willow
glen
association,
neighborhood
meeting.
I
went
to
that
one,
but
we
yeah.
So
it's
been
individual
meetings
with
different
groups.
N
It's
been
more
larger,
based
community
meetings,
as
we've
had
focus
groups,
we've
had
we've
had
partners
under
that
have
done
outreach
with
us
greenbelt
alliance.
Luna
announced
to
income
to,
for
example,
communities
in
east
san
jose,
so
we've
had
a
lot
of
outreach,
so
I
just
want
to
say
you
know
I.
I
think
I
just
want
to
acknowledge
that
we've
done
a
lot
of
outreach
in
this
and
it's
not
just
you
know
the
immission
study
session
and
a
few
other
big
things
that
we've
done.
I
N
C
Q
Okay,
just
you
know,
I
have
to
say
I
love.
The
idea
is
a
family
where
we
just
reduce
to
one
car
and
we
generally
walk
to
any
place.
That's
within
two
miles.
Q
A
I
mean
I
have
a
definitely
a
partial
answer,
which
is
where
parking
is
provided
under
the
law.
You
know
a
certain
percentage
of
it
has
to
be
accessible
now,
if
you're
not
proposing
any
parking,
I'm
not
sure
if
you
are
required
to
still
add
accessible
spaces.
I
mean,
I
think,
generally,
the
ada
is
around
equal
access.
So
I
I
hate
to
say
I
don't
know
the
answer
to
that,
but
definitely
where
parking
is
provided
there
would
still
be
those
same
requirements
for
accessible
spaces.
N
Q
O
Thank
you
chair.
Thank
you
for
this
presentation,
so
the
one
perspective
I
want
to
bring
forward
is
that
of
a
mom
of
four
children,
and
I
know
there
are
other
people
with
larger
families
or
even
just
even
even
doesn't
matter
the
size
of
the
family.
But
when
you
have
an
infant
and
a
toddler
and
maybe
an
elementary
school
age,
you
have
children,
it
can
present
a
real
challenge
in
san
jose.
O
The
way
it
is
built
to
get
around,
for
instance,
where
I
live
right
now
there
is
no
grocery
store
within
a
half
mile,
so
we
couldn't
even
walk
to
get
groceries
or
take
a
bus.
There
also
is
no
pool
in
our
neighborhood,
and
so
we,
if
we
want
to
go
to
a
pool
we
have
to
drive
or
taking
a
bus,
would
take
quite
a
long
time
and
if
you
have
multiple
age
children
that
can
be,
that
can
be
a
real
challenge
even
going
to
the
doctor.
O
That's
not
close
going
to
the
pediatrician
so
for
parents
trying
to
raise
children.
I
I
don't
want
to
put
more
barriers
in
the
way
of
that.
It's
hard
enough
job
as
it
is,
and,
and
we
need
children
here
so
that
we
can
have
schools
and
teachers
and
and
all
of
those
things
and
children
really
make
a
city
better.
O
I
believe,
and
so
my
suggestion
to
the
city
council
would
be
to
go
with
more
of
alternative
two,
where
it's
a
gradual
approach
to
reducing
parking
and
and
reducing
the
parking
in
those
areas
that
you
know
whatever
alternative.
To
said
about
in
the
general
plan
in
those
planned
developments,
reducing
it
so
that,
as
those
are
planned,
then
there
can
be
grocery
stores
and
and
services
that
people
can
get
to
more
easily
than
if
you're
living
way
out
in
the
sprawl
of
san
jose.
B
Yeah,
I
I
agree,
I
think
you
know
for
folks
that
have
families-
and
you
know
I
don't
know-
maybe
something
where
you
know-
people
that
carpool
carpool
only
or
family
parking
spaces.
I,
I
think,
that's
a
good
idea.
I
did.
I
know
I
mean.
I
think
this
is
a
really
bold
idea.
This
is
a
great
idea.
I
think
it's
it's
it's
necessary
on
so
many
levels.
B
It
looks
like
san
jose
already
has
enough
parking
for
everything
it
seems
like
you
know,
so
I
I
would
encourage
more
with
a
lot
of
these
big
projects
to
do
parking
agreements
with
other
places
that
already
have
you
know
tons
of
parking.
So
I
would
encourage
maybe
recycling
the
parking
that
we
have
by
doing
these
parking
agreements.
Part
of
you
know
in
some
of
these
projects
to
alleviate
that.
Another
thing
is,
I
mean
you
know
I
I'm
in
the
you
know.
B
If
you
know
where
monterey
road
and
center
road
meets
it's
like
an
old
shopping
center,
it
has
this
huge
parking
lot.
You
know
if
there
was
a
way
to
give
incentive
to
folks
that
have
you
know
those
old
shopping
centers
that
have
tons
of
parking
spaces
to
recycle
the
existing
parking
spaces
and
give
them
some
sort
of
incentive
to
to
reuse
that
land
in
some
way.
I
don't.
I
don't
know
how
we
could
do
that
with
this
ordinance.
B
Neighborhood
preservation
to
me
is
really
important,
so
looks
like
there
is
already
ways
to
preserve
neighborhoods
while
adjusting
the
parking
requirements
and
just
make
sure
that
that's
key
and
critical.
Another
concern
was
safety.
I
mean
there's
just
been
so
many
homeless
encampments
and
you
know
so
in
regards
to
creating
a
pedestrian,
pedestrian
friendly
environment.
Where
you
know
I,
as
a
mom,
you
know
have
also
two
small
children.
You
know
want
to
walk
or
even
bike.
You
know
you
know
so
safety
lighting
landscaping.
B
I
mean
you
know
on
capitol
expressway
and
silver
creek.
There
was
another
cyclist,
you
know
that
was
hit
and
died,
and
you
know
so.
If
you're
talking
about
a
holistic
approach,
I
would
think
that
this
would
be
something
that,
on
a
regional
level,
we
would
look
at
and
talk
to.
You
know
santa
clara
county,
roads
and
airport
that
manage
expressways
vta,
like
you
know,
different
local
cities,
so
that
it's
something
connected
and
regional
to
really
improve,
not
only
transportation
but
circulation
and
safety.
B
I
I
think
is
is
like
some
of
my
concerns,
but
I
think
it's
bold.
I
think
it's
necessary.
Other
people
already
brought
up
certain
things,
I'm
also
thinking
about
like
events
or
seasonal
events,
and
how
do
you
mitigate
for
for
parking
in
those
specific
cases?
So
I
I
I
think
it's
bold.
I
think
it's
it's
great
and
I
think
it's
necessary
that
we
take
these
steps
but
being
a
san
jose
resident
and
knowing
my
community,
I
I
would
think
that
starting
at
an
alternative,
maybe
would
be.
B
You
know
like
one
of
the
alternatives
that
you
have
like
alternative
one
or
two,
that
kind
of
slowly
progresses
to
eliminating
the
minimum
requirement,
but,
but
I
think
it's
great
and
I
think
it's
necessary
and
definitely
do
a
great
job,
great
presentation
yeah.
This
is
necessary.
Thank
you.
G
Thank
you
chair.
I
just
wanted
to
give
a
chance
to
jess.
You
did
you
want
to
step
in
here
before
I
pontificate
go
ahead.
H
H
What
this
proposal
would
do
is
would
take
away
those
mandates
and
allow
individual
developments
to
decide
in
consultation
with
the
the
planning
staff,
the
communities
around
them,
etc.
What
type
of
parking
amounts
they
need,
and
so
I
do
just
think
it's
really
important
to
keep
in
mind
that
we
don't
expect
any
what
we
don't
expect.
You
know
grocery
stores
we
don't
expect
family
serving
uses
to
to
come
in
without
parking.
That
probably
won't
make
sense
to
very
many
from
a
market
perspective,
and
this
would
not
limit
them.
A
G
Thank
you
chair.
I'm
I'm
very
strongly
in
support
of
this
initiative
and
thank
the
staff
for
all
the
work
they've
done.
I
really
liked
the
powerpoint.
G
It
really
struck
home
with
me
on
a
personal
basis,
because
I
consider
myself
this
environmentally
conscious
person
right,
but
yet
the
grocery
store,
which
for
me,
is
like
five
minutes
away.
I
jump
in
my
car
and
I
drive
to
the
grocery
store.
Why
do
I
do
that
number
one?
It's
habit
number
two!
It's
convenient,
even
though
I
have
a
really
nice
electric
bike
sitting
in
the
garage
and
I
like
to
walk.
So
I
think
to
me
what
that
means.
Is
it's
a
cultural
change
that
we're
striving
for
which
is
hard?
G
I'm
a
native
californian
and
I
grew
up
in
southern
california,
which
is
even
more
car
centric
than
here
and
it's
hard
to
change
that
culture,
but
it's
necessary.
G
You
know
it's
not
as
convenient
to
not
be
able
to
drive
somewhere
in
park.
Well,
guess
what?
If
we're
going
to
make
a
significant
impact
on
climate
change,
we
have
to
accept
some
inconveniences
right,
and
I
think
this
is
one
that
if
we
have
less
parking,
we
will
encourage
people
to
walk,
or
you
know,
ride
a
bike
or
take
transit.
G
So
I
I
think
it's
important
to
do
this.
I
I
support
the
staff
recommendation
to
eliminate
parking
minimum
city-wide.
I
think
that's
the
best
way
to
go
and
it
provides
flexibility,
doesn't
eliminate
parking
as
jess
said,
but
it
provides
flexibility
for
developers
to
you
know
design
what
they
think
the
market
will
demand.
As
far
as
how
much
parking
and
just
two
other
things
I
wanted
to
say
you
know
overwhelmingly.
G
The
response
we
received
was
a
positive
on
this
recommendation,
but
we
did
receive
a
couple
of
things
that
I've
when
I
was
on
the
neighborhoods
commission,
this
really
commonly
came
up.
One
is
the
comment
that
we
don't
have
an
adequate
transit
system,
and
so
we
shouldn't
eliminate
parking
minimums
until
we
have
an
adequate
transit
system.
G
Well,
guess
what
we
don't
have
an
adequate
transit
system,
because
we
don't
have
enough
people
taking
transit
myself
included
right
and
the
only
way
we
can
get
a
better
transit
system
is
to
have
more
of
us
riding
transit,
and
then
it
becomes
financially
feasible
for
the
vta
to
provide
more
service
right,
whether
it's
more
frequent
service
or
more
bus
lines
or
whatever,
and
the
other
point
is
on
the
the
concern
of
overflow
parking.
I
think
the
transportation
consultant
hit
it
right
on
the
head.
G
We
can
address
that
problem,
there's
permit
parking
programs,
there's
other
programs,
there's
technology
coming
up,
that
will
limit,
who
can
park
in
certain
neighborhoods
and
and
try
to
ensure
that
residents
have
that.
So
I
I
think
again
this.
I
I
really
strongly
support
it.
This
is
the
this
is
the
right
thing
to
do.
Thanks.
A
Yes,
thank
you,
commissioner
or
chair.
Thank
you.
I
agree
with
the
many
of
the
comments
that
the
fellow
commissioners
are
making.
I
do
believe
that
we
are
car
dependent
and
as
optimistic
as
we
want
to
be
to
you
know,
eliminate
you
know
the
greenhouse
gases
in
the
environment
and
things
of
that
nature.
A
N
Yeah,
I
mean,
I
think,
a
lot
of
that
has
to
be
figured
out.
I
mean-
maybe
you
want
to
step
in
here,
but
if
people
have
approved
permits
out
that
dictate
how
much
parking
they're
going
to
provide,
then
you
know
those.
My
understanding
is
that
they,
those
parking
requirements
being
in
effect
but
they'd,
have
the
option
to
come
back
and
modify
them.
A
C
No
I'll
I'll
weigh
in
you
know
I'll
I'll
I'll.
Try
to
be
brief
here.
You
know.
I
just
concluded
a
six-month
tour
of
my
community
and
the
number
one
issue
that
has
come
up
in
my
interactions
and
I
know
because
I
live
it
as
well.
C
Is
this
parking
overflow
issue
the
east
side,
closer
to
downtown
the
spartan
keys
area,
we're
talking
about
families
that
have
absolutely
no
choice
but
to
actually
drive
vehicles,
because
a
lot
of
them
are
working
not
even
in
san
jose
but
other
parts
of
the
silicon
valley,
sustaining
the
economy
and
I
think
the
covet
the
pandemic
and
the
shutdown
of
the
of
the
world
kind
of
really
brought
that
to
light.
You
know
you
guys
talked
about.
You
know
how
people
can
work
from
home.
Well,
some
people
work
from
home.
C
Many
in
my
community
did
not
including
myself.
You
know
we
talked
about
evs
and
you
know
teslas
and
bolts.
Well,
I'll
be
honest
with
you:
we're
not
going
to
see
parade
of
teslas
or
bolts
in
my
community,
and
I
can
guarantee
you
that
if
you
met
with
actual
community
groups
and
with
all
due
respect
to
luna,
you
know
they
have
a
very
niche
perspective.
C
If
you
were
to
speak
to
other
groups
in
east
san
jose
or
even
in
the
spartan
keys
neighborhood,
you
would
find
a
very,
very
different
point
of
view
on
this
topic.
Look
I
get
it.
I
get
why
you
want
to
do
this.
I
care
about
the
environment.
This
is
where
my
kids
are
growing
up
and
one
day
grandkids.
If
I'm
so
fortunate,
but
the
reality
is.
We
also
have
to
ask
ourselves
a
very
fundamental
question.
San
jose
is
not
san
francisco.
San
jose
is
not
manhattan.
C
I
mean
if
we're
going
to
compare
san
jose
to
a
city
is
much
more
aligned
with
los
angeles
and,
let's
talk
about
los
angeles.
Los
angeles
has
invested
billions
of
dollars
in
infrastructure,
upgrades
new
systems
subways
and
yet,
as
of
today,
you
know,
six
percent
of
the
population,
in
los
angeles,
uses
public
transportation.
According
to
a
report
just
released
by
usc,
so
what
I'm
getting
at
is
this
is
I
get
why
it's
so
important?
C
But
what
I
think
is
missing
from
this
conversation
is
the
reality
that
a
large
segment
of
this
city-
I
would
almost
argue
half
of
it-
isn't
going
to
be
able
to
ever
make
those
adjustments,
and,
commissioner
torrance
you
took
the
words
out
of
my
mouth.
I
mean
I'm
over
here.
Thinking
I
gotta
go.
You
know
my
kids
get
a
little
older,
but
when
they
were
smaller,
if
I
had
to
go
to
the
grocery
store
or
if
I
had
to
take
them
to
school,
you
know
I
don't
care
how
big
I
came.
C
I'm
not
gonna
load
up
all
three
of
my
kids
on
the
back
of
my
bike
and
and
drop
them
off.
It's
just
not
gonna
work,
it's
just
not
feasible
and
more
often
than
not.
You
know
cars
out
here
and
not
a
luxury
cars
out
here
are
a
necessity
in
order
to
allow
for
families
to
to
actually
support
their
themselves
and
others.
So
I
think
that's
what's
missing.
So
I
think
one
thing
I
would
want
to
add
is
in
this
community
timeline.
C
You
know
if
the
council
would
be
open
to
having
a
much
more
robust
community
obsession
in
east
san
jose,
spartan
keys.
I
keep
going
back
to
them
because
for
some
reason-
and
I
spent
a
lot
of
time
in
that
neighborhood
too-
and
I
talked
to
a
lot
of
neighborhood
leaders
there
and
there's
an
issue
that
comes
up-
I
I
think
you're
gonna
have
a
very
different
perspective.
I
get
it
I
get.
I
can
get
the
core
of.
Why
we're
here.
C
Believe
me,
I
support
it
and
I
get
commissioner
young
what
you're
saying
you
know
we
do
have
to
reduce
cars
in
order
to
encourage
public
transportation,
but
for
some
of
us
out
here
we're
taking
our
car
away
now
I
agree.
Look
within
reason
too.
I
mean
I've
run
into
homes
where
they've
got
15
cars.
That's
a
bit
much,
but
the
vast
majority
of
folks
just
out
here
need
cars
in
order
to
work
in
order
to
go
to
school
in
order
to
just
get
things
done.
C
So
you
know
the
sake
of
brevity
up
I'll
leave
it
at
that.
I
think
you
all
had
wonderful
points,
but
I
do
think
that
the
east
side
perspective
not
just
the
east
side
perspective.
I
would
say
the
the
working
class
economic
perspective
is
somewhat
missing
from
this,
because
I
think
we
say
very
easily
that
we
can
work
from
home.
C
We
say
very
easily
that
we
can
get
perhaps
electric
vehicles
in
the
future
and
we're
also
assuming
let's
be
honest-
that
the
community
conversation
between
developers
in,
for
example,
willow
glenn,
is
going
to
look
very
different
than
the
community
conversation
in
east
palo
alto.
I'm
sorry,
san
jose
center
road
spartan
keeps
keys.
So
with
that,
I
will
go
ahead
and
stop
my
pontificating
stealing
your
word
there,
commissioner
young.
I
did
see
that
your
hand
is
up
so
with
that
I
will
defer
to
you.
G
Thank
you
chair
because,
as
I
understand
the
staff
recommendation,
all
three
of
the
alternatives
are
included
and
I
think
it's
been
a
really
good
discussion
and
I
appreciate
the
input
from
all
the
commissioners
because
you
really
opened
my
eyes
to
some
issues
that
are
challenges.
Maybe
I
would
say
that
I
haven't
considered,
but
because
all
the
alternatives
are
included
in
the
staff
recommendation,
I'm
going
to
make
a
motion
that
we
accept
staff
recommendations
at
this
time.
C
O
Yeah,
I
don't
understand
the
the
motion,
because
if
we
accept
all
because
I
would
like
to
push
forward
alternative
too,
and
so
if
I
vote
yes
with
the
the
motion,
then
I
don't
think
I'm
voting
the
way
that
I
intend
to
so.
Can
you
clarify
what
we're
actually
voting
on
sure.
N
So
all
you're
doing
is
you're
only
accepting
our
our
report
to
you
and
presentation:
you're,
not
you're,
not
passing
a
motion
on
alternative
one
or
the
staff
recommendation
or
alternative
to
your
just
to
be
accepting
our
report,
which
is
kind
of
agnostic.
N
C
Sorry,
I
I
was
about
to
take
the
roll
call,
but
apparently
I
think
there
are
some
more
questions
so
I'll
defer.
Commissioners
wise.
B
I
just
wanted
to
add
to
the
comments.
Obviously
you
know
that
there's
different
things
that
are
being
brought
up.
I
really
think
that
the
the
city
council
should
have
original
transportation
task
force,
really
address
a
lot
of
these
issues
and
engage
a
lot
of
different
folks
that
are
involved.
I
think
that's,
and
I
also
think
right
now
that
gas
prices
are
very
high.
This
is
an
opportunity
for
the
city
to
work,
maybe
with
vta,
to
create
some
sort
of
campaign.
B
I
think
we're
at
a
point
right
now
that
people,
you
know
who
may
not
have
taken
a
lot
of
public
transportation,
would
be
willing
to
if
there
was
some
sort
of
incentive,
so
I
I
would
suggest
maybe
some
sort
of
campaign
to
get
people
out
of
their
cars
into
public
transportation.
So
that's
just
my
last
comments.
Thank
you.
Thank.
C
You
I'm
gonna,
I'm
gonna,
let
jess
jump
in
because
I
see
our
hands
up
and
then
colleagues,
I
know
commissioner
cantrell
lord
around
your
hand,
is
unless
you
feel
like
it's
burning
fire
to
add
it
to
weigh
in
right.
Now.
I
was
about
to
call
for
the
vote,
but
I'll.
Let
you
guys
consider
that,
as
as
just
as
getting
ready
to
comment.
H
Yeah,
thank
you.
These
are
very
helpful
comments
and
respect
with
respect
to
commissioner
or
nellis
wise.
Just
a
couple
quick
pieces
of
information.
We
do
have
a
vision,
zero
task
force.
You
raised
that
earlier
and
I
think
it's
a
great
point
and
important
to
raise
awareness
that
we
are
working
hard
to
make
sure
that
our
streets
are
safe
and
that
people
are
not
killed
or
seriously
injured
on
them.
H
That
is
a
pretty
tall
order,
but
one
we're
working
very
hard
on
through
the
task
force
as
well
at
in
regionally
with
county
roads
and
airports
among
others.
So
I
just
wanted
to
acknowledge
your
point
there
and
part
of
the
tdm
solutions
that
wilson
listed
just
want
to
highlight
that
improving
our
infrastructure
and
improving
the
safety
of
it
would
count
for
how
you
get
credit
for
your
tdm
contribution,
because
we
see
that
need
in
that
alignment
as
well.
H
So
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
was
clear
and
on
the
question
of
trying
out
public
transit,
the
state
is
considering
three
months
of
free
public
transit
paid
for
by
the
state
in
partial
response
to
the
gas
tax
prices,
alongside
the
other
things
they're
considering.
So
if
that
happens,
we'll
make
sure
that
the
planning
commission
does
does
hear
that
so
that
we
can
all,
because
I
think
you're
also
right.
C
Q
N
I
mean
I
could
weigh
and
just
sort
of
generally,
I
think
I
mean
we're
talking.
I
mean
so
just
strategically,
where
we're
at
right
now.
Is
that
there's
a
lot
more
work
to
do
on
this,
and
we
thought
it
was
really
important
for
us
as
staff
to
come,
get
feedback
from
the
planning
commission
and
then
take
that
feedback
to
counsel
and
get
direction
on.
Do
they
want
us
to
go
straight?
Do
they
want
us
to
go
left?
N
Do
they
want
us
to
go
right,
I.e,
staff
recommendation
alternative
one
or
alternative
two
or
some
other
alternative
that
we
didn't
think
about,
and
so
that's
really
what
why
the
process
were
before
us
today.
We
think
it's
ultimately
a
better
process,
so
we
don't
spend
an
a
lot
of
time,
developing
an
ordinance
to
kind
of
plan.
A
commission
in
council
and
they'd
say
you
should
have
gone
left.
So
that's
why
why
we're
doing
this?
So
so
we
don't
really
have
anything
for
you
formally
to
vote
on.
N
It's
more
just
accepting
our
our
accepting
our
report
and
and
then
getting
your
individual
comments
as
a
commission.
We
will
package
them
up,
so
the
council
can
hear
your
perspective
as
commissioners
and
then
they
can
consider
that
when
they
give
staff
to
direction
and
then
actually
go,
do
the
real
work
of
creating
the
lord
all
right.
I
So,
based
on
what
michael
said,
I
could
accept
the
report,
knowing
that
they've
encompassed
our
feedback
from
the
commissioners
every
commissioner.
That
has
stated
something,
but
I
also
just
want
to
repeat
there
should
be
I'm
not
trying
to
slow
down
the
process,
but
the
process
of
government
also
involves
transparency
and
community
involvement,
and
when
we're
doing
something
bold
such
as
this,
I
think
we
really
need
to
include
and
do
outreach.
I
I
want
to
make
sure
that
you
know
the
general
public
has
an
understanding
of
the
implications.
If,
if
the
desire
is
to
you
know
just
sort
of
you
know,
I
don't
think
there's
any
ill
intent
at
all,
not
at
all,
but
I
just
truly
think
that
people
should
be
heard
and
should
be
advised,
and
then
the
elected
officials
and
planning
staff
and
the
planning
commission.
I
C
You
thank
you
and
with
that
I'll
go
for
for
the
roll
call,
though,
and
to
your
point,
commissioner,
of
ariel,
that's
actually
why
I'm
gonna
vote.
No,
I
do
think
it's
important
to
at
least
have
someone
on
record
saying.
No,
I
don't
think
there
was
any
ill
intent.
I
definitely
think
the
city
did
an
amazing
job
putting
this
together,
but
I
do
think
that
we're
missing
something
and
that's
okay
right.
That's
part
of
the
this
is
the
part
of
the
process,
and
you
know
I
do
think
that
needs
to
be
reflected.
C
So
I
am
voting
no
with
that
cantrell.
I
B
O
N
I'm
sorry
can
we
can.
I
just
there
was
two
no
votes
that
I
think
was
benia
and
was
that
garcia?
Thank
you
got
it.
C
N
Hang
on,
I
just
need
to
switch
gears
doing
the
the
presentation
or
of
this
item.
So
let
me
just
switch
gears
for
a
minute.
Sorry,
sorry,
I'm
doing
that
anyway.
A
C
Teamwork
makes
the
dream
work.
I
like
that
perfect
all
right
item,
seven
good
and
welfare
item,
a
report
from
city
council
staff.
Do
we
have
any
reports
from
the
city
council.
A
So
the
report
is
not
out,
but
yesterday
city
council
actually
approved
a
few
city-initiated
rezonings,
conforming
conformance
rezonings.
The
report
is
not
out,
but
yeah.
They
did
do
that.
A
C
Well,
colleagues,
it
has
been
an
awesome
ride
to
serve
as
your
chairman
for
this
last
year,
although
I
wished,
I
had
the
opportunity
to
meet
all
of
you
in
person
and
sit
on
the
dice
together.
Well,
the
reality
of
the
world
didn't
make
that
possible.
Having
said
that,
I
think
this
is
an
amazing
body.
That's
done
a
lot
of
great
work.
We
went
from
seven
to
we
got
to
know
each
other.
C
We
got
to
work
together
on
major
issues
that
are
forever
changing
the
future
of
this
city,
but
also
having
the
understanding
of
this
chair
and
recognizing.
What's
coming
on
the
horizon
for
22
23,
I
think
experience
matters
and
for
that
reason,
I'd
like
to
take
this
opportunity
to
nominate
commissioner,
pierre
luigi
olivario.
As
our
chair,
I
think,
he's
our
senior
member
of
this
commission
he's
a
former
city
council
member,
currently
a
commissioner
and
someone
who
has
extensive
experience
on
these
issues
and
that
I
think,
can
help
us
as
a
body.
C
Excuse
me
help
you
as
a
body
is.
As
of
the
30th.
I
am
no
longer
your
colleague
I'll,
be
your
friend
but
no
longer
your
colleague,
but
I
do
think
that
he
has
the
type
of
experience,
the
type
of
understanding
of
the
nuances,
the
law
that
I
think
will
help
this
body
move
forward
as
we
continue
in
our
infancy
as
an
11
member
board.
C
So
with
that,
commissioner
olivario
I'd
like
to
ask
you
if
you'd
accept
the
nomination
and
perhaps
give
you
a
second
to
to
talk
about
it,.
I
Well
well,
thank
you
chair.
First
of
all,
I
appreciate
your
efforts
during
this
time.
As
you
mentioned,
it
was
a
challenging
time
with
covid
and
your
zeal
for
your
your
community.
I
I
think
you
know
having
a
planning
commissioner
from
every
council
district
is
very
good
at
providing
representation
as
we
do
on
the
city
council.
I
So
I
appreciate
you
for
your
your
service
and
your
efforts
and
based
on
your
suggestion,
I
I
would
be
willing
to
be
the
chair
with
you
know,
with
just
the
intent
of
making
sure
that
we
have
a
meetings
that
are
process
oriented
and
we
go
through
the
agenda
and
we
get
through
and
making
sure
everyone
has
an
opportunity
to
be
heard
and
then
having
that
vote
and
moving
things
forward.
I
So,
if,
if,
but
you
know
this,
it's
really
up
to
the
commission,
if,
if
you
feel
someone
else
would
be
better
suited,
I'm
totally
acceptable
that
but
yeah.
But
I
appreciate
the
offer.
G
A
C
Oliverio,
yes,
oh
thank
you.
O
Q
I'd
like
to
nominate
mr
lardnock,
I
think
he's
a
stand-up
person
great
for
the
commission.
He's
done
a
fantastic
job
of
supporting
our
communities
and
I
think
he'd
be
a
great.
J
Yeah,
commissioner
cantrell,
thank
you
that's
very
kind
of
you
and
I
really
appreciate
that
and
yeah.
I
would
be
happy
to
step
up
and
serve
as
vice
chair.
I'm
really
excited
for
the
next
phase
of
this
commission
of
us
returning
to
working
together
in
person.
Again,
I
have
not
had
that
experience
as
a
planning.
J
Commissioner,
I
know
quite
a
few
people
here
have
not
either
and
still
some
of
you,
I
haven't
even
met
in
person
yet,
and
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
opportunity
for
us
to
work
together
even
better
and
continue
to
serve
this
city
and
would
love
to
be
a
part
of
that
as
the
vice
chair.
Thank
you.
C
Thank
you.
No,
I
think
that's
a
that
was
a
great
selection,
mr
commissioner
cantrell
but
gentlemen
team
I'll
say
this.
Both
of
you
are
now
the
leadership
of
the
commission,
and
I
think
this
is
a
great
squad
and
I
think
all
of
you
have
to
vote.
Oh
no,
I
know
I
do
I
know,
but
I
did
listen,
I'm
trying
to
milk
the
final
minutes
I
got
with
all
of
you,
but
with
that
this
is
exciting.
It's
been
a
privilege
privilege
to
serve
with
all
of
you.
C
I
think
this
is
a
great
team
as
a
whole.
This
is
again,
as
I've
said
before
the
dream
as
to
why
we
push
for
11
member
commission
diversity,
and
one
thing
you
all
may
not
know
in
the
very
beginning
when
I
was
fighting
for
diversity,
it
was
commissioned
olivario
that
worked
with
me
to
help
diversify
the
planning
commission.
So
thank
you
for
your
partnership
early
on
in
this
process.
Commissioner,
olivario
with
that,
we
will
go
ahead
and
take
a
vote.
Q
C
O
C
Sure
it
was
thank.
C
No,
you
did
you
did
you
did
vote?
Oh
sorry,
yeah
yeah,
that's,
okay!
It'll!
Go
foggy
right
now.
Tell
me
about
it
all
right
with
that.
Congratulations
to
the
team
and
all
of
you
for
making
this.
In
my
opinion,
the
best
body
within
the
city
of
san
jose
all
right
with
that.
We
will
now
go
to
commission
calendar
and
study
sessions.
C
O
A
A
O
You
first
of
all
thank
you
for
serving
chair,
bonilla
and
also
chair
vice
chair
casey.
I
know
he's
not
here
tonight,
but
really
appreciate
your
leadership
and
then
I
just
admire
you
cherbonia
and
commissioner
lardinwa
for
putting
your
ring
your
hat
in
the
ring
and
running
for
office.
That's
what
our
democracy
needs,
and
I
know
it
doesn't
always
turn
out
the
way
we
expect,
but
I
just
really
admire
you
and
thank
you
for
for
what
you've
done
in
that's.
That
already
has
been
a
service.
So
thank
you.