►
From YouTube: AUG 28, 2019 | Planning Commission
Description
City of San José
Planning Commission
View agenda at https://sanjose.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=716544&GUID=5D351EFA-FF51-4FAC-9624-A5320BF04DA7
B
A
Can
just
read
it:
oh
yeah
summary
of
hearing
procedures.
If
you
want
to
address
the
Commission,
please
fill
out
a
speaker
card
located
on
the
table
near
the
audio-visual
technician
and
deposit
the
completed
card
in
the
basket.
There
are
also
speaker
cards
in
the
back
of
the
chambers
and
at
the
side
entrance.
The
procedure
for
the
hearing
is
as
follows.
After
the
staff
reports,
applicants
and
appellant
may
make
a
five-minute
presentation.
A
The
chair
will
call
out
names
on
the
submitted
speaker
cards
in
the
order
received,
as
your
name
is
called
line
up
in
front
of
the
microphone
at
the
front
of
the
chamber.
Each
speaker
will
have
two
minutes.
Speakers
using
a
translator
will
have
four
minutes
after
the
public
testimony.
The
applicant
and
appellant
may
make
closing
remarks
for
an
additional
five
minutes.
Planning
commissioners
may
ask
questions
of
the
speakers.
Response
to
Commissioner
questions
will
not
reduce
the
speaker's
time
allowance.
A
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.
If
you
challenge
these
land-use
decisions
in
court,
you
may
be
limited
to
raising
only
those
issues
you
or
someone
else
raised
at
this
public
hearing
or
in
written
correspondence
delivered
to
the
city
at
or
prior
to
the
public
hearing
the
Planning
Commission's
action
on
rezoning,
Cree's,
awnings
general
plan
amendments
and
code
amendments
is
only
advisory
to
the
City
Council.
A
The
City
Council
will
hold
public
hearings
on
these
items,
section
20.12,
0,
no,
sorry,
dot.
400
of
the
you
miss
Municipal
Code,
provides
the
procedures
for
legal
protests
to
the
City
Council
on
rezoning,
xand
pries
awnings,
the
Planning
Commission's
action
on
conditional
use
permits
is
to
the
City
Council
in
accordance
with
section
20
point
100
point
220
of
the
Municipal
Code
agendas
and
a
binder
of
all
staff
reports
have
been
placed
on
the
table
near
the
door
for
your
convenience,
so
we're
gonna
move
on
to.
A
Public
comment:
if
there's
anyone
who
would
like
to
speak
to
any
items
that
are
not
agendized,
they
are
welcome
to
at
this
point
in
time,
seeing
none.
We
will
move
on
to
deferrals
and
removals
from
calendar
and
they'll.
Let
the
record
show
that
Commissioner
Griswold
has
arrived
anything
from
staff.
Nope
stop
shakes
their
head
so
on
to
item
number
4
the
consent
calendar.
A
D
D
Changes
to
the
analyzed
lighting
type
TLC,
LED,
1150
and
amount
of
lighting
on
the
athletic
fields
that
could
result
in
intensification
of
the
illumination
in
the
area
shall
be
subject
to
a
discretionary
review
to
determine
conformance
to
the
city
of
San,
Jose
lighting,
plot
pall
lighting
policy
4-3,
including,
but
not
limited,
to
promoting
energy-efficient
lighting
and
continuing
to
in
continuing
the
operation
of
the
Lick
Observatory
by
reducing
light
pollution
and
sky
glow,
as
may
be
amended.
Thank
you.
A
E
You
my
comment
or
question
to
staff
had
to
do.
Excuse
me
with
the
fact
that
there's
absolutely
nothing
in
the
general
Development
Plan
standards
that
deals
with
avoidance
of
environmental
impacts.
The
issues
associated
with
the
lighting,
based
on
my
experience
with
feel
lighting
at
other
schools
in
the
past,
is
that
there
are
two
issues.
One
is
the
amount
of
light
and
which
can
be
a
factor
of
how
tall
the
poles
are
and
what
kind
of
light
fixtures
they
are
and
how
late
at
night
they're
used.
E
D
Thank
You,
mrs.
chairman
Sean
Flores
planning
project
manager.
The
project
being
considered
this
evening
is
a
plan
development
rezoning
from
the
APD
plan
development,
zoning
district
to
the
pqp
plan
development,
zoning
district
on
an
approximately
seventeen
point,
six
four
gross
acre
site
and
a
plan
development
permit
to
allow
for
sixty
five
foot
tall
field
lights
on
an
approximately
3.1
EIN
gross
acre
portion
of
the
site.
D
The
project
conforms
with
development
standards
generally
no
lighting
policy,
the
project
site
for
the
field
lights
is
within
the
boundaries
of
the
plan.
Development
permit
rezoning
plan
development,
rezoning,
the
project's
public
quasi-public
general
plan
land
use
designation
is
intended
for
public
land
uses,
including
schools.
The
field
lights
would
facilitate
the
use
of
the
existing
soccer
lacrosse
athletic
field
located
on
the
north
side
of
west
heading
Street.
The
project
conforms
with
the
City
Council
policy
4-3
for
outdoor
lighting
on
private
development.
In
that
outdoor
recreational
facilities
are
exempt
from
providing
fully
shielded
lights.
D
If
they
provide
a
photometric
study
and
refer
the
project
to
the
Lick
Observatory,
the
use
of
the
field
lights
would
be
limited
to
Monday
through
Friday
from
6:30
a.m.
to
9
a.m.
and
Saturdays
from
9
a.m.
to
7
p.m.
the
addendum
to
the
bell.
Ehrman
college
preparatory
master
plan
mitigated
negative
declaration,
was
prepared
for
the
project
based
on
the
analysis
and
conclusions
in
the
addendum.
The
proposed
project
would
not
result
in
any
new
impacts
not
previously
disclosed
in
the
previous
mitigated
negative
declaration.
D
Nor
would
it
result
in
a
substantial
increase
in
the
magnitude
of
any
significant
environmental
impact
previously
identified
in
the
initial
study
or
mitigated
negative
declaration.
The
project
would
not
increase
the
number
of
athletes
and
the
field
usage
would
be
turned
off
by
the
field.
Light
usage
would
be
turned
off
by
9
p.m.
the
field.
Lights
would
not
increase
the
usage
intensity
of
the
field
as
it
would
distribute
existing
uses
with
similar
participant
numbers.
Staff
has
not
received
any
public
comments.
D
Staff
recommends
that
the
Planning
Commission
recommend
to
City
Council
to
adopt
D,
and
our
mental
resolution
adopted
ordinance
rezoning.
The
approximately
seventeen
point,
six
four
gross
acre
site
from
the
APD
plan
development,
zoning
district
to
the
pqp
plan
development
zoning
district
and
adopt
a
resolution
approving
the
plan
development
permit,
subject
to
condition
subject
to
conditions
to
effectuate
the
plan
development
zoning
district
and
to
allow
for
sixty
five
foot
tall
ground
mounted
field
lights
on
an
approximately
three
point:
one
nine
gross
acre
portion
of
the
subject
site.
Thank
you.
F
My
name
is
Jeff
Berg
architect
with
Devcon
construction
address,
962,
brault,
er,
Drive
Milpitas.
So
we're
happy
to
be
here
tonight
after
about
eight
month
process,
to
be
here,
presenting
to
you
about
our
soccer
and
lacrosse
field
lighting
project
as
staff
red.
We
have
gone
through
the
process
of
amending
our
initial
study
that
supported
the
master
plan
and
PD
zoning
application.
That
was
done
back
in
2007
eight.
We
believe
that
we
have
a
good
project
and
our
lights
basically
conform
to
the
city's
policies
of
cutoff
fixtures
spillage.
F
We
have
no
proposed
amplified
sound.
There
is
no
additional
field
use
by
outside
groups
or
clubs.
This
is
not
a
field
for
rent
is
to
serve
the
existing
school
population.
So
I
just
wanted
to
make
that
clear
this
evening,
so
happy
to
answer
any
technical
questions
if
commissioners
have
them.
Thank
you.
E
E
It's
fortunate
that
those
buildings
intervene
between
the
field
and
the
homes
I
just
want
a
commitment
on
the
zoning
that
you're
not
going
to
do
anything
to
increase
the
impacts
beyond
those
that
will
occur
from
this
proposed
project,
which
means
no
football
games
at
11
o'clock
at
night,
with
the
field
lights
on
basically
and
you're
not
going
to
increase
the
intensity
of
light
on
the
field,
and
that
would
be
in
the
zoning
not
just
in
the
permit.
Pd
permits
come
and
go,
but
zoning
stays
there
well.
F
E
F
F
E
B
Public
quasi
public,
which
for
late-night
uses,
define
some
of
them
as
midnight,
some
as
10:00
p.m.
so
my
understanding
is.
This
is
intended
to
be
9:00
p.m.
so
I
think
we
should
put
a
9:00
p.m.
in
order
to
satisfy
your
concern,
put
a
9:00
p.m.
end
date,
but
the
hours
of
operation,
the
general
development
plan
for
the.
B
B
B
A
H
E
Actually,
the
important
concept
is
functional
equipment.
Every
time
turn
around
are
coming
up
with
a
better
source
of
lighting,
and
they
can,
in
some
cases,
provide
an
equivalent
amount
of
light
without
actually
generating
the
same
measurements,
which
is
why
lumens
is
a
is
a
good
better
than
wattage
good
good.
Something
to
tie
to.
E
C
Staff
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
were
very
careful
on
how
we
wanted
to
craft
the
light,
just
like
the
back
in
the
day
when
sodium
lights
were
the
high
popular
thing
to
do.
We
want
that's.
Why
there's
a
little
more
hesitation
to
put
it
in
the
development
standards
if
a
new
technology
comes
along
or
different
aspects,
we
wanted
to
have
that
kind
of
flexibility.
So
we
did
say
then
we'd
have
to
do
a
new
light
study.
They
would
have
to
do
the
equipment,
that's
equivalent.
C
It's
just
a
little
careful
when
you
use
specific
numbers,
because
luminance
can
mean
one
thing
that
impacts
are
different,
so
there
will
be
some
kind
of
evaluation
to
do
that
in
technology.
So
we
did
put
some
Civic
standards
in
that
photo.
Metrics
use,
foot,
light,
candles,
evaluations,
so
there's
a
lot
of
different
and.
E
B
E
B
A
G
F
Of
the
equipment
or
the
time
time
times,
we've
already
I
think
through
the
development
standard
portion
which
I
understand
we're
we're
you're
talking
about
zoning,
but
we're
processing
the
PD
permit
at
the
same
time.
So
the
school
is
fine
with
the
times
and
to
be
clear,
we've
talked
about
9:00
p.m.
on
weekdays
and
we're
talking
about
7:00
p.m.
on
Saturdays,
just
to
be
perfectly
clear,
so
the
school.
G
C
G
F
F
F
G
That's
unfortunate,
but
I
mean
you
know,
having
had
numerous
high
schools
and
in
San
Jose
that
have
obtained
lights,
I
can
tell
you
it's
been
nothing
but
improvement
yeah.
These
are
not
the
lights
from
long
run.
These
are
lights
that
are
directed
onto
the
field
that
don't
have
significant
leakage
to
the
neighborhood
and
frankly,
amen
these
neighborhoods,
and
even
this
one
they
like
the
lights
on
at
that
hour.
If
you
know
this
area,
it's
got
the
industrial
across
the
street.
G
F
I
So
my
question
is
on
the
I
guess:
putting
in
the
standards
into
the
zoning
versus
the
permit.
If,
if
the
applicants
a
wanted
to
come
back
and
amend
their
permit
to
extend
the
hours
and
that
request
was
to
have
lights
till
10:00
p.m.
or
whatever
it
is,
would
that
require
a
new
environmental
study?
Because
it's
not
consistent
with
their
permit
as
issued
and.
A
I
Then
I
guess
my
sort
of
thoughts
on
I'm
Commissioner,
Yeahs
knees,
comments,
I
tend
to
agree
with
I'm
Krishna
Oliveira,
that
why
would
we
be
putting
on
additional
requirements
if
the
applicant
can't
do
what
we're
concerned
about
already
within
the
confines
of
their
permit
and
the
it
sounds
like
the
overlay
zoning
of
the
public
quasi
and
what
you
said.
What
was
it
exactly?
It's.
I
So
then
we'd
be,
and
that
allows
for
a
higher
number
or
a
later
number
of
hours
for
the
lights
and
so
we're
putting
on
the
applicant
a
lower
number
in
their
zoning
and
when
the
environmental
concern
can
be
addressed
through
the
permitting
process.
If
they
apply
down
the
road-
and
we
know
that
changing
zoning
is
much
more
arduous
and
changing
a
permit-
and
maybe
that's
the
concern
is
well,
we
don't
want
them
to
come
back
and
easily
change
the
ours
on
it.
I
B
Just
just
a
comment
is
that
normally
this
would
be
a
pqp
zoning
and
the
only
reason
this
is
coming
back
and
is
in
my
understanding
for
a
PD
zoning.
A
specialized
zoning
is
because
the
proposed
height
of
the
lighting
is
much
greater
than
what's
currently
allowed
in
the
pqp
district.
So
that's
why
they're
asking
for
a
specialized
PD
zoning
district
so
attendant
with
that
higher
lighting
standard
that
had
to
be
event
evaluated
through
sequa
and
you
know,
do
whatever
kind
of
project
avoidance
measures
would
avoid
having
those
types
of
impacts.
B
So
everything
that
we're
talking
about
tonight
is
really
related
to
the
impact
of
the
hot
taller
height
of
that.
So,
with
regard
to
the
zoning,
there
is
nothing
in
that
default
zoning
of
earth
or
the
base
zoning
of
pqp
that
would
allow
this
use
without
you
know
us
doing
a
PD
zoning.
This
is
just
kind
of
the
default
for
other
uses
of
what
can
be
used
there,
and
so,
with
the
exception
of
the
height
and
so
Commissioner
as
Annie's
comment.
B
I
I
ask
a
question
of
staff,
though,
because
what
I'm
hearing
is
that's
not
really
the
keys,
because
the
regulation
would
be
through
doing
an
environmental
review
and
then
insuring
through
that
environmental
review,
that
any
impacts
that
need
to
be
mitigated
before
a
permit.
Would
it
good
issue
would
be
addressed
through
that
process,
not
sure
so.
B
B
Happen
so
this
is
a
stopgap
to
tell
you
this
is
all
the
zoning
allows
right
now,
if
you
want
to
do
something
different,
you
have
to
come
in
with
a
different
application,
not
just
a
PD
permit,
where
all
of
a
sudden,
it
will
be
assumed
that
you
comply
with
the
zoning,
because
all
it
does
is
limit
height.
It
raises
height.
It
does
nothing
else
with
regard
to
that
lighting,
so
you
know
that
that's
why
this
is
being
suggested.
I
believe
I.
I
B
That
staff
and
I
make
mistakes
all
the
time
time
and
that
the
public,
also
in
reading
a
document,
will
also
be
mistaken
and
the
applicant
after
several
years
of
having
different
people
work
for
the
applicant
is
also
going
to
do
that.
You
want
it
to
be
as
clear
in
the
higher-level
document
as
possible
as
you
need
to,
and
so
here,
for
example,
we're
saying
fine
allows
at
65
or
70
feet:
65
foot,
light
lights
and
they've
evaluated
the
light
spillage
from
that
in
the
secret
document.
B
They
have
not
evaluated
time
past
9
o'clock,
so
it
is
good
to
basically
limit
in
the
zoning
what
you've
currently
evaluated
under
sequa,
because
otherwise,
if
I
come
in
with
a
PD
permit
amendment
later
and
a
staff
member,
the
public,
the
applicant
takes
a
look
at
the
zoning,
they
say,
oh
well,
look
it's
allowed,
there's
no
limitation
on
ours.
Here,
there's
no
light.
You
know
and
we
revert
to
P
Q
P,
which
is
I,
believe
midnight.
B
If
you
don't
put
different
hours
in
the
PD
zoning,
then
guess
what
it's
the
base
zoning
district
hours
with
those
limitations
so
and
I
just
skimmed
them
there
are.
There
are
a
few
uses
that
you
can
do.
10
p.m.
this
doesn't
appear
to
be
included.
There
are
other
uses
at
or
midnight,
and
so
without
a
different
hour
of
operation.
That
is
the
default.
Is
your
base,
zoning
for
hours
for
outdoor
activity
and
that's
why
it's
being
suggested
and
recommended
that
it
be
included
in
the
general
development
standards?
I
guess.
I
A
E
That
was
the
project
for
which
the
amendment
to
the
negative
declaration
was
prepared
and
because
you
could
not
build
those
standards,
apparently
under
the
old
PD
zoning
that
was
present
on
this
property,
a
new
PD
zoning
was
proposed
in
the
city,
as
it
now
does
included
a
realistic
basis
owning
the
pqp
zoning
so
that
if
the
property
owner
wants
to
develop
in
the
future
under
that
zoning,
he
can
do
so.
But
the
project
that
was
evaluated
and
that
we're
being
asked
to
approve
tonight
is
a
planned
development.
E
Zoning
with
light
posts
that
are
65
feet
tall
and
can
only
be
turned
on
between
6:30
in
the
morning
and
9
o'clock
at
night.
That's
it,
but
the
project
we're
being
asked
to
approve
doesn't
contain
those
avoidance
measures
for
not
causing
significant
impact,
we're
approving
a
PD
zoning
that
says,
oh,
whatever
is
often
here
in
someplace
else,
and
you
can
look
it
up
if
you
can
find
it
in
the
paperwork,
because
that's
what
I
had
to
do
to
find
out
what
the
mitigated
negative
declaration
said.
E
I
F
B
It's
both
reasons
it's
basically
noticed
and
that
there
was
adequate
environmental,
yes
for,
what's
being
improved,
yes,
and
if
we
want
it,
you
know
there
were
desire
to
expand
the
parameters
of
this
project
to
provide
more
time
higher
lights,
brighter
lights.
What
more
lights,
then
that's
beyond
the
what
was
applied
for
here
and
would
need
to
have
further
environmental
review,
but
the
GDP
needs
to
reflect
those.
E
Chair
I
would
like
to
prove
to
move
that
we
considered
the
addendum
to
the
Bellarmine
College
Master
Plan
mitigated
negative
declaration
in
accordance
with
sequa,
adopt
an
ordinance
rezoning.
The
project
with
the
reference
modifications
to
the
general
development
plan
previously
discussed,
including
the
hours
and
the
staffs
proposed
language
on
the
type
of
lighting,
and
adopt
a
resolution
approving
a
planned
development
permit,
as
stated
in
the
staff
recommendation,
so.
A
H
G
I'm,
just
I
would
like
to
approve
this
and
thanks
to
all
the
patience,
it's
a
long.
It's
a
long
process
to
do
things
that
are
what
most
people
would
consider
simple
and
no
offense.
Anyone
here,
I'm
just
saying
in
the
community,
most
people
enjoy
having
a
opportunity
to
have
lights
on
for
athletic
play,
but
I'd
say
most
everyday
residents,
don't
know
the
complexity
behind
it
in
the
process
that
you
have
to
go
through.
So
thank
you
for
your
patience
and
thank
you
for
playing
staff
to
prepare
the
report
and
thank
you
to
my
colleagues.
J
Yes,
are
two
items
were
afraid
from
this
commission
to
City
Council
on
August
27th
and
both
of
them
were
approved,
specifically
their
item
number
2.15,
which
is
the
request
for
authorization
to
apply
for
the
Senate
bill
to
planning
grant
program.
It
was
approved,
as
recommended
by
the
Commission.
The
second
one
item
was
10.1
C
19
that
0
1
0,
which
is
conventional
rezoning
for
real
property
located
at
4
1
9,
not
5th
Street,
which
was
also
approved,
as
recommended
by
the
Commission.
H
Would
like
to
request
a
slight
change
to
the
action
minutes
which
I
believe
said
something
like
no
items
under
the
report.
This
is
the
action
minutes
for
August
14th,
there's
a
reference
in
7,
a
report
from
City
Council,
no
reports,
but
our
senior
staff
member
here
actually
gave
us
two
or
three
items
that
evening.
So
I'd
like
to
add
those
to
the
record.
Please
Thank.