►
From YouTube: FEB 9, 2022 | Planning Commission
Description
City of San José, California
Planning Commission meeting of February 9, 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.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=929776&GUID=F0C1423A-3A0A-42E7-A7DA-43A1ED6CAF1A
A
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
All
right
good
evening,
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
coven
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
roll
call.
C
D
A
B
And
young
here
at
the
record,
reflected
at
this
moment.
Commissioners,
lord
noi
and
garcia,
are
not
present.
Some,
oh,
you
are
perfect.
Thank
you
so
much,
commissioner
summary
of
hearing
procedures.
The
procedure
for
this
hearing
is
as
follows.
After
the
staff
report,
applicants
and
appellants
may
make
a
five
minute
presentation.
B
City
staff
will
call
out
names
of
the
public
who
identify
the
items
they
want
to
speak
on.
You
may
identify
yourself
by
the
raised
hand,
feature
on
zoom
click,
star
9
on
your
phone
or
you
may
call
408,
535,
3505
or
email
planning,
support
staff
at
san
jose
ca.gov
and
identify
your
name
phone
number
and
what
items
you'd
like
to
speak
on,
as
your
name
is
called
city
staff
will
unmute
you
to
speak
after
we
confirm
your
audio
is
working.
Your
allotted
time
will
begin.
Each
speaker
will
have
two
minutes.
B
Speakers
using
a
translator
will
have
four
minutes
after
the
public
testimony
the
applicant
and
appellant
may
make
closing
remarks
for
an
additional
five
minutes.
Planning.
Commissioners
may
ask
questions
of
the
speakers
response
to
commissioner
questions
will
not
reduce
the
speaker's
time
allowance
staff
will
unmute
the
speaker
to
respond
to
the
commissioner.
B
The
public
hearing
will
then
be
closed.
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
actions
on
rezonings
pre-zonings
general
plan
amendments
and
code
amendments
is
only
advisory
to
the
council
city
council.
B
The
city
council
will
hold
public
hearings
on
these
items.
Section
20.120.400
of
the
municipal
code
provides
the
procedures
for
legal
protests
to
the
city
council
on
rezonings
and
pre-zonings.
The
planning
commission's
action
on
conditional
use
permits
is
appealable
to
the
city
council
in
accordance
with
section
20.100.220
of
the
municipal
code.
With
that
we
will
now
call
to
order
and
orders
of
the
day.
E
Thank
you
chair.
I
just
wanted
to
share
something
with
the
commissioners
and
staff,
our
planning
commission
agenda,
it's
comprised
of
a
series
of
documents
and
each
and
every
one
of
those
documents
are
not
accessible,
and
what
I
mean
is
that
members
of
our
community
fall
under
different
disability
categories
and
based
on
how
the
documents
are
they're,
unable
to
use
assistive
technology
to
navigate
and
process
the
documents.
B
Thank
you
for
that,
commissioner
olivario
and
and
that's
a
great
it's
great
feedback
staff.
Is
there
any
way
that
we
may
be
able
to
to
address
that
perhaps
at
a
future
meeting,
just
or
or
whatever
the
appropriate
mechanism
is
we
we
absolutely
do
not
want
to
leave
anyone
outside
of
the
process.
Can
is
there
any
question?
Is
it.
E
I
I
just
looked
at
all
the
documents
associated
to
the
agenda,
the
agenda
itself,
the
minutes
and
all
the
staff
reports,
and
each
of
them
fail
on
accessibility,
checks
and,
and
so
that's
that's
why
I'm
bringing
it
up.
Okay,.
B
All
right
and
michelle
verio,
if
you
can
raise
the
issue
until
it
gets
resolved,
that
would
be
appreciated.
I
think
that's
a
very
good
point
to
bring
up
to
the
commission
tonight.
B
Item
two
public
comment:
public
comment
to
the
planning
commission
on
non-agendized
items.
Please
use
the
raised
hand
feature
in
zoom
or
click
star
nine
to
raise
a
hand
to
speak.
Each
member
of
the
public
may
address
the
commission
for
up
to
two
minutes.
The
commission
cannot
take
any
formal
action
without
the
item
being
properly
noticed
and
placed
on
an
agenda.
B
In
response
to
the
public
comment,
the
planning
commission
is
limited
to
the
following
options:
responding
to
statements
made
or
questions
posed
by
members
of
the
public
or
requesting
staff
to
report
back
on
a
matter
at
a
subsequent
meeting
or
directing
staff
to
place
the
item
on
a
future
agenda
staff.
Do
we
have
any
speakers
for
public
eye
comment
for
items
not
on
the
planning
commission
agenda
tonight.
G
I
I
just
always
bring
up
at
the
beginning
of
these
meetings
that
if
it
was
a
public
forum
meeting,
I
would
be
able
to
see
who
the
attendees
were
and
how
many
attendees
there
are-
and
I
know
a
zoom
meeting
can
be
set
up
that
way,
but
for
some
reason
it's
not,
and
I
find
that
to
be
a
form
of
censorship.
So
maybe
that's
something
that
you
guys
can
look
into
changing
in
the
future.
Thank
you.
B
B
A
Approve
commissioners
consent
calendar
actually,
can
we
make
a
most
two
separate
motions?
Can
we
move
items
for
a
c
and
d
and
then
vote
on
b
separately,
because
I
was
not
at
the
meeting
on
january
26th.
B
H
I
apologize.
Let
me
unmute
here
I
was
having
some
trouble
in
muting
and
I
was
on
a
message
with
somebody.
What
was
the
question
again.
A
B
C
B
A
D
A
A
Motion
to
approve
4b
of
the
consent
calendar.
Second,
second:
oh,
go.
B
C
C
I
Yes,
and
actually
I
need
to
change
hey,
I
thought
we
were
doing
bcd
we
didn't
do.
We
did
a
first
then
correct.
A
D
A
A
B
Motion
passes
with
montenegrini
and
garcia
not
present.
B
J
All
right,
this
is
alex
hughes
with
staff.
Can
I
sure,
screen.
F
Actually,
can
I
interrupt
for
a
second.
I
just
want
to
confirm
who,
commissioner,
I
think,
cantrell
you
said
you
were
abstaining
from
item
4b.
Is
that
correct?
Oh
4a?
F
J
Joining
me
today
is
wendy
selazi
division
manager
from
the
police
department's
division
of
cannabis
regulation,
along
with
sergeant
woolsey,
also
with
the
division
of
cannabis
regulation,
which
is
the
lead
agency
for
this
work.
Also
with
me
today
is
michelle
mcgurk
with
the
city
manager's
office
and
martina
davis,
supervising
planner.
J
The
city's
cannabis
regulatory
program
began
in
july
of
2014,
allowing
businesses
that
were
open
at
the
time
to
file
for
registration
under
the
new
regulations
that
defined
where
a
medical,
cannabis
collective
could
go
what
the
operational
and
regulatory
requirements
were
and
the
total
limit
on
the
number
of
businesses
a
single
registrant
could
operate
at
that
time.
The
city
required
vertical
integration,
where
each
collective
had
to
conduct
cultivation,
processing,
manufacturing
and
dispensing
from
one
site.
J
Businesses
were
given
a
time
frame
to
come
into
compliance
and
a
total
of
16
campus
collectives
completed
the
registration
before
the
program
closed.
Originally,
these
businesses
were
limited
to
medical
cannabis
when
california
passed
proposition
64
in
2016
to
allow
the
recreational
use
of
cannabis.
Council
approved
the
16
collectives
to
engage
in
non-medical
cannabis
activities
in
2017
all
16
of
san
jose's,
cannabis
dispensaries
shifted
to
recreational
cannabis
in
2019.
The
city
updated
the
regulatory
program
to
allow
new
manufacturing
testing
and
distribution
facilities.
J
Now,
I'm
going
to
talk
you
through
the
application
process
to
open
canvas
business.
This
is
the
existing
process
and
we
are
not
recommending
any
changes.
An
applicant
for
a
new
or
relocated
canvas
business
location
must
begin
their
process
by
filing
an
application
with
the
san
jose
police
department's
division
of
cannabis
regulation
applicants
undergo
fingerprinting
background
checks
and
provides
several
types
of
documentation
that
demonstrate
how
they
will
meet
the
standards
for
items
such
as
security
systems,
where
the
required
security
guard
will
be
located
how
customer
identification
will
be
conducted.
J
J
Planning
staff
review
new
or
relocated
cannabis
business
proposals
as
part
of
the
application
process,
with
a
zoning
code
verification
certificate,
we
verify
that
they
are
in
the
correct
zoning
district
and
proposed
locations
are
meeting
all
citing
requirements
which
include
distance
from
sensitive
uses
and
whether
the
proposed
site
is
within
an
exclusion
area.
Among
other
aspects,
we'll
go
into
more
detail
later
after
a
site
visit
for
an
on-the-ground
look
of
the
surrounding
businesses
to
ensure
we
haven't
missed
any
uses
that
could
prohibit
a
cannabis
business.
J
We
provide
a
zoning
verification
certificate
that
says
whether
all
requirements
are
or
are
not
met.
If
they
do
not
meet
all
requirements,
they
could
reapply
for
another
certificate
at
another
location,
but
otherwise
the
application
process
would
end
there
for
planning.
This
is
the
only
step
by
the
plan
by
planning
in
the
application
process.
There's
no
public
hearing
or
permit
for
cannabis
use.
For
example,
there's
no
conditional
use
permit
requirement
and
we're
not
proposing
to
change
this,
because
the
operation
and
security
conditions
under
title
vi
are
very
robust
and
address.
J
Restricting
cannabis
uses
to
industrial
zoning
districts
combined
with
the
distance
requirements
to
sensitive
uses
and
the
exclusion
areas
limit
the
number
of
available
sites
for
our
cannabis
industry.
If
you
look
at
where
these
dispensaries
are
located,
it's
clear
that
these
limiting
factors
create
a
concentration
of
these
businesses
in
two
council
districts,
districts,
three
and
seven,
these
distinct
or
these
districts
have
between
them
roughly
85
of
all
sites
that
meet
the
current
zoning
ordinance
standards
and
are
home
to
13
out
of
the
16
cannabis.
Businesses.
J
It's
important
to
note
that
the
zoning
ordinance
changes
discussed
are
only
part
of
the
overall
process
moving
forward
to
city
council.
The
zoning
ordinance
only
addresses
where
businesses
are
allowed
to
locate
and
sets
forth
the
process
for
obtaining
a
zoning
verification
certificate,
but
outside
of
the
zoning
ordinance
title
vi
of
the
municipal
code,
along
with
the
city
manager,
regulations
dictate
who
can
apply
for
a
cannabis
business.
How
many
cannabis
businesses
can
exist
in
the
city
and
the
regulation
process
for
a
cannabis,
business
or
registration
process.
J
Excuse
me,
we
want
to
be
clear
that
the
changes
to
who
can
register
and
how
many
businesses
can
exist
within
the
city
are
not
addressed
in
the
zoning
ordinance,
so
are
not
under
the
purview
of
the
planning
commission.
But,
however,
when
we're
you're,
considering
where
businesses
may
be
able
to
locate
in
the
future,
it
is
helpful
to
know
how
many
we
are
talking
about.
J
The
police
department
are
recommending
to
allow
each
of
the
16
existing
businesses
to
open
a
second
location
in
the
commercial
areas
allowed
by
this
proposed
zoning
ordinance
update
and
to
keep
their
existing
industrial
location.
Open
title
vi
also
creates
the
cannabis
equity
program
and
the
police
department
is
proposing
to
open
up
registration
for
up
to
10
new
equity
applicants.
J
J
J
J
We
also
use
social
media
such
as
nextdoor,
twitter
and
facebook,
and
developed
a
dedicated
website
for
this
work,
where
we've
posted,
updates
and
information
as
we
have
it
wherever
possible,
we
translated
materials
into
simplified
chinese,
spanish
and
vietnamese.
With
regards
to
the
industry,
outreach
we've
had
good
communication
with
the
16
existing
businesses
and
the
representatives.
J
J
For
example,
our
original
recommendation
was
to
allow
the
existing
businesses
to
relocate
their
existing
storefront
into
one
of
the
proposed
new
commercial
locations,
but
we
heard
a
concern
and
overall
frustration
about
them
losing
their
investment
that
they
had
made
in
their
current
industrial
locations.
So
the
recommendation
has
shifted
to
allow
them
to
keep
their
current
retail
location
open.
In
addition
to
allowing
a
new
location,
the
largest
quantity
of
feedback
we
got
from.
The
general
public,
though,
was
through
our
online
survey,
which
was
published
in
march
through
april
of
2021..
J
The
survey
was
offered
in
four
languages
and
had
approximately
950
respondents
across
languages
offered
I'll
go
into
more
detail
on
the
survey
shortly
we
followed
the
survey
up
with
a
virtual
community
meeting.
We
advertised
this
meeting
broadly,
including
inviting
the
200
people
who
asked
for
follow-up
through
the
survey.
In
the
end
we
had
12
attendees
at
the
meeting,
most
of
whom
were
from
the
cannabis
industry.
J
The
majority
of
the
conversation
in
this
meeting
centered
on
the
equity
program
and
other
items
that
were
not
related
to
land
use,
such
as
the
city's
cannabis
tax
structure,
one
attendee,
a
cannabis
business
owner,
wanted
to
see
an
event
license
or
a
social
consumption
aspect
for
cannabis
and
another
attendee.
A
community
member
pointed
out
that
the
proposed
thousand-foot
distance
requirement
between
dispensaries
for
downtown
could
result
in
one
business
precluding
another
which
we've
addressed
in
our
current
proposal.
J
The
ordinance
presented
today
reflects
both
the
ced
and
community
feedback
to
date.
The
other
major
piece
of
the
outreach
was
an
informational
video
that
we
posted
on
our
website.
We
also
posted
a
transcript
of
the
video
in
english,
spanish,
vietnamese
and
simplified
chinese.
The
video
covers
the
proposed
changes
presented
here
today
and
was
distributed
using
the
methods
described
previously.
J
To
date,
approximately
a
dozen
questions
and
comments
about
the
video
were
received
and
includes
similar
concerns
seen
by
other
respondents
in
the
surveys
that
I
will
discuss
in
a
moment.
Some
of
the
emails
expressed
a
mixture
of
interest
in
applying
for
the
equity
applicant
program
or
excitement
about
seeing
the
program,
allow
cannabis
in
commercial
areas
or
worries
about
possible
litter
or
trash
around
these
areas.
J
The
cannabis
survey
had
approximately
950
responses
when
asked.
If
we
should
increase
the
number
of
dispensaries.
52
said
no,
and
46
said
yes.
In
total,
we
had
454.
Respondents
provide
a
whopping,
1700
written
comments
in
the
survey
and
we
reviewed
and
analyzed
these
comments,
which
were
approximately
half
supportive
and
half
a
post.
J
J
Currently,
the
zoning
ordinance
does
not
support
cannabis
uses
outside
of
industrial
zoning
districts,
and
it
also
does
not
allow
delivery
only
uses
in
any
zoning
district.
We
are
proposing
to
amend
our
zoning
code
to
allow
dispensaries
in
commercial
zoning
districts
and
are
proposing
to
remove
them
from
the
industrial
zoning
districts.
We
are
also
proposing
to
allow
delivery
only
uses
in
industrial
zones,
the
zoning
districts.
We
are
looking
to
make
these
changes
to
are
listed
on
this
slide.
J
The
zoning
districts
were
retail,
where
retail
storefronts
would
be
allowed.
Are
zoning
districts
where
commercial
retail
activities
are
permitted?
You
can
see
there
are
some
seemingly
residential
zoning
districts
on
there,
such
as
transit
residential,
but
those
districts
actually
allow
mixed
use
or
standalone
commercial
development.
So
that's
why
they
are
included
the
new
delivery.
Only
use
is
proposed
to
be
allowed
in
the
industrial
zoning
districts
where
other
non-retail
cannabis
businesses
are
allowed.
Since
these
delivery-only
businesses
do
not
have
a
public
interface
and
could
involve
a
lot
of
vehicle
trips
to
and
from
the
site.
J
The
bulk
of
our
ordinance
changes
take
place
in
the
specific
use
regulations
of
title
20,
because
this
is
where
distance
requirements
for
cannabis
uses
are
located.
The
sections
we
are
making
changes
to
are
parts
9.75
and
parts
9.76
9.75
outlines
regulations
for
collectives
cultivation
and
both
medical
and
non-medical
cannabis
businesses.
J
This
section
defines
the
exclusion
or
blackout
areas
and
has
the
most
restrictive
set
of
distance
criteria
from
sensitive
uses.
I'll
refer
to
this
section
as
the
dispensary
section
moving
forward
part
9.76
outlines
regulations
for
manufacturing,
distribution
and
testing
of
cannabis.
There's
no
exclusion
or
blackout
area
for
these
uses
and
the
distance
criteria
from
sensitive
uses
are
less
than
those
set
in
the
dispensary
section,
because
these
businesses
don't
engage
with
the
public.
We
are
not
recommending
changes
to
distances
for
this
section
and
I'll
refer
to
this
section.
As
the
industrial
section
moving
forward.
J
Currently,
the
dispensary
section
includes
cultivation
which
isn't
open
to
the
public.
We
conclude
it
would
be
better
to
move
this
to
the
industrial
section
with
other
similar
industrial
uses.
By
doing
this,
only
thing
the
dispensary
section
would
cover
is
medical
and
non-medical
cannabis.
Dispensaries
moving
cultivation
to
the
industrial
section
would
reduce
the
distance
requirements
from
sensitive
uses,
with
the
exception
of
distances
to
residential,
which
would
remain
the
same
under
the
current
proposal.
J
The
ordinance
would
remove
the
enterprise
exclusion
areas
and
the
downtown
ground
floor
restriction,
but
it
would
also
add
a
new
exclusion
criteria,
called
the
police
beat
exclusion
which
would
prevent
a
dispensary
from
locating
in
areas
that
have
a
20
higher
than
city-wide
average
crime
rate
in
a
police.
Speed
as
defined
by
the
san
jose
police
department,
this
is
the
same
criteria
we
use
when
evaluating
applications
for
off
sale
of
alcohol.
However,
a
key
difference
is
that
alcohol
sales
are
allowed
within
these
police
beats.
J
J
This
map
shows
the
proposed
police
be
exclusion
area.
When
we
looked
at
data
for
these
police
speeds,
we
realized
that,
while
they
can
change
from
year
to
year,
large
parts
downtown
are
almost
always
included.
The
ced
committee
gave
direction
that
they
want
these
new
regulations
to
allow
dispensaries
to
locate
downtown.
So
we
are
not
proposing
to
apply
the
police
feed
exclusion
criteria
to
this
area.
J
Now,
let's
talk
about
the
distance
criteria
to
sensitive
uses
under
the
dispensary
section.
Currently,
dispensaries
are
prohibited
from
opening
within
a
thousand
feet
of
a
public
or
private
preschool
elementary
or
secondary
school
child
daycare,
center
community
or
recreation
center
park
or
library,
500
feet
of
a
substance,
abuse,
rehabilitation
center
or
emergency
residential
shelter,
150
feet
of
a
religious
assembly,
adult
daycare
center
or
any
residential
use
or
within
50
feet
of
another
dispensary.
J
J
That's
just
based
on
the
zoning
criteria
alone
and
the
likelihood
of
these
parcels
being
available
for
lease
or
them
even
wanting
to
lease
to
a
cannabis.
Business
would
likely
further
decrease
this
number.
When
we
presented
this
to
the
ced
committee
last
year,
they
directed
us
to
re-examine
these
distances
and
offer
alternatives
that
allow
more
sites.
I
know
this
table
can
be
a
lot
to
take
in
so,
let's
break
it
down,
we
got
clear
direction
from
council
and
ced
to
increase
the
total
number
of
sites
dispensaries
could
locate
at
and
one
of
the
first
things.
J
You'll
notice
is
that
the
downtown
and
urban
village
areas
are
considered
separately.
These
areas
have
or
are
planned
to
have
a
dense
mix
of
commercial
and
residential
uses,
and
the
reality
is
that
the
compact
nature
of
these
areas
put
most
locations
within
them
next
to
a
sensitive
use,
particularly
when
it
comes
to
residential
distance
requirements.
J
J
We
are
adding
the
state
criteria
view
center
into
the
municipal
code
as
a
sensitive
use
and
distances
from
daycare
or
youth
centers
would
be
a
thousand
feet
for
areas
outside
of
downtown
or
600
feet
within
downtown
youth.
Centers
are
defined
by
the
state
as
any
public
or
private
facility
that
is
primarily
used
to
host
recreational
or
social
activities
for
minors.
J
Examples
of
a
youth
center
would
be
a
boys
and
girls
club
or
an
amusement
arcade.
We
didn't
originally
include
youth
centers
because
we
thought
the
other
distance
criteria
we
had
would
cover
those,
but
we
realized
that
there's
a
bit
of
a
gap
and
we
want
to
better
align
our
regulations
with
the
state
to
ensure
that
we
don't
sign
off
on
a
location
that
can't
get
state
approval.
J
To
control
for
concentration
of
cannabis,
dispensaries,
the
distance
from
a
dispensary
for
the
downtown
or
urban
village
area
would
be
increased
to
500
feet
and
further
increased
to
a
thousand
feet
for
the
rest
of
the
city.
From
the
existing
50
feet,
we've
heard
from
industry
representatives
a
desire
to
lower
this
distance
between
dispensaries
to
make
sites
more
potentially
available.
J
While
we
agree
that
lowering
this
number
would
make
more
sites
available.
We've
also
heard
a
lot
of
concern
around
concentration
of
these
businesses
near
each
other
by
the
public.
Keep
in
mind
the
lower
the
standard
goes,
the
more
opportunities
there
would
be
for
the
businesses
to
concentrate
around
each
other.
We
feel
that
the
thousand
foot
or
500
foot
distance
strikes
a
good
balance
and
was
endorsed
by
the
ced
committee.
J
Lastly,
we
are
also
removing
religious
assembly
and
adult
daycare
centers
use
requirements
and
are
not
requiring
a
distance
from
residential
uses
for
locations
in
the
downtown
or
urban
village
areas
for
areas
outside
of
downtown
or
urban
villages.
The
way
distance
from
residential
would
be
measured,
changes
from
parcel
to
parcel
or
has
the
pro
flies
to
a
path
of
travel
measurement.
J
The
ordinance
as
proposed
would
use
a
path
of
travel,
distance
measurement,
which
is
defined
as
a
continuous,
unobstructed
way
of
pedestrian
passage
by
means
of
which
the
use
may
be
approached,
entered
and
exited
where
open
to
the
public.
This
measurement
type
considers
intervening
structures
and
more
accurately
represents
the
reality
of
our
built
cityscape,
and
the
next
few
slides
illustrate
this
difference.
J
J
You
can
see
in
this
example
how
the
hard
barriers,
like
fences
or
sound
walls
prevent
feasible
access
to
the
location
when
using
a
path
of
travel
measurement.
However,
travel
from
the
nearby
residential
use
to
the
example
locations,
public
access
is
a
much
farther
distance.
It
approximates
350
feet
compared
to
the
108
in
the
parts
of
the
parcel
or
as
the
crop
fly
measurement.
J
This
brings
us
to
the
zoning
code
verification
certificate
changes.
I
want
to
reiterate
here
that
this
is
the
only
step
by
planning
and
the
application
process,
there's
no
public
hearing
or
permit,
for
example,
there's
no
conditional
use
requirement
and
we're
not
proposing
to
change
this,
because
the
kinds
of
things
that
we
would
address
in
a
conditional
use
permit
are
addressed
in
the
most
robust
regulations
of
title
vi.
J
At
present,
these
certificates
do
not
expire
and
capture
a
snapshot
in
time,
based
on
what
other
uses
are
in
operation
in
the
vicinity.
At
the
time
of
issuing
the
certificate.
This
causes
two
problems.
An
applicant
could
apply
and
receive
a
certificate
with
no
intention
to
effectuate
a
cannabis
use
at
a
location,
but
instead
sit
on
the
certification
indefinitely
and
effectively
keep
those
initial
standards.
J
For
these
reasons,
we
are
proposing
to
add
a
provision
that
the
certificate
will
expire.
If
a
cannabis
business
does
not
commence
operations
at
the
location
within
24
months
of
the
date
the
certificate
is
issued,
we
are
also
proposing
to
specify,
in
the
ordinance
that
a
certificate
cannot
be
issued
where
another
valid
certificate
for
a
cannabis
business
exists
within
either
500
feet
within
a
downtown
or
urban
village
area,
or
a
thousand
feet
when
outside
of
these
areas,
whether
or
not
the
other
cannabis
business
has
opened.
Yet.
J
In
total,
the
amendments
proposed
roughly
create
1300
delivery,
only
locations
and
1400
retail
or
dispensary
locations
within
san
jose.
What
this
doesn't
show
is
the
distance
from
another
dispensary
which
controls
for
concentration
and
could
exclude
others
and,
as
a
reminder,
we
are
only
recommending
a
maximum
of
21
new
dispensaries.
J
J
As
part
of
our
requirements
under
sequestaff
hired
a
consultant
to
prepare
an
initial
study
to
analyze
changes
in
the
amendments
discussed
here,
because
what
this
ordinance
essentially
does
is
allow
retail
sales
of
cannabis
in
areas
where
retail
sales
are
allowed.
We
found
no
new
environmental
impacts
would
result
from
this
ordinance
change.
The
initial
study
and
draft
negative
declaration
was
circulated
for
a
period
of
20
days
and
we
received
no
public
comments.
J
In
summation,
the
canvas
ordinance
update
would
change
the
use
tables
to
allow
cannabis
delivery
only
uses
in
industrial
zoning
districts
and
add
this
under
part
9.76
or
the
industrial
section.
It
would
allow
cannabis,
retail
or
dispensaries
in
commercial
zoning
districts
and
modify
the
distance
requirements
from
sensitive
uses
for
dispensaries
and
replace
the
old
exclusion
zones
with
a
new
one
known
as
the
police
beat
exclusion
area.
J
This
update
would
also
modify
the
zoning
code
verification
certificate
process
by
adding
a
check
for
other
certificates
in
the
vicinity
and
would
add
a
24-month
expiration
to
the
certificate
combined.
These
changes
allow
an
expansion
of
our
local
cannabis
industry
while
including
controls
to
ensure
these
businesses
are
not
concentrated
in
close
proximity
and
are
not
located
near
sensitive
uses,
particularly
those
where
youth
congregate.
J
In
conclusion,
staff
recommends.
The
planning
commission
recommend
that
the
city
council
adopt
a
resolution
approving
the
cannabis
business
ordinance,
update
initial
study
and
negative
declaration
adopt
an
ordinance
amending
title
20
as
posted
on
the
agenda
with
the
following
modifications
for
consistency
with
state
terminology.
J
The
first
would
be
a
change
to
non-medical
cannabis
dispensary,
which
would
then
become
cannabis.
Storefront,
retail
and
the
next
change
is
medical,
cannabis,
regulation
and
safety
act
and
the
adult
use
or
of
marijuana
act
would
become
the
medicinal
and
adult
use
cannabis.
Regulation
and
safety
act.
B
Alexander,
thank
you
for
that.
I
do
want
the
record
to
reflect
that
commissioner.
Garcia
joined
us
at
6,
56
p.m,
and
precisely
because
of
that
I'll,
let
you
have
your
drink
of
water
alexander
great
job.
Can
you
remind
us
of
what
agencies
comprise
the?
I
think
you
said
cde
committee.
B
K
Martina
davis
acting
division
manager
good
evening
everybody,
so
that
is
the
city
of
san
jose's,
community
and
economic
development
committee.
It
is
a
subcommittee
of
our
city
council,
so
it
is
sat
on
by
a
number
of
members
of
our
city
council.
K
K
So
this
entire
project
has
been
very,
very
much
done
in
conjunction
with
the
the
police
department.
They
don't
typically
staff
or
attend
that
committee,
because
you
know
usually
items
aren't,
don't
pertain
to
them,
but
we've
really
been
a
team
between
planning,
the
city,
manager's
office
and
the
police
department
on
this
work.
Just
because
our
regulations,
their
regulations,
are
so
intertwined,
so
they
were
there
at
every
ced
committee
meeting
that
we
discussed
this
at
and
in
fact
the
the
police
department's
input
really
actually
shaped
a
lot
of
this
ordinance.
K
B
A
Yes,
we
do
nathan
olsh.
You
have
two
minutes
to
speak.
G
Good
evening,
chair,
bonilla
and
planning
commission
members,
my
name
is
nathan
ulst,
the
director
of
policy
and
operations,
the
san
jose
downtown
association
representing
over
1800
businesses
and
property
owners,
striving
to
increase
the
vitality
of
our
beloved
downtown,
and
we
support
the
staff
recommendation
tonight.
We
believe
san
jose
specifically
downtown
is
poised
for
this
program:
expansion,
as
we
see
potential
to
activate
underutilized
storefronts
mitigate
vacancies
and
increase
activity
in
our
community.
Moreover,
as
stated
in
the
staff
member
total,
average
crime
rates
were
significantly
less
on
blocks
containing
dispensaries.
G
G
Lastly,
it
would
make
sense
to
also
consider
new,
safe
social
consumption
policies
for
outdoor
events,
such
as
san
francisco's
grasslands
at
the
outside
land
festival,
which
touts
a
great
experience
for
crowds
to
enjoy
music.
So
why
not
start
the
year
on
a
high
note,
thank
you
very
much
for
your
time.
L
Yes,
I'm
concerned
that
none
of
the
analysis
seemed
to
take
into
account
who
the
customers,
the
new
customers,
would
be
for
these
new
retail
outlets.
L
There
was
a
lot
of
common
commentary
about
you,
know
sunnyvale
cupertino
and
other
cities,
not
having
dispensaries
in
effect,
meaning
that
residents
beyond
the
boundaries
of
san
jose
will
be
coming
to
san
jose
to
make
these
purchases,
and
it
would
be
interesting
to
get
commentary
from
the
group.
That's
been
working
on
this
as
to
what
they
forecast
in
that
regard,
if
they
anticipate
any
ill
effect
from
that
as
well.
L
I
it's
interesting.
I
missed
the
opportunity
to
comment
on
the
environmental
impact,
but
my
recollection
was
originally
the
concept
was
seed
to
sale,
meaning
that
the
product
has
grown
here
locally,
and
I
find
it
hard
to
believe
that
there
is
no
economic
or
I'm
sorry,
no
environmental
impact
from
the
grow
operations
which
take
a
ton
of
of
lighting.
L
So
I
would
like
I
would
like
response
from
the
city
on
that.
Please
thank.
A
L
Thank
you,
chair
and
honorable
planning,
commissioner
sean
kelly
rye
silicon
valley,
cannabis
alliance.
I'd
just
like
to
reiterate
that
this
was
the
city
council's
number
one
priority
in
2019.
It
is
large
in
scope.
Staff
has
done
a
tremendous
job
in
outreach,
as
you've
heard
from
the
presentation
by
alexander.
There
have
been
many
public
hearings.
There
have
been
online
outreach,
there
have
been
city
council
committees
and
even
another
city
council
hearing
on
this
issue
before
it
was
brought
back.
L
So
it
has
been
in
the
pipeline
for
some
time
and
there's
been
a
lot
of
outreach
and
a
lot
of
input.
San
jose
is
actually
behind
the
curve
when
it
comes
to
zoning
redwood
city
has
is
only
allowing
cannabis
in
retail
commercial
zoning
union
city
allowed
cannabis.
Retail
dispensaries
at
their
super
regional
mall
called
union
landing.
Hayward
has
allowed
it
in
the
historic
district
downtown
san
francisco,
oakland
chico,
fairfield
belmont
san
bruno
san
mateo
are
all
contemplating
it
or
have
approved
zoning
in
retail
commercial
zoning.
L
Only
not
industrial
san
jose
also
has
the
experience
of
having
run
a
cannabis
program
extremely
well.
Over
the
last
six
years,
almost
going
on
seven,
the
dcr
with
wendy
and
sergeant
woolsey
have
done
an
exemplary
job
in
working
with
the
industry,
and
you
don't
hear
about
cannabis
in
the
newspaper
or
anywhere
else,
because,
frankly,
we
don't
have
those
problems.
Other
cities
have
because
pd
is
so
closely
intertwined
with
what
we
do
on
a
day-to-day
basis.
L
San
jose's
industry
was
89
million
dollars
at
the
end
of
2016..
It's
now
estimated
at
170
million.
That's
almost
double
and
it's
the
same
amount
of
dispensaries
in
the
same
industrial
areas
with
double
the
traffic
and
double
the
customer
count,
and
hence
the
need,
and
so
I'd
ask
that
you
move
for
approval
of
the
staff
recommendation.
Thank
you
so
much.
B
E
All
right,
hey,
so
a
couple
questions,
one
just
to
be
clear
in
the
recommendation.
You're
still
recommending
no
ground
floor
in
the
downtown
is
that
correct.
E
Would
it
would
be,
it
would
be
allowed
yeah?
Thank
you
wasn't
clear.
Pardon
me
for
that
and
then
on
the
on
the
equity
applicants
is
a
requirement
that
you've
been
incarcerated
for
a
drug
crime
or
a
cannabis
crime.
When
it
was
illegal
or
is
that
criteria
been
set
yet.
M
Good
evening,
commissioner
olivario
the
criteria
we
have
an
existing
cannabis,
michelle
mcgurk
from
the
city
manager's
office.
We
have
an
existing
cannabis
equity
ordinance.
That's
on
the
books.
M
We
have
been
tasked
with
and
have
state
grant
funding
and
to
do
a
cannabis
equity
assessment
that
is
going
to
council
on
february
15th
and
it
would
update
the
eligibility
requirements.
Incarceration
is
not
a
requirement.
What
we
are
proposing,
based
on
the
equity
assessment
and
the
disproportional
rates
of
arrest
or
impacts
from
cannabis.
Prohibition
in
different
neighborhoods
is
where
we're
looking
at
a
geographic
approach
where
business
owners
would
would
be
located.
M
So
that's
all
posted
for
the
council
meeting
of
february
15th
and,
of
course,
is
within
the
purview
of
the
city
council
to
make
that
decision,
rather
than
the
planning
commission.
E
Thank
you
very
much
and
hope
you're
doing
well,
and
then
I
just
wanted
to
state
staff
brought
up
the
secret
document
that
was
published
and
allowed
for
public
comment,
but
yet
again
that
document
that
sequa
document
it
has
11
accessibility
errors,
so
that
again
means
people
of
different
disability
categories.
Multiple
disability
categories
would
be
unable
to
navigate
and
process.
This
sql
document.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Olivario
commissioners
torrence
learned.
While
then
young
tournaments,
commissioner
torrance
foreign.
A
Thank
you,
hello,
everybody.
So
my
question
is
this:
this
I
thought
of
this.
As
we
were
hearing
one
of
our
public
speakers
made
a
point.
So
how
do
do
dispensaries
make
streets
safer
because
that
was
one
thing
that
was
stated
that
I'm
just
curious
about?
Are
there
any
statistics
around
that
and
why?
Why
would
that
be
so,
and
then
there
was
an
additional
comment
made.
That
said,
yet
we
need
to
require
additional
police
around
dispensaries.
So
can
maybe
martina
clarify
that
or
someone
else
for
on
the
staff.
K
Yeah,
no
I'm
happy
I'm
happy
to
clarify,
because
I
definitely
do
not
want
to
overstate
what
we
were
saying
in
our
staff
report
with
regard
to
the
crime
statistics.
So
one
thing
we
we,
you
know
came
up
a
lot
right
was
a
concern
around.
Do
these
attract
crime,
and
so
we
tried
our
best
using
the
data
we
could
get
to
to
see
what
we
could
find
you
know
with.
Are
there
statistics
showing
either
way?
K
So
what
we
did
is
to
because
we
hear
frequently
you
know
these
are
not
very
different
from
alcohol
sales
right.
So
we
thought,
let's
look
at
licensed
off
sale
establishments
in
close
proximity
for
to
our
dispensaries,
to
see
if
there's
a
difference
in
rates
of
crime
either
at
those
businesses
or
in
the
vicinity
for
privacy
reasons,
we
actually
couldn't
get
crime
reports
for
the
businesses
themselves,
but
we
were
able
to
get
analysis
of
the
number
of
reported
crimes
on
the
block.
K
K
Yeah.
Okay,
thanks
alex
there's
about
a
half
a
mile.
You
know
we
try
to
find
as
close
as
once
as
we
get
so,
it's
kind
of
you
know
apples
to
apples
as
much
as
we
could
get
and
we
got
crime
rates
for
those
blocks
that
that
contained
those,
and
we
did
find
that
the
crime
rates
were
actually
lower
on
the
blocks
containing
a
cannabis
use.
Now.
Does
that
mean
that
it's
because
of
the
cannabis
use
that
the
the
crime
is
lower?
K
I
mean
we
definitely
cannot
say
that
we
can't
say
why
the
crime
is
lower.
There
could
be
lots
of
reasons,
but
we
were
really
looking
to
see
you
know.
Is
there
a
discrepancy?
Is
there
more
crime?
Is
there?
Are
we
looking
at
a
lot
of
crimes
on
these
blocks
and
we
really
did
find
that
as
close
as
we
could
get
to
that
kind
of
comparison,
that
we
weren't
seeing
any
increase
and,
in
fact
yeah
just
the
numbers
so
does
less
crimes
on
those
blocks.
So
that's
what
those
numbers
were.
K
Definitely
don't
want
to
present
that
as
cannabis
uses
reduced
crime.
That's
you
know.
We
can't
conclude
that,
based
on
the
data
that
we
had
certainly,
but
we
definitely
also
can't
you
know-
did
not
find
that
they
increased
it
when
making
that
comparison-
and
I
know
if
I
don't
not
sure
wendy
if
you
do
want
to
step
in
because
I
know
as
mentioned
you
know,
the
police
department
does
regulate
these
very
very
heavily,
and
so
we
do
have
a
lot
of
information
on
crimes
reported
on
those
cannabis
businesses
themselves.
A
K
Wendy,
I
think
that's
a
good
question
for
you
on
how
the
regulatory
program
works,
because
it
is
essentially
kind
of
a
self-funded
program
that
does
pay
for
this
robust
regulation
of
those.
So
I
think
you'd
be
probably
best
to
answer
that.
One.
A
Yeah
staffing
costs
are
collected
through
the
annual
operating
fee
paid
by
the
regulated
businesses.
So
if
the
council
decides
to
expand
the
program
and
allow
it
the
second
locations,
the
equity
applicants
or
the
equity
businesses,
then
we
would
definitely
have
to
evaluate
our
staffing
plan
and
we
would
go
back
to
full
council
on
that.
We
aren't
proposing
anything
at
this
time
because
we
don't
know
how
the
city
council
will
vote
or
if
they'll
make
changes
to
our
recommendations.
A
I
B
I'm
not
I
understand
if
you
don't
have
this
information,
I'm
just
curious.
It's
not
specifically
a
land
use
matter,
but
it
is
relevant
in
making
this
decision
do.
We
have.
A
Wendy
swazi
division
of
cannabis
regulation
police.
Again
we
aren't
pred
or
we
aren't
doing
any
kind
of
estimates
on
revenue
again.
It
still
depends
on
what
council
will
determine
how
we
proceed
forward
as
to
any
kind
of
expansion
of
our
program
again.
That
will
also
go
to
full
council
after
the
recommendations
are
made.
N
Thank
you
chair
good
evening,
everyone,
excellent
staff,
presentation,
jonathan,
thank
you.
That
was
really
really
terrific.
I
have
a
question
for
staff,
which
is:
could
you
talk
briefly
about
what
an
equity
applicant
is
and
why
they
are
differentiated
in
the
ordinance.
M
Good
evening,
commissioner,
young
michelle
mcgurk
from
the
city
manager's
office,
so
an
equity
applicant,
is
someone
who,
in
hopefully
in
their
life
experience,
had
experienced
disproportionate
harm
by
cannabis,
prohibition
and
the
war
on
drugs.
So
the
cannabis
industry
is
largely,
you
know
almost
90
percent
white,
it's
not
it's
significantly
male
dominated
industry.
So
many
of
the
folks
who
were
disproportionately
harmed
by
arrests
during
the
years
of
cannabis
prohibition.
M
This
equity
programs
are
designed
to
give
them
an
opportunity
to
become
entrepreneurs
potentially
or
become
employees
in
this
new
industry,
and
so
we
have
a
def.
We
have
some
defined
criteria
that
we've
set
out
to
update
in
the
ordinance
for
equity
owners,
as
well
as
for
equity
employees.
Should
the
city
decide
to
do
a
workforce
development
program
down
the
road
so
for
equity
owners
they
would
be
required
to
be
san
jose
residents.
M
They
would
be
required
to
live
in
either
a
metropolitan
transportation,
commission
equity,
priority
census
tract
that's
rated
high,
higher
or
highest
priority
under
mtc's
equity,
priority
community
program
or
in
one
of
the
city's
former
strong
neighborhoods
initiative,
neighbors
neighborhoods,
so
kind
of
gives
you
a
sense
of
the
city
that
there's
a
lot
of
overlap
between
those
two
maps
but
kind
of
gives
you
a
sense
of
what
portions
of
the
city
that
would
be,
and
then
we
have
a
checklist
of
things
that
would
be
required
and
and
there's
a
variety
of
factors.
M
It
could
be
that
if
someone
was
had
a
cannabis,
arrest
or
conviction
in
their
past,
it
could
be
that
they
are
had
a
parent
or
sibling
or
child
who
was
arrested
or
had
a
cannabis
conviction
in
their
past
and
that
could
have,
you
know,
impacted
their
family.
M
It
could
include
I'm
trying
to
think
another
factor
that
we
are
recommending.
Adding
to.
The
ordinance
is
individuals
who
were
survivors
of
domestic
violence,
sexual
assault
or
human
trafficking
related
to
working
in
the
cannabis
industry
and
then
for
owners.
One
of
the
factors
that's
another
ore
is
somebody.
M
Who's
worked
for
two
years
in
the
local
cannabis
industry
in
san
jose,
so
perhaps
somebody
who's
worked
and
that
could
going
back
to
2009,
so
they
could
have
worked
legal
in
the
legal
industry,
regulated
industry
or
in
one
of
the
former
unregulated
cannabis
businesses.
But
those
are
the
kind
of
the
criteria
that
we're
looking
at.
So
hopefully
that
gives
you
a
picture
and
and
what
the
goals
are.
N
Thank
you.
That
was
a
great
explanation.
I
I'm
very
supportive
of
that
idea.
I
think
to
allow
folks
that
have
been
negatively
impacted
by
the
war
on
drugs
to
participate
is
terrific,
and
I
think
it's
also
really
good
that
it
encourages
local
ownership
of
cannabis
businesses,
rather
than
just
the
large
large
large
businesses
that
might
be
nationwide.
B
You
know
I
will
go
ahead
and
second
that
motion,
but
commissioner
ornelas
wise
is
one
and
asked
a
question.
I
just
saw
that
so
commissioner
losweis
go
ahead.
Yeah.
D
I
have
some
questions
and
concerns.
I
know.
Obviously
there
it
seemed
from
the
staff
report
that
the
intent
to
bring
this
forward
was
because
there
was
an
over
concentration
of
you
know
this.
These
cannabis
just
still
places
in
district
7
and
district
3.,
and
so
I'm
just
wondering
you
know
if
we
allow
them
to
have
a
second
location,
but
yet
allow
them
to
have
I
mean
that
that
they're
still
gonna
be
highly
concentrated
in
district
7,
because
then
you'll
allow
them
to
exist
in
here
like
delivery.
Only
is
that
correct.
K
Yeah,
so
the
concern
around
concentration
was
primarily
around
the
storefronts,
where
there's
a
public,
visible
component,
where
there's
not
a
visible
component.
Honestly,
they
look
like
a
warehouse.
You
would
not
know
that
it
was
a
cannabis
business
other
than
maybe
there's
more
security
around,
but
you
wouldn't
know
right
they
blend
in.
So
the
real
concern
was
the
ones
where
you.
K
Storefront,
there's
a
sign:
there's
customers
going
in
and
out
and
they're
all
packed
in
one
area.
So
so
that's
why
we
really
were
trying
to
address
that
concern
around
the
storefronts
and
not
so
much
the
industrial
type
businesses
just
because
they're
pretty
inconspicuous.
D
D
That
brings
me
to
another
point,
one
of
the
things
that
said
that
you
wanted
to
eliminate
these
in
high
crime
areas,
which
I
think
is
fantastic,
but
you
excluded
the
downtown
core
area,
and
I
kind
of
wanted
to
know
why,
because
high
crime
area
is
a
high
crime
area,
I
think
that
there's
I
mean
I
don't
know
exactly
what
the
map
of
downtown
core
looks
like
if
there's
areas
of
downtown
that
are
not
high
crime,
then
maybe
it's
okay,
but
I
I
I
just
kind
of
want
to
understand
why
the
downtown
core,
if
it's
high
crime,
it's
high
crime,
why
was
it
excluded.
K
Yeah
there's
a
couple
reasons,
so
just
so,
you
know
the
police
there's
a
couple
police
fees
that
cover
most
of
downtown
and
in
most
years
those
are
both
in
the
over
20
crimes.
So
you
know
downtown
is
a
little
bit
of
a
different
animal.
K
You
know,
given
the
density,
I
think
to
your
point
actually,
when
you've
got
a
lot
more
people
in
one
area,
you're
gonna
see
more
crime
and
there
was
a
very
strong
desire
from
council
and
when
we
checked
in
with
the
ced
committee
as
well
to
allow
these
downtown
actually
our
first,
you
know
we
first
thing
we
took
to
the
ced
committee
was
showing
hey:
let's
do
this
20
crime
and
the
feedback
we
got
was
we
really
do
want
opportunities
for
these
businesses
downtown.
K
So
there
was
just
no
way
to
keep
that
20
percent
crime
coverage
on
downtown
and
also
allow
businesses
downtown,
they're,
just
kind
of
mutually
exclusive,
so
the
desire
that
we
got
the
recommendation
the
direction
we
got
from
the
committee
was
to
go
ahead
and
not
have
that
downtown
and
again
from
a
planning
standpoint.
You
know
we
were
supportive
of
that.
In
that
again,
you
know,
downtowns
aren't
like
anywhere
else.
They
are
more
compact.
There
are
more
people,
it
is
normal
to
kind
of
treat
downtown
a
little
bit
differently.
D
Yeah
I
recently
just
like
the
other
day.
I
took
a
walk
downtown
and
obviously
I
saw
a
lot
of
vacancy
there.
So
obviously
we
need
to
bring
you
know
more
businesses
there,
but
there
was,
I
saw
in
the
staff
report
some
big
concerns
with
you
know
the
future
of
the
families
and
youth
a
lot
of
the
youth
and
trash.
D
So
you
know,
of
course
you
know
I.
I
know
it
seems
like
you,
collaborate
with
the
police
department
to
really
condition
these
projects
and-
and
you
only
have
so
much
power
policing
power-
I
mean,
of
course
I
would
like
to
see
you
know
more
public
outdoor
trash
cans,
extra
lighting-
you
know,
maybe
public
art,
you
know
anything
to
beautify
the
landscape.
D
You
know
I
mean
really
to
add
limit
the
hours
of
operation
and
you
know
when
I
think
of
of
something
like
this
going
into
a
local
shopping
center.
I
I
kind
of
or
a
commercial
center
I
think
about
when
I
was
a
teenager
at
andrew
hill,
high
school
and
walking
down
the
street,
like
all
the
kids,
typically
walk,
and
then
you
pass
a
7-eleven
and
all
those
little
stores
there.
D
So
my
concern
is
that
you
know
that
radius
right
I
mean
I
don't
know
I
I
know
that
you've
increased
the
setback
or
you
know
the
the
distance
from
a
school
or
sensitive
area,
and
I
appreciate
that,
of
course,
I
I
just
you
know,
hope
that
you're
a
little
bit
more
sensitive
to
to
where
those
those
pedestrian
paths
from
a
local
school,
a
junior
high,
a
high
school.
D
Those
are
all
obviously
some
concerns
right.
Let
me
think
of
what
other
questions
I
had
so
just
to
be
clear,
because
you're
going
to
allow
the
change,
the
ones
in
the
industrial
area,
mainly
in
district
7,
will
continue,
but
just
delivery
only
is
that
correct.
D
K
Yeah
and
I'll
share:
why
why
we
we
the
collective
we
landed
on
this
recommendation
after
going
to
the
ced
committee
a
couple
times
on
this,
and
it's
it's
because
you
know
those
those
businesses
based
on
our
regulations
have
been
put
forced
you
know,
put
in
those
areas
and
have
invested
a
lot
into
their
businesses
in
those
areas.
Many
of
them
have
done
very,
very
expensive,
tenant
improvements.
K
Many
of
them
have
long-term
leases,
for
example,
and
so
we
heard
very
strongly
that
you
know
yours
if
you
make
us
close,
you
know
we're
forfeiting
all
of
this
investment
we
made
at
your
behest.
Essentially
in
these
areas.
K
Allow
us
to
stay
open
so
that
you
know
we
can
kind
of
recoup
those
investments,
and
that
was
the
recommendation
the
committee
meant
went
with
so
so
that
is
the
the
core
reason
as
to
why
we
have
heard
from
some
of
the
businesses
some
may
actually
elect
to
remain
open.
Some
may
not.
I
mean
you
know
it's
up
to
them,
but
I
have
heard
from
a
couple
that
they
may
not
remain
open
in
those
areas,
but
they
did
want
the
ability
to.
A
Unmuted,
am
I
unneeded?
No,
my
screen
is
blinking,
but
I
just
wanted
to
mention
that
around
the
locations
the
cannabis
locations
they
are
required
to
do.
Trash
pickup
have
exterior
lighting
graffiti
removal
can't
have
cannabis
consumption,
there's
no
loitering.
So
there
are
certain
things
that
are
put
in
as
good
neighbor
requirements.
Just
so
you're
aware.
D
Yeah
I
mean
obviously
in
the
downtown
area.
You
would
definitely
need
some,
you
know
sidewalk
steam
cleaning
projects
or
something
to
to
clean
those
areas
up.
Let
me
think
I
I
wrote
a
lot
of
notes,
so
let
me
just
go
through
my
notes
here.
B
B
Going
once
going
twice,
okay,
so
the
reason
I
seconded
commissioner
young's
motion
is,
I
do
have
the
unique
benefit
of
being
intimately
involved
with
the
subject
matter
for
since
san
jose
was
the
the
wild
west
on
the
subject
matter
and-
and
we've
gotten
to
the
point
where
we
are
now
and
in
my
mind
this
is
a
very
natural
evolution
to
where
we
have
to
go,
because
this
is
in
many
ways,
crime
fighting
as
well.
B
I
think
when,
when
you,
when
you
are
create
much
more
control
around
this
market,
I
know
in
my
district
it
it
takes
it
off
of
our
streets
and
puts
it
in
a
format
where
people
have
to
actually
go
through
literal
loops
and
hurdles
by
which
to
access
this
everything
from
cameras
to
photo
identification
to
extensive
chronicling
of
who's
coming
in
and
who's
coming
out,
and
I
think
for
me,
perhaps
the
biggest
reason
that
I
am
very
comfortable
with
this
and
again
I
do
have
the
benefit
of
being
intimately
involved
in
the
subject
matter
from
the
very
genesis
of
it
in
san
jose
and
mind
you.
B
We
are
a
not
just
a
state
model,
but
a
national
model
in
terms
of
how
do
you,
how
to
regulate
marijuana
usage
in
the
city
is
the
fact
that
the
san
jose
police
department
has
been
a
very
intimate
and
vocal
partner
to
me.
That
is
the
most
important
seal
of
approval
here.
It
confirms
what
I've
always
seen
this,
as
this
is
a
way
by
which
to
regulate
something
that
I'll
be
frank
with
you.
I
still
see
levels
of
it
in
my
district,
not
as
much
as
before,
but
we
still
deal
with
it.
B
So
I
think
the
fact
that
the
san
jose
police
department
has
been
intimately
involved
continues
to
be
intimately
involved
is
literally
putting
their
name
on
this.
To
me
is
the
ultimate
sign
that
we
are
moving
in
a
direction
where
we
aren't
just
thinking
of
this
from
a
land
use
policy
standpoint,
but
that
we're
also
thinking
of
this
from
a
public
safety
standpoint.
Look
I'm
the
father
of
three
small
kids
and
I
think
to
your
point.
Commissioners
twice.
B
You
know.
I
want
to
make
sure
that
when
my
kids
are
walking
around
that
the
environment
is
clean,
that
there
is
a
a
level
of
protection
that
is
invested
in
these
sites.
B
That
is
important
to
me,
and
I
know
that
even
in
my
district,
one
of
the
things
I'd
be
very
clear
about
is:
we
need
to
be
tougher
on
crime
and
one
of
the
reasons
I
say
this
is:
I
still
have
to
deal
with
a
level
of
sale
of
illegal
narcotics,
not
not
marijuana,
but
heavier
substances.
That,
in
my
mind
you
know
we.
We
need
to
completely
decimate
the
competitive
market
for
folks
doing
these
things
illegally.
So
that
is
why
I'm
supportive
of
commissioner
young's
motion.
That
is
why
I
made
my
second.
H
Yeah
my
apologies
for
having
technical
difficulties
today,
but
you
know
I
I
am
concerned,
I
realize
there's
a
motion
on
the
floor
and
it's
been
seconded
to
to
to
approve
this,
but
I
am
concerned
about
the
the
disbursement
of
the
centralized
locations
that
we
have
today
today
being
in
industrial
areas,
they're
not
they're,
not
in
our
residential
neighborhoods.
That's
probably
why
crime
is
lower
there,
but
let's
not
forget
that
this
is
still
against
the
law
from
a
federal
level
right.
H
I
have
to
believe
that
that's
part
of
the
reason
that
in
the
enterprise
zones
that
it's
not
allowed
because
from
the
federal
level,
it's
still
against
the
law
to
con,
you
know
to
consume,
possess
or
sell
marijuana.
H
My
other
concern
is
that,
due
to
the
zoning
change,
the
the-
if
I
understood
correctly,
there
will
be
no
conditional
use
permit
required.
Obviously,
and
so
there
will
be
no
reason
to
have
community
input
and,
and
so
these
things
will
get
approved,
dispensaries
retail
establishments
whatever
will
get
approved
without
community
being
aware
of
it,
it'll
just
be
there
and
and
frankly,
as
a
citizen
of
a
resident
of
san
jose.
I
wasn't
even
aware
until
a
week
ago
that
we
were
going
to
be
deciding
on
this.
H
I
think
it's
it's
partly
for
us
to
to
to
weigh,
but
I
think
it's
also
for
the
citizens
of
the
city
to
weigh
in
their
opinions
and
then,
lastly,
the
the
distance
requirement
or
the
distance
going
from
as
a
crow
flight
as
the
crow
flies
to
the
path.
I
think
somebody
said
that
it
was
about
a
half
a
mile,
but
it's
actually
less
than
a
quarter
mile
a
thousand
feet.
H
So
if,
if
I
use
my
reference
points
like
mount
pleasant,
high
school
to
the
east
valley,
ymca,
that's
a
thousand
feet
or
city
hall
to
the
san
jose
state.
Martin
luther
king
jr
library
is
a
thousand
feet.
So
a
thousand
feet's
a
lot
closer
than
we
seem
to
realize,
and
I
think
this
is
a
little
premature
to
be
voting
and
changing
zonings
in
in
the
city
at
this
point
in
time,.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner
garcia.
I
was
going
to
call
for
a
vote,
but
I
just
saw
that
commission
oliveira,
commissioner
oliveria.
Then
we
will
call
for
a
vote.
E
B
D
B
L
D
Outreach
was
really
important
to
me
and
I
did
also
wanted
to
mimic
what
commissioner
garcia
said
in
regards
to
involving
the
community,
and
you
know.
I
know
that
a
lot
of
people
got
hit
hard,
a
lot
of
mom-and-pop
small
businesses
and
they
didn't
have
all
the
money
to
to
do
all
this,
and
yet
they
they
did
comply
with
whatever
dh
or
you
know,
whatever
they
had
to
do
with
the
department
of
environmental
health.
A
lot
of
people
obviously
invest
money
to
make.
D
You
know
on-site
improvements,
so
it's
not
just
these
type
of
businesses
and
then
have
to
walk
away
or
lose
everything.
Sometimes,
and
so
you
know
not.
Everybody
wants
to
go
to
a
store,
and
then
you
know
if
I'm
just
wondering
how
neighboring
businesses
are
going
to
feel
even
if
one
of
those
type
of
businesses
goes
next
to
them
and
how
that's
going
to
affect
them.
You
know
because
some
people
might
then
say
I'm
not
going
to
go
to
that
store.
D
I
typically
go
to
because
I
don't
like
that
business
that
went
in
next
door.
You
know
so
there
will
be
an
impact
to
neighboring
businesses
and
definitely
the
early
public
notification
on
this
is
like
crucial
and
critical.
When
I
worked
for
county
planning,
there
was
a
time
where
I
was
working
with
a
small
restaurant
owner
on
the
east
side
of
san
jose,
really
small
shopping
center.
D
I
think
off
of
mckee
or
something,
and
there
was
a
vacancy
next
door
to
him
and
and
and
there
was
this
pop-up
dispensary
that
just
popped
up
and
it
would
it
got
busted
and
it
got
closed
down
like
within
like
five
days
but
the
the
guy
next
door.
D
He
told
me
he
said
like
in
those
three
days
hundreds
of
people
came
and-
and
you
know
I
think
about
like-
did
it-
have
the
parking
you
know
obviously,
and
then
they
closed
it
down.
But
he
told
me
I
mean
he.
He
was
right
next
door
and
he
told
me,
and
so
in
that
specific
neighborhood
I
mean
that
that
was
used
to
be
like
a
little
bar
and
it
had
a
lot
of
police
activity
and,
and
so
the
neighbors
were
up
in
arms
about
it.
So
early
public
notification
is
critical.
D
B
And
I
agree,
comment
short
and
less
wise.
I
think
that's
why
it
is
important
to
have
these
frameworks
and
the
council
will
also
get
the
chance
to
weigh
in
on
the
broader,
and
the
importance
is
that
our
comments
are
also
being
reflected
on
the
record.
So
thank
you
for
that.
All
right,
commissioner,
say
your
hands
still
up
or
is
that
a
new
hand
up.
H
Let
me
take
it
down.
My
apologies
all
right
all
right.
A
D
B
Torrance,
no
young!
Yes!
Yes,
all
right
with
that.
The
emotion
passes
with
garcia,
relax,
wise
and
yeah
and
tauren's
voting
no.
B
I
want
to
thank
you
all
for
weighing
in
and
it
is
a
very
delicate
subject.
I
do
appreciate
everyone
weighing
in,
and
all
of
this
goes
up
to
the
council,
who
has
a
broad,
broader
discretion
in
policy,
and
our
comments
will
be
a
part
of
the
record
and
a
part
of
that
conversation
as
well.
So
thank
you
for
for
that.
All
right
with
that,
we
will
now
go
to
item
six
open
the
general
plan
hearing
2022
cycle
one.
B
We
will
now
go
to
item
seven
general
plan.
Consent
calendar
seems
that
there
are
no
items
for
consent.
Is
that
still
correct
staff.
B
P
All
right
give
me
that
awkward,
second,
to
share
the
right
part
of
my
screen.
Appreciate
that
all
right,
so
my
name
is
jennifer
piosay.
I
am
the
current
planning
project
manager
for
the
north
first
street
urban
village
plan,
and
I
have
a
bit
of
a
lengthy
presentation
and
I'll
try
to
help
guide
you
through
the
multiple
documents
that
we're
going
to
be
talking
about
that
are
part
of
this
approval.
P
But
I
first
want
to
say
a
thank
you
to
the
former
planning
project
manager,
tracy
tamm,
who
brought
this
project
almost
up
to
hearing
before
she
parted
ways
with
the
city.
She
did
amazing
work
with
the
community
for
three
years,
while
we
were
putting
together
and
doing
the
outreach
for
this
plan.
So
I
wanted
to
say
that
before
we
continued
so
item
a
is
the
north
first
street
local
transit
village.
P
Gp21017
is
the
changing
of
general
plan
designations
for
properties
that
are
outside
of
the
urban
village
pp
21
just01
is
for
municipal
code
changes
to
section
20.85,
which
is
the
specific
height
regulations.
North
first
street
falls
under
those
currently
the
village
area,
and
so
we're
making
modifications
to
that
we'll
discuss
those
a
little
bit
later.
P
C21041
is
for
our
rezonings
for
properties
that
are
in
the
urban
village
boundary
and
will
remain
in
the
urban
village
boundary
to
align
with
their
general
plan
designations.
And,
lastly,
c21042
is
rezonings
of
properties
that
are
going
to
be
outside
of
the
village
boundary
to
align
with
their
proposed
general
plan
designations.
P
The
north
first
street
local
transit
village
plan
proposes
land
use
and
land
use
diagram
that
will
allow
for
up
to
250
and
20
new
jobs,
which
is
about
750
000
square
feet
of
new
employment
uses
and
up
to
1
678
residential
units,
and
I
do
want
to
note
that
333
units
have
already
been
entitled
of
that
number.
So
we
have
about
1
345
residential
units
left
for
this
planning
area,
with
the
exception
of
some
affordable
housing
projects
that
comply
with
certain
local
or
state
laws,
residential
and
commercial
projects
will
have
to
an
employment
project.
P
So
the
plan
includes
goals,
standards,
guidelines
and
action
items
to
guide
new
development
and
private
and
public
investment
to
achieve
the
vision
of
the
village
consistent
with
the
general
plan's
major
strategy
through
the
land
use
diagram
and
supporting
policies.
The
plan
guides
where
commercial
and
residential
uses
can
be
built
and
we'll
be
looking
at
that
land
use
diagram
shortly.
P
As
part
of
the
village
planning
process,
the
village
boundary
was
adjusted
to
remove
about
78
of
the
original
132
acres
remaining
leaving
about
56
acres
for
the
village
site.
This
is
based
upon
community
feedback
and
we
incorporated
the
likelihood
for
development
repedential,
as
well
as
the
preservation
of
historic
properties,
as
there
are
many
historic
resources
and
potential
historic
resources
within
this
village.
P
The
city
was
able
to
hire
a
consultant
to
help
with
the
work
in
2018..
We
worked
on
existing
research
for
existing
conditions
through
2018
and
hosted
our
first
workshop
in
2019
and
during
2019
between
2019
2020.
There
were
delays
because
of
the
kovic
19
pandemic,
and
we
anticipate
now
that
we're
up
and
running
again
to
have
this
before
the
city
council
in
march,
so
community
engagement.
I
want
to
talk
about
that
briefly.
So,
over
the
course
of
the
project
staff
hosted
three
workshop
series.
We
also
did
an
online
survey.
P
We
hosted
virtual
office
hours
where
anyone
could
drop
in
and
ask
us
questions,
and
we
also
hosted
community
leader
meetings
where
we
invited
folks
from
the
neighborhood
associations
around
the
village
to
provide
feedback.
The
first
workshop
focused
on
the
assets
and
opportunities
around
the
village
area.
P
The
second
workshop
participants
were
asked
to
establish
character
areas
for
three
different
segments
of
the
village
to
build
to
help
guide
the
land
uses
and
the
third
workshop
staff
presented
the
draft
village
plan
and
invited
the
participants
to
join
virtual
breakout
rooms.
Since
it
was
during
the
pandemic
shelter
in
place.
We
did
this
virtually
where
they
can
provide
feedback
and
interactive
format
on
the
village
plan.
P
From
these
community
meetings
online
surveys
feedback
emails,
the
public
had
many
concerns,
many
of
which
are
summarized
on
this
slide:
height
neighborhood,
neighborhood
compatibility,
we're
big
items,
the
desire
for
more
gathering
spaces,
pedestrian
lighting,
larger
sidewalks
and
greenery
around
streets
having
protection
from
displacement
specifically
for
housing.
The
retention
of
small
businesses
also
displacement
concern
issues
with
parking
availability,
as
development
comes
in
impacts
to
schools
and
then
not
enough
police
to
address
illegal
activities
like
lawyering
and
drug
use.
P
So,
as
part
of
the
village
planning
document,
we
establish
a
vision
statement
and
three
guiding
principles
with
the
community.
So
I'm
not
going
to
read
the
entire
thing.
It
was
included
in
the
packet,
but
the
vision
statement
is
around
creating
a
vibrant,
multicultural
well-connected
community
that
supports
local
businesses.
They
want
to
have
amenities
and
provide
housing
opportunities.
P
The
second
guiding
principle
looked
at
creating
a
multicultural
environment,
preserving
historic
assets
within
and
without
the
within
the
village
and
those
that
were
removed
and
encouraging.
Affordable
housing
and
the
last
guiding
principle
was
to
establish
a
well-connected,
safe
and
integrated
multimodal
transportation
system.
P
P
We
are
using
pink
for
this
village
plan
and
so
there's
been
a
significant
removal
of
some
of
the
sites,
many
of
which
have
historic
properties
or
have
existing
entitlements
that
were
approved
recently
or
have
in
developments
that
meet
their
existing
general
plan,
designation
or
the
goals
of
our
general
plan
or
their
existing
single
family
in
large
pockets
that
are
not
likely
to
be
redeveloped
and
will
maintain
their
use,
so
they
won't
accommodate
future
growth
for
the
land
use
on
the
sites
that
are
being
retained
in
the
urban
village.
P
Some
of
these
sites
are
going
to
require
ground
floor
commercial,
which
is
shown
on
this
map,
with
a
red
line,
as
you
can
see
here
along
the
street
frontage
a
little
bit
about
these
land
use,
designation,
the
five
that'll
be
in
this
village,
so
we're
retaining
neighborhood
community
commercial
on
some
of
the
sites.
This
is
a
medium
to
low
intensity,
commercial
designation,
where
it's
usually
neighborhood
serving
commercial
uses
and
small
office.
P
We're
also
proposing
to
have
urban
village
commercial,
be
integrated
into
the
central
portion
of
the
urban
village,
where
more
height
is
being
proposed.
This
is
for
an
intensive
commercial
activity,
so
there
are
larger
buildings,
bigger
footprints
and
taller.
So
it
can.
You
can
envision
mid-rise
office
buildings.
It
could
be
healthcare
facilities,
hotel
ground
floor
serving
commercial,
those
sorts
of
things.
P
P
We
have
one
small
single
family
home,
that's
historic,
that's
actually
stained
in
the
village
boundary
because
it
was
very
awkward
to
remove
it
and
we
didn't
want
to
remove
if
there
were
any
developments
here,
the
likelihood
of
any
sort
of
improvements
to
line
the
frontage.
So
it's
left
in
there,
but
it's
protected.
P
This
can
provide
a
gradual
transition
between
lower
intensity
surrounding
neighborhoods
to
this
medium
intensity,
sort
of
housing
versus
something
that's
like
in
downtown
and
the
allowable
intensities
are
typically
defined
by
the
code,
but
we
have
additional
provisions
in
the
plan
and,
lastly,
there's
transit
residential.
So
this
is
a
high-intensity
residential
designation.
P
P
So
the
plan
contains
an
urban
urban
design
and
place
making
chapter,
and
this
urban
design
strategy
aims
to
provide
guidance
on
architectural
styles
that
relate
to
the
rich
architectural
ambiance
of
the
area
was
very
important
to
the
community
that
new
buildings
integrate
well
and
are
reminiscent,
but
don't
do
not
copy
the
existing
style,
architectural
styles,
ensuring
that
public
art
is
viewable
and
accessible
and
making
a
comfortable
public
realm
building.
On
top
of
that,
the
community
wanted
to
see
gateway
elements
potentially
incorporated
into
the
planning
area
to
help
solidify
the
community
identity.
P
P
They
also
are
interested
in
having
publicly
accessible
plazas
activity,
centers
places
for
folks
to
congregate,
and
that
is
shown
we
have
a
publicly
accessible
paseo
propose
that
could
be
considered
if
private
development
comes
in
in
this
green
sort
of
cross.
Here
we
also
discourage
boxy
and
modern
architecture,
as
it
does
not
relate
to
the
rich
existing
architectural
styles
in
the
village,
and
we
have
standards
around
that.
P
We
are
proposing
the
height
diagram
on
the
right,
which
was
included
in
the
packet
and
so
in
the
central
area.
The
community
made
clear
that
they
would
like
to
see
the
most
intensity,
and
so
that's
where
most
of
the
200
feet
is
proposed
and
then
in
the
neighborhoods
next
to
hyde
park
and
then
dome
it's
down
to
50
feet,
so
it's
kind
of
taller
in
the
center
and
then
goes
down
from
there.
P
So
we're
also,
as
part
of
this,
we
have
to
make
updates
to
municipal
code,
section
20.85.020.
This
was
included
in
the
pocket,
it's
our
specific
height
regulations
and
it
controls
a
lot
of
the
heights
that
are
sites
that
are
in
our
urban
villages
as
well
as
this
area.
There
are
two
specific
call
outs
from
north
first
street
and
they
allow
the
heights
to
be
a
little
bit
different
than
what's
in
the
urban
village
plan,
and
so
what's
typical
practice
is
a
site.
P
P
I
think
in
this
calendar
year
and
we
are
also
controlling
under
this
urban
village
plan
sidewalk
widths,
so
15
foot
required
sidewalks
along
north
first
street.
We
make
sure
to
include
that
we
also
want
street
tree
wells
of
a
certain
size
to
make
sure
we
have
healthy
street
trees
and
then
on
all
other
streets.
We're
wanting
12
foot
sidewalks
with
a
street
treat
well
as
well
to
make
sure
those
are
healthy.
P
P
P
We've
split
them
into
two
separate
ordinance
documents,
just
like
the
general
plan
rezos
to
make
it
easier
to
track.
What's
in
the
village
and
what's
going
to
be
on
the
outside.
P
P
The
only
exception,
as
mentioned
before,
are
certain
projects
like
affordable
housing
projects
that
can
use,
like
perhaps
concessions
or
waivers
to
get
out
of
certain
objective
standards
that
are
in
the
plan
and
commercial
entitlements
can
continue
to
move
forward,
but
they'll
have
to
comply
with
all
of
the
rules.
P
So
I
do
want
to
read
into
the
record
we
received
some
information
two
days
ago
about
we
conducted
as
part
of
this
work,
some
historic
surveys,
and
so
the
third
part
and
final
part
of
this
survey
was
completed
just
very
recently
and
so
the
properties
that
are
circled
down
on
the
bottom,
between
empire
and
hensley
along
first
street
and
yellow
that
have
the
dark
brown
so
they're
fronting
on
north
first
street.
P
These
two
properties
were
evaluated
as
part
of
the
city-wide
historic
resources
survey,
which
was
an
effort
that
started
in
2017
is
wrapping
up
and
north
first.
It
was
part
of
that
and
the
qualified
historic
consultant
evaluated
this
and
determined
that
those
two
buildings
are
candidate
city
landmark
eligible
and
as
such
and
they'll
be
going
and
as
such.
Because
of
that,
we
want
to
remove
these
properties
from
the
village
boundary
to
not
give
a
false
sense
of
the
his
the
redevelopment
potential
through
the
entire
process.
P
P
The
historic
preservation
officer
stated
that
these
properties
would
be
potentially
going
before
the
historic
landmarks
commission
for
consideration,
whether
or
not
to
move
forward
with
that
sometime
this
year,
potentially
april.
P
So
the
rear
of
staff
recommends
that
the
planning
commission
recommend
that
the
city
council
approve
all
of
these
actions
so
considering
the
termination
of
consistency
with
the
final
program
eir
with
the
envision
san
jose
2040
general
plan
and
the
supplemental,
eir
and
addenda
there
too,
in
accordance
with
sequa
and
adopt
two
resolutions
approving
the
following.
The.
B
First,
before
before
you
go
on
jennifer,
because
it
is
quite
long
and
somewhat
redundant,
since
we
all
have
it
in
front
of
us
vera
is,
is
jennifer
required
to
read
the
entire
verbiage
here?
No.
H
She,
no,
she
isn't.
No,
she
is
not,
but
what
I
do
want
to
clarify,
though,
is
that
the
the
candidate,
historic
structures
that
she
was
talking
about,
that
we
were
informed
of
a
couple
of
days
ago
are
the
addresses
are
480
through
490,
north
first
street.
They
were
not
identified,
I
mean
she
looked,
you
know
it
was
on
the
map,
so
any
approval.
B
Okay,
so
maybe
some
gender
for
all
I'll
defer
to
you.
You
don't
have
to
read.
H
Jennifer,
if
I
may
make
a
suggestion,
just
tell
the
commission
that
you
know
what
what
is
on
the
agenda
tell
them
which
numbers
you
know
you
need
to
be
changed
and
otherwise.
H
They
how
they
need
to
change
them.
That
would
be
the
only
thing
that
I
would
suggest.
Otherwise
the
recommendation
is
already
on
the
agenda
and
the
commissioner,
when
they
make
their
motion
can
just
say
you
know,
let's
approve
the
staff
recommendation
on
the
agenda
and
what
jennifer
said
perfect.
P
You
have
these
five
properties
they're
five
total
that
we're
going
to
be
talking
about
I'll,
read
you
to
the
record
so
we'll
do
it
by
apns,
because
the
addresses
are
a
little
inconsistent.
Sometimes
so
the
480
and
490
north
first
are
the
transit.
Res
staff
is
recommending
that
it's
removed
from
the
village,
which
is
going
to
be
a
change
from
item
a
the
first
resolution,
so
gp
21.016.
P
They're
not
going
to
be
contained
in
that
document;
instead,
they
will
be
added
to
item
b,
which
is
gp
21-017
and
they
will
be
proposed
to
be
outside
the
village,
with
a
general
plan,
designation
of
neighborhood,
community,
commercial
and
zoning
designations
of
cp
commercial
pedestrian.
So
that's
the
first
piece.
P
The
second
piece
that's
different
from
the
packet
is
these
back
three
properties.
They
have
apns,
so
assessor's
parcel
number
of
two
four
nine
four
three
zero
five
seven
same
first
number
is
zero.
Five
six
same
first
number
is
zero:
five:
five,
it's
these
three:
they
are
going
to
be
removed
from
item
a
which
is
the
gp7
21.016
added
into
the
g
item
number
two
here
b.
Excuse
me
g
p,
21,
21.017,.
P
P
B
Yeah,
no,
no
and
vera,
we'll
we'll
be
coming
back
to
you
for
a
commercial
break
when
it's
time
to
make
the
motion
so
all
right.
Well,
then,
with
that
I
will
go
ahead
and
open
the
floor
for
commissioner
questions
and
jennifer.
Thank
you
so
much
for
your
presentation.
B
D
I
I
I
really
enjoyed
the
presentation.
This
was
pretty
complex
and
you
made
it
really
easy
to
understand.
So.
Thank
you,
jennifer.
I
also
really
liked
how
you
address
neighborhood
compatibility
as
a
neighborhood
concern.
I
really
liked
the
design
standards
and
how
they
met.
D
P
It
depends
on
the
brown
floor,
so
it
can
be
around
18
to
25
stories,
but
it
depends
on
what
your
florida
floor
is
as
well
as
your
ground
floor
and,
if
there's
any
sort
of
like
ground,
any
parking
podium.
That
kind
of
offsets
that,
but
I
would
say
around
18
ish
stories
and
I
know
a
couple
other
planners
are
on
the
call.
If
they
want
to
correct
me.
F
D
Good,
so
I
wanted
to
know
I
mean
you,
you
definitely
address
the
communities
concerned
about
neighborhood
compatibility
with
historic
preservation,
sidewalk
pedestrian
friendly.
But
how
are
you
all
addressing
displacement
concerns
for
existing
small
businesses
and
residents
that
are
long-term
in
the
area.
P
Sure
so,
unfortunately,
it
falls
out
of
the
scope
of
the
work
that
we
do
here.
Part
of
the
partnership
we
have
with
our
housing
department
and
with
our
office
of
economic
development,
who
are
the
driving
forces
behind
residential
displacement
and
then
business
displacement
preventing
those
things
we
have
to
partner
with
them
and
the
programs
that
they
have
in
place.
Michael,
I
don't
know
if
you
have
anything
you
want
to
add
to
that.
F
Yeah
I
mean
there
are
existing
programs
related
to
displacement
the
housing
department,
the
city
has
that
the
housing
department
led
when
you're,
redeveloping
or
displacing
people
from
housing.
But
it's
this
is
like
a.
This
is
a
large
city-wide
issue
and
so
couplings
are
going
on
one
there's
a
displacement
program
going
on
and
a
displacement
program
going
on
for
businesses
in
alum
rock
and
then
as
part
of
the
five
wounds.
F
Urban
village
plan
updates,
there's
going
to
be
a
really
intensive
sort
of
step,
study
and
then
development
of
a
strategy
related
to
business,
displacement,
small
business
displacement
and
you
know,
people
displacement
from
their
homes.
So
I
think
the
thought
is
at
this
point.
Those
would
those
those
studies
could
be
the
the
sort
of
the
framework
or
or
sort
of
be
used
to
develop
a
more
of
a
city-wide
approach.
F
C
F
To
a
growth
area
or
an
urban
village,
but
throughout
the
city
where
displacement
is
either
occurring
or
is
anticipated
to
occur,
that's
for
displacement
as
it
relates
to
people
from
their
homes,
though,.
F
They're
doing
a
anti-displacement
business
program
in
alum
rock
park
and
then
under
the
five
wounds,
updated
planning
process,
there's
going
to
be
additional
work
done
related
to
this
business
displacement
there
that
could
provide.
You
know,
strategies
that
could
that
potentially
could
be
expanded
to
be
a
city-wide
approach.
P
I
do
want
to
add
as
well
that
many
of
the
properties
you're,
seeing
I
don't
see
my
cursor
with
the
light
with
the
pink
here
that
are
a
lot
narrower
there's
a
lot
of
existing
smaller
businesses
that
occupy
these
historic
homes.
And
so
there
is
a
reality
that
designating
them
with
lower
heights
and
as
neighborhood
community
commercial
they're,
more
likely
to
be
retained
in
place.
And
given
that
they
have
many
of
historic
designations.
They're
more
likely
to
be
retained
in
place.
D
Yeah,
I
I
would
just
like
to
see
like
maybe
when,
when
something
gets
approved
in
the
in
this
area,
have
some
sort
of
condition
of
approval
that
would
allow
these
tenants
to.
You
know
somehow
be
able
to
come
back
yeah.
So
thanks.
B
And
you
know
what
I'll
do
I
apologize?
Colleagues,
I
first
of
all
commissioner
canshon
young,
but
before
I
get
to
you
chairman
oversight,
I
did
not
open
it
up
for
public
comment,
so
what
I
will
do
is
open
it
up
for
public
comment
and
then
allow
for
commissioners
kenshon
young
after
the
fact
to
the
public.
I
apologize.
I
B
Okay,
perfect:
do
we
have
any
public
comment.
A
Yes,
first
speaker
is
todd.
You
have
two
minutes
to
speak
when
I
meet
your
device.
G
Hello,
I
attended
every
workshop
and
meeting
and
reviewed
the
61
page
draft
and
have
several
questions
still
number
one.
It
appears
that
a
lot
of
the
village
on
the
west
side
of
first
street
has
been
removed
from
the
plan.
I'd
like
to
know
why,
and
what
is
the
zoning
for
these
areas,
particularly
the
heights?
G
G
G
G
Seven,
what
parking
guidelines
will
be
in
place?
Will
there
be
any
additional
parking
that
could
be
phased
out
in
conjunction
with
success
of
the
plan?
Number
eight.
Can
there
be
any
designation
of
fees
or
taxes
to
specifically
enhance
existing
neighborhood
parks
and
the
guadalupe
river
park?
Nine,
any
planned
lighting
improvements.
G
I.E,
historical
lighting
and
what
about
the
setbacks
and
the
street
trees
with
the
sb-35
waivers,
and
I
guess
that's
all
I
have
time
for
I
had
a
few
more
questions.
B
G
Hi,
thank
you
for
the
time
and
all
the
effort
that
everyone
on
the
staff
has
put
together.
I
echo
my
concerns
on
what
happened
to
the
west
side,
plots
that
have
been
removed
out
and
quite
I'm
confused.
I
just
don't
understand
what
happened
with
that
and
is
currently
zoned
120
feet,
and
that
would
be
the
streets
from
rankin
air
hawthorne
way
and
clayton.
G
Maybe
if
some
clarity
could
be
why
those
particular
west
side
of
north
first
was
taken
out,
that
would
be
great
another.
I
wanted
to
know
if
there
is
going
to
be
an
increase
in
traffic
mitigation,
some
traffic
calming
because
of
the
impact
of
the
village
on
residential
area,
particularly
the
shortcuts
that
are
being
used
to
come
off
coleman.
Coming
from
santa
teresa
ryland
street
down
north
san
pedro
crossing
hawthorne,
going
down
hawthorne
way
over
into
japan
town
using
empire.
G
We've
got
a
huge
flow
of
traffic
coming
through
there.
What
kind
of
mitigation
is
in
this
plan
to
work
to
you
know,
calm
that
traffic
for
us
and
also
from
jackson
coming
across
heading
west.
In
addition,
also
I'd
like
to
know
what
kind
of
community
outreach
will
we
have
moving
forward
once
this
is
moved
on
to
the
council,
how
many
what's
the
process
and
how
many
of
you
know
for
each
new
building
that'll
be
approved
once
this
transit
village
is
approved,
what
will
be
the
process
in
terms
of
community
outreach?
G
H
Yes,
thank
you.
I
just
want
to
say
that
I
and
many
of
my
neighbors
were
very
happy
when
we
saw
the
plan
that
the
buildings
along
first
street
at
empire
were
reduced
to
100
from
120
feet
to
50
feet
near
our
residential
area,
and-
and
now
this
evening
I
heard
jennifer
say
that
it's
partially
50
feet
and
partially
120
feet.
So
I
would
like
to
know
more
about
that
and
very
much
do
appreciate
that
you
did
listen
to
our
concerns.
H
The
other
thing
that
I
would
like
to
know
is
about
the
homes
that
are
in
pink
purple
on
the
map
that
are
considered
more
historical
homes.
I'd
like
to
know
what
that
means
is
that
pertains
to
those
homes
and
additionally,
for
these
buildings,
I'd
like
to
know
what
kind
of
parking
construction
will
be
required,
because
many
of
our
residential
streets
in
the
area
are
already
highly
congested
with
with
parking.
So
thank
you
very
much
like
yield
the
rest
of
my
time.
A
Hi,
thank
you.
I
think
the
previous
public
commenters
asked
all
the
questions
I
had
and
I
would
love
to
know
the
answers
to
those
as
well.
I
want
to
reiterate,
I
appreciate
the
taking
into
consideration.
A
A
J
Okay,
good
evening,
my
name
is
hip
nguyen
and
I
want
to
make
my
comment
very
brief.
I
own
property
on
the
north
first
street
corridor
and
I
appreciate
the
fact
that
there's
been
a
lot
of
community
input
on
behalf
of
the
work
by
the
staff.
I
think
that
the
staff
have
come
up.
A
L
H
H
The
first
street
property
area
has
the
additional
benefit
of
having
light
rail
and
bus
lines
and
because
of
the
available
transit,
it's
the
perfect
location
for
high
density
housing
and
new
job
growth.
I
hope
the
commission
will
approve
the
plan,
as
I
think
it
will
improve
the
area
as
well.
Thank
you.
A
O
Okay
thanks,
my
name
is
john
thompson
and
thank
you
jennifer
for
the
the
presentation
and
the
detail
so
much
appreciated,
I'm
also
a
property
owner
in
the
in
the
downtown
urban
village
area,
and
I
think
I
believe
that
everything
that
the
staff
has
come
up
with
is
is
sensible.
It's
a
great
plan
it
I
I
like
how
it's
going
to
balance
housing
and
job
production
which
are
both
important
for
for
this
location,
and
I
just
wanted
to
state.
I
encourage
the
planning
commission
to
approve
this
plan.
O
A
Oh
sorry
about
that,
I
was
not
muted.
We
have
nancy
nancy,
go
ahead
and
meet
your
device
hi.
Can
you
hear
me?
Yes,
we
can
okay,
we
we
have
traffic
concerns
and
my
husband
will
be
speaking.
Thank
you.
H
Hi
wade
hall
so
in
the
vendo
neighborhood
san
pedro
street
parallels
first
street
and
is
used
as
a
cut
through
and
all
the
feeder
streets.
H
Hobson
hawthorne
fox
they're,
all
impacted
heavily,
so
we've
been
working
with
d.o.t
for
the
past
15
years
on
mitigating
traffic
and
we've
been
working
against
all
these
odd
things
like
they
block
highway,
87
and
then
they'd,
send
everyone
down
san
pedro
and
now
waze
is
here
and
wade
said
everyone
down
san
pedro
using
the
feeder
streets.
So
we
need
to
have
an
understanding
what
the
intention
is
for
managing
the
traffic.
It's
insanity
in
the
small
neighborhood,
very
small
pocket
neighborhood.
H
The
amount
of
cars
that
go
through
daily
is
completely
insane
and
then
the
parking
we.
I
don't
personally
have
a
parking
issue
we
park
on
our
property,
but
I
look
at
the
streets.
There's
no
parking
on
the
streets
and
this
new
kelsey
project
they're
putting
in
is
maybe
I
don't
know,
50
units
100
units
with
zero
parking
or
maybe
18
parking
spaces
with
their
intention.
H
So
I'm
I'm
I'm
leery
of
the
parking
intentions
you
guys
have,
because
when
our
transit
corridor,
everyone
thinks
there
will
be
no
parking
issues
and
they
no
way
that's
the
case.
Maybe
in
10
years
we'll
have
tesla,
auto
cabs
and
life
will
be
good,
but
that's
not
now.
Okay,
thank
you.
L
Good
evening,
chair
bonilla
members
of
the
commission,
my
name
is
eric
shaneauer
and
I
have
lived
in
the
neighborhood
here
for
34
years
and
first
I
want
to
thank
tracy
and
jennifer
and
michael
for
their
extensive
community
engagement.
I
attended
all
of
the
sessions,
both
in
person
and
the
virtual
meetings,
and
I
think
you
get
a
sense
that
there's
been
a
lot
of
input
and
that
the
staff
has
responded
to
that.
L
As
you
know,
I
come
before
you
regularly
asking
you
to
support
higher
density
development
and
higher
intensity
development
in
other
people's
neighborhood.
Well
tonight
I
asking
you
to
please
support
high
density
development.
In
my
neighborhood
this
is
the
appropriate
corridor.
L
L
Yes,
thank
you
chair
and
commissioners.
I
just
have
a
quick
question
of
seeing
that
a
substantial
portion
of
the
property
that
was
removed
from
the
from
the
village
is
held
by
the
county
if
there's
any
way
that
there
can
be
collaboration
with
the
county
relative
to
development
on
the
west
side
of
1st
street,
you
know,
given
the
great
effort
that's
been
shown
so
far
in
terms
of
compatibilities
and
step
downs
and
all
the
rest
of
it,
I'm
just
curious
if
the
if
staff
can
comment
on
that
this
evening.
Thank
you.
A
And
that
concludes
the
list
of
speakers.
B
P
All
right,
so
this
is
in
your
packet,
I'm
showing
the
proposed
zoning
district.
So
one
of
the
questions
asked
was
about
properties
that
were
removed
so
for
context.
Here.
P
Red
line,
pink
line
means
in
village,
blue
line
means
now
out
to
village,
but
was
in
the
village
boundary
originally
so
we'll
go
through
the
properties,
we'll
scroll
down
through
the
maps
and
talk
about
the
proposed
zoning
and
then
the
general
plan
designations
and
why
they
were
removed.
So
staff
removed
this
parking.
This
is
a
parking
lot,
it
might
serve
the
sheriff's
station
and
what-
and
this
is
the
vta
rail
yard
and
sorry-
my
cat
was
just
making
a
lot
of
noise.
P
In
the
background
I
apologize,
so
this
is
being
removed
and
actually
designated
public
quasi-public,
because
it's
part
of
the
entire
area,
where
valley
transportation,
authority
and
the
county
have
their
master
plan
area
and
they're
not
intending
to
use
this
for
something
outside
of
their
mission.
So,
instead
we
are
designating
it
for
the
public,
quasi-public
use
and
as
such,
the
height
that
will
govern
here
is
going
to
be
the
if,
if
they've
developed,
something
that
we
have
any
land
use
authority
over,
it
would
be
the
height
in
our
municipal
code,
which
is
65
feet.
P
P
The
next
property
in
question
is
here.
This
is
mission
street.
This
is
the
former
city
hall
site.
This
is
part
of
this
santa
clara
county's
civic
master
plan.
We
are
proposing
to
align
this
and
designate
it
public
kaiser
public,
because
it's
part
of
the
county's
master
plan
area
and
we
coordinated
actively
with
the
county.
They
don't
want
to
be
part
of
the
urban
village
plan
as
they
plan
to
develop
this
as
part
of
their
mission.
If
that
changes
in
the
future,
things
could
always
be
amended
in
this
plan.
P
If
they
wanted
to
develop
this
as
a
housing
project
than
they
would
be
under
our
and
it
wasn't
for
their
mission,
they
would
be
under
our
land
use
authority,
but
as
such,
we're
proposing
public
plaza
public
65
feet
if
they
were
under
our
land
use
regulations
as
they're,
not
it's
up
to
the
county.
What
they
want
to
do.
There
was
a
question
about
coordination
with
the
county
on
future
development.
P
P
This
is
owned
by
the
city
and
the
city
has
decided
to
build
some
temporary,
affordable
housing
or
supportive
housing
on
what
we
call
lot
e
and
as
we
coordinated
with
our
office
of
economic
development,
and
they
are
not
planning
to
do
anything,
that's
under
our
that
where
they
would
need
to
pull
permits
from
us
under
our
land
use
authority
like
pull
a
development
permit
to
build
a
housing
project
for
a
market
rate
or
as
a
private
developer,
so
we
removed
them
from
the
urban
village
boundary
as
such.
P
F
P
Awesome
great,
we
have
another
property
here
in
green.
We
are
aligning
this
to
agriculture.
It
is
being
changed
to
support
the
open
space
use
that
already
exists
on
the
site
garden
to
table.
If
anyone
is
familiar
operates
here,
they
operate
a
great
local
farm.
I
think
they
have
bees.
Now
it's
really
cool,
but
if
you
haven't
visited
please
go,
but
we
are
aligning
that
and
removing
them
from
the
villages.
We
do
not
anticipate
any
sort
of
growth
to
be
here.
P
It's
also
a
little
awkward
because
there's
the
the
fly
up
here
on
this
bridge
and
it's
a
budding
single
family
and
has
strange
access
back
here.
So
we
didn't
feel
that
growth
would
be
accommodated
down
here,
that
you
can
follow
the
pink
line,
these
properties
that
are
all
in
this
light,
yellow
and
then
here
in
this
light
orange
they're
removed
from
the
boundary
a
lot
of
them.
There
are
some
here
like
on
the
corner,
there's
a
small
business.
These
are
all
existing
single-family
homes.
P
Similarly,
with
these
properties
they're
being
designated
commercial
and
this
as
well,
this
is
a
single
family.
We
don't
anticipate
any
sort
of
redevelopment
because
of
historic
status
and
that's
going
to
apply
to
a
lot
of
these
properties
moving
down
a
lot
of
them
that
are
being
removed.
They
just
have
some
sort
of
historic
significance
or
community
and
significance,
and
so
we
do
not
want
to
put
them
in
the
village
boundary
to
put
a
signal
to
the
market
that
they
are
sites
for
redevelopment.
P
This
is
ryland
park.
It
was
included
within
the
original
boundary.
It
is
a
developed
city
park
that
is
used
by
the
community.
It
is
not
planned
to
be
torn
down
and
to
have
other
things
built
on
it,
so
it's
been
excluded
here.
These
properties
are
existing
apartments
and
condos
that
are
within
the
boundary.
P
We
have
a
lot
of
that
in
the
southern
portion
of
this
village,
mostly
south
of
hensley,
that
we've
excluded
from
the
boundary,
because
they're
established
newer
developments
and
by
newer
I
mean
like
maybe
the
90s
2000s
they're,
not
really
going
to
go
anyplace
so
including
them
to
accommodate
new
growth
is
fairly
unrealistic
in
our
opinion,
and
so
we've
removed
them.
P
So
I
think
I've
answered
that
question
and
then
the
heights
for
all
of
these
properties.
That
was
the
last
piece
they
would
be
controlled
by
the
municipal
code
and
so,
for
example,
like
these
properties.
Here
between
hawthorne
and
clayton,
for
example,
there
are
going
to
be
commercial,
pedestrian,
zoning,
so
neighborhood,
community,
commercial,
general
plan,
the
height
and
the
municipal
code.
That's
allowed
is
50
feet,
and
so,
if
these
properties
were
to
be
redeveloped,
they
would
have
to
comply
with
our
municipal
code
regulations,
our
general
plan
regulations.
P
They
would
also
comply
with
our
city-wide
design
standards
and
guidelines
which
contain
setback
requirements.
They
would
have
to
and
step
back
requirements
and
compatibility
measures
and
just
general
massing
and
shaping
of
the
buildings
to
make
them
interesting
to
make
them
compatible.
So
they
would
comply
with
all
existing
ranks
that
we
have.
P
Let's
see,
I
talked
about
the
police
parking
lot,
which
is
lockey,
so
there
was
a
question
about
oversaturation
of
affordable
housing
projects
in
this
village.
That
is
not
something
that's
under
the
control
and
purview
of
the
urban
village
plan.
I
believe
housing
the
housing
department
is
working
on
a.
P
F
No
notice
of
available
ability,
yeah
it's
their
citing
plan
and
they're
sort
of
setting
criteria,
different
criteria,
including
locational
criteria
for
projects
that
would
be
prioritized
for
funding.
So.
D
F
F
P
F
Yeah
so
they're
looking
at
issues
of
of
where
to
invest
in
the
city
which,
as
a
criteria,
which
is
many
cases,
areas
of
the
city
that
are
of
high
resource,
more
affluent
areas
of
the
city,
with
good
access
to
jobs
and
schools,
with
high
test
scores
and
blah
blah.
So
that's
kind
of
where,
where
their
focus
one.
F
Focuses
in
putting
housing
is
in
those
areas,
so
that's
part
of
the
citing
policy
that
I
think
council's
already
approved.
If
I
recall.
P
Great,
and
so
as
far
as
the
so
the
housing
department
has
this
policy
that's
gone
through,
but
it's
only
about
where
city
funds
are
being
allocated
for
what
projects
based
upon
having
them
be
dispersed,
but
this
has
nothing
to
do
with
private,
affordable
housing.
If
they're
not
seeking
the
funding,
I
don't
believe
that
they
are
under
those
provisions
and
I
do
not
believe
there's
anything
we
can
do
under
our
land
use
controls.
I
see
very
shaken
your
head
where
we
can
actually
control
that.
So
I
just
want
to
make
that
clear.
There's.
L
B
Jennifer,
thank
you.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
for
that.
Jennifer
appreciate
your
your
your
feedback
to
these
questions.
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
now
and
move
it
over
to
to
my
colleagues.
I
just
saw
commissioner
torrance's
hand
go
up,
so
we
will
go
cantrell,
young
torrance
and
then
caballero.
Commissioner
cantrell
you've
got
the
floor.
I
Great,
I
I
really
want
to
say
to
the
city
staff
that
first
thank
you.
You
guys
do
amazing
work.
I
I
think
what
you
do
here
is
help
the
city
move
forward
and
we
all
want
to
see
more
housing.
We
all
want
to
see
more
jobs,
but
I
think
good
planning
should
also
protect
excess,
existing
business-
and
I
I
know
that's
not
in
your
purview
per
se,
but
until
city
council
finds
a
way
to
try
to
treat
existing
business
equitably.
I
It's
hard
to
approve
these
things
for
me
personally,
it's
just
hard
to
get
behind
something
that
may
hurt
small
business
unnecessarily.
I
really
respect
that
the
property
owners
would
love
to
be
able
to
develop
their
properties.
I'd
love
to
see
that,
but
until
we
learn
what
equity
means
and
enforce
equity
for
everyone,
these
things
leave
people
behind
too
many
people,
but
I
I
think
we
need
to
really
consider
that
when
we're
considering
making
these
large-scale
changes
so
with
that
I'll
I'll
return
it
to
the
floor.
N
Thank
you,
chair,
I'd
like
to
echo,
commissioner.
Cantrell's
comments
really
commend
the
staff
on
this.
On
this
plan
I
read,
I
read
the
plan,
it's
really
well
written.
I
found
that.
As
I
had
questions
I
would
read
another
page.
My
question
would
be
answered.
It's
just
very
well
done
and
I
think
there
was
a
lot
of
outreach
to
the
community
and
I
know
that's
not
easy,
so
I
I
commend
the
staff
on
that
as
well
and
and
the
residents
I
do
have
just
a
couple
questions.
N
One
is
so
on
the
original,
the
original
boundary
of
the
village.
It
appears
to
me
that
north
second
street
some
properties
on
the
west
side
of
that
were
included
in
the
village
boundary
and
and
they
are
not
currently,
I
was
just
wondering
why
that
change
was
made.
N
P
N
Right,
the
properties
on
north
second
street,
even
up
around
burton
and
that
area
up
by
880.
P
L
N
Okay,
great,
I
did.
I
did
walk
this
area
too.
I
spent
a
couple
afternoons
walking.
This
whole
area
was
really
interesting.
The
vendome
neighborhood
in
particular.
I
I
commend
you
to
go
through
that
neighborhood.
If
you
haven't,
had
a
chance,
there's
a
lot
of
really
interesting
historical
buildings
and
architectural
styles
there.
N
P
P
They
know
that
there's
a
need
in
the
front
so
right
here,
there's
like
an
opportunity.
Potentially,
this
was
also
something
that
we
talked
to
the
residents
on
2nd
street,
in
particular.
There's
something
similar
here
on
the
top,
which
is
like
preferred
popo.
You
know
privately
owned
and
maintained,
but
publicly
accessible,
but
the
preferred
park
location.
This
is
kind
of
generally,
where
it
is,
but
it's
a
floating
designation.
P
N
Okay,
great
and
then
the
the
paseo
that
you're
showing
down
on
is
that
miller
and
asbury.
There
was
some
mention
in
the
plan
about
maybe
you
know
changing
that
to
more
residentially
oriented
and
limiting
vehicle
traffic
there,
which
I
think
would
be
terrific.
Could
you
just
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
that
area
and
what
kind
of
the
vision
for
that
is.
P
Those
streets
were
also
chosen
because
they
wouldn't
really
impact
the
transportation
network
in
the
way
that
they
aren't
really
dead,
ends
to
other,
like
other
streets,
there's
more
of
a
curving
sort
of
undulating
network
down
south,
and
it's
really
the
heart
of
the
village,
and
so
we
envisioned
this
is
where
more
intensity
is
going.
P
The
community
wanted
to
see
more
of
that
intensity,
and
so,
if
there
was
a
real
mix
of
uses
with
both
higher
intensity,
residential
and
higher
intensity
commercial,
this
could
be
the
perfect
place
to
see
publicly
accessible
open
spaces
as
well
as
this
paseo.
But
it's
it's
an
action
item,
something
that
we're
envisioning
in
the
plan
and
if
it
comes
to
fruition,
that
would
be
great.
A
Thank
you
chair
and
thank
you
jennifer
wow
and
your
team.
This
has
been
a
great
presentation,
so
one
of
the
reasons
I
wanted
to
apply
to
be
on
the
planning
commission
is
because
my
excitement
over
the
the
urban
villages
as
the
in
the
2040
plan,
and
so
for
me,
this
is
just
so
positive,
seeing
these
move
forward
and
I
want
to
help
them
along,
and
I
hear
what
commissioner
cantrell
is
saying
about
concerns
with
equity.
A
The
thing
about
approving
the
urban
village
boundaries
and
this
the
the
staff
recommendations
tonight,
is
that
there
are
no
specific
plans
for
for
what
will
go
where
that's
up
to
the
market,
and
I
agree
with
you
that
I
hope
city
council
continues
to
develop
policies
that
help
protect
our
small
businesses,
and
so
I
feel
confident
that
they
will
and
that
and
that
great
things
are
going
to
happen.
A
B
C
Yes,
as
usual,
commissioner
torrence
beat
me
to
the
punch
as
far
as
making
a
motion.
I
live
in
this
district,
and
actually
I
live
in
this
neighborhood
that
is
oriented
towards
this
towards
this
urban
village
and
a
transit
village
plan.
I'm
really
excited
about
the
changes
that
are
being
made
here.
C
I
think
that
it
actually
does
preserve
a
lot
of
the
commercial
opportunities,
but
in
fact,
probably
increases
them,
because
you'd
have
more
just
more
folks
who
are
accessing
a
lot
of
these
businesses
on
first
street
are
dependent
on
business
during
the
day
right
because
there's
not
a
lot
of
even
though
they're
single
family
on
the
on
the
back
side,
a
long
first
street
there.
C
Many
of
the
properties
that
are
not
historic
and
even
some
that
are
are
dilapidated,
are
vacant
are
not
necessarily
used
to
their
best
ability
and
potential,
and
so
I
think
that
this
plan
preserves
that
that
which
is
good
about
the
neighborhood,
such
as
the
historic
districts
and
and
and
the
while,
I
generally
tend
towards
higher
density.
I
think
that
this
is
the
right
move,
because
so
many
of
these
single-family
homes
are
single-story
right.
C
You
know
this
is
a
a
primarily
single-steering
neighborhood
and
having
18
to
20
stories
right
behind
them
would
would
be
difficult
right,
so
I
think
for
the
areas
where
the
core
that
makes
sense
it
follows
in
line
with
what
is
probably
being
developed
with
the
county
kind
of
own
properties
etc,
and
I
think
that
this
is
the
right
direction
for
this
neighborhood.
I
think
that
it
will
increase
pedestrian
use.
C
I
think
it'll,
hopefully
increase
transit
use
along
this
corridor,
which
is
already
a
higher
use
corridor,
but
you
know
maybe
becomes
more
of
a
destination,
not
just
japan,
town
but
the
rest
of
this
urban
village
right.
You
know,
I
think
that
we're
seeing
such
beautiful
and
increased
diversity
and
vibrancy
within
the
japan
town
neighborhood
itself,
because
of
some
of
the
changes
that
are
finally
coming
to
fruition
that
were
approved
by
previous
planning
commissions
and
city
councils.
So
you
know,
I
think
that
this
is
a
great
plan.
C
I
think
that
really
took
into
account
both
business
and
residential
community
members
concerns.
I
do.
I
don't
think
that
the
displacement
issues
are
under
the
purview
of
the
planning
commission,
but
I
echo
my
commissioner's
concerns
and
requests
that
you
know
the
city
council
do
something
to
ensure
that
businesses
that
are
there
get
to
get
the
opportunity
to
stay
in
whatever
form
or
fashion
happens
after
development
and
they're
supported
in
doing
that.
C
So
with
that,
I
second
commissioner
torrance's
motion
and
I'm
excited
to
see
how
my
neighborhood
continues
to
grow
and
change.
Thank
you.
I
I
I
I
respect
and
appreciate
your
fellow
commissioner's
opinion.
I
I
really
do,
I
think,
there's
an
opportunity
for
us
once
again
to
send
something
to
city
council
that
says
hey.
This
is
something
you
have
to
pay
attention
to.
I
I
would
love
to
see
an
amendment
to
this.
A
lot
that
says:
hey
we'd
like
to
see
this
included
in
the
pilot
that
you
that
you're
doing
right
now
in
other
areas
just
to
give
the
this
this
community
an
opportunity
to
develop
fairly.
I
B
E
C
B
The
interim
is
I'll
call
on
commissioner
olivario
that
way
we
can
kind
of
keep
things
moving,
but
it
will
get
and
then
I'll
come
right
back
to
you
and
then
we'll
we'll
present
that
friendly
amendment
formally
to
commissioners,
torrance
and
caballero.
Does
that
sound
agreeable?
That's
fair!
All
right!
Thank
you,
commissioner.
E
Thank
you
chair.
I
think
one
item
of
interest
is
that
there's,
probably
some
commercial
businesses
that
the
neighborhood
would
like
to
not
see
would
be
retained,
which
are
bail,
bonds
there.
It's
not
necessarily
the
most
popular
use
within
the
neighborhood
and
if
we're
looking
at
making
sure
that
those
can
be
preserved,
I'm
not
sure
the
neighborhood
would
support
that.
E
Barry
swenson
builder
approved
two
buildings
at
the
corner
of
mission
and
taylor,
I'm
going
to
say
in
the
late
90s
they
only
built
one
building,
which
I
think
is
called
the
vendome
apartments,
or
something
like
that.
It's
approximately
eight
or
nine
stories
are
you
familiar.
You
think
you're
pointing
your
cursor.
There.
P
Yeah,
I'm
fairly
certain
it's
at
taylor
and
first
here.
E
That's
correct
taylor
and
first
my
apologies,
so
under
the
new
plan,
the
tower
that
or
not
the
tower,
but
the
building
that
is
not
yet
built,
it
will
now
be
able
to
be
taller
than
it's
approved
today
or
any
idea
on
that.
One.
P
E
Yeah,
so
maybe
it
paid
to
wait
25
years
to
not
build
for
the
extra
for
the
extra
units-
okay.
Well,
I
I
did
want
to
say
both
this
presentation
and
our
cannabis
ordinance
presentation.
I
thought
both
the
presenters
did
excellent
in
explaining
and
thoroughly
a
variety
of
information
in
these
policies.
I
think
the
visual
graphics
were
also
above
average,
and
I
think
that
helps
not
only
the
commission,
but
it
helps
those
watching
from
home.
E
I
I
Addition
of
this
community
to
the
current
pilot
being
being
done
for
equity.
In
I'm
sorry,
the
name
of
the
other
community
was
olim.
L
I
A
C
P
F
Yeah
so
there's
been
correct,
so
there's
been
a
number
of
affordable
housing
developments
were
proposed
and
approved
in
elem
rock.
There
was
one
by
silicon
valley
sage.
If
you
read
the
mercury
now
that's
under
investigation
and
is
being
torn
apart
on
the
properties
being
sold,
but
that
developer
had
a
couple
properties
that
were
gonna
that
were
proposed
and
these
either
were
or
are
gonna
result
in
displacement
of
small
mom-and-pop
businesses.
And
so
that's
where
the
real
concern
about
anti-displacement
arose.
You
know,
we've
heard
rents
have
been
risen,
etc.
F
So
the
other
issue
is
that
bart
is
getting
more
and
more
real
and
so
there's
a
greater
concern
that,
as
bart
you
know,
opening
day
comes
closer
and
closer
there's
going
to
be
even
more
pressure
to
displace
businesses,
and
so
so
yes,
this
has
been
a
real
thing
that
has
begun
to
occur
and
there's
been
a
lot
of
concern
about.
So
that's
where
this
work
came
out
of
that
work.
F
There
are
we're
not
aware
of
proposals
that
would
displace
businesses
on
north
first
year
this
time,
and
I
just
want
to
note
something
that
jennifer
brought
up
that
you
know
a
lot
of
the
areas
where
the
small
businesses
are
have
been
essentially
proposed
to
be
designated
with
a
land
use
designation
that
would
discourage
their
redevelopment
or
removed
from
the
village.
F
So
that's
an
approach
that
we've
used
in,
for
example,
east
santa
clara
to
discourage
displacement
of
small
businesses
and
its
approach.
It's
one
of
the
effects
of
the
approach
that
we're
proposing
here,
so
I'm
not
to
say
that
there
aren't
some
small
businesses
that
could
be
displaced
because
there's
a
high
density
designation
on
the
property,
but
for
the
most
part
they
were
designated
for
neighborhood
community
commercial,
which
discourages
displacement
of
small
businesses
and
because
it
discourages
redevelopment
now
you
know
displacement
could
happen,
but
it
wouldn't
likely
happen
through
redevelopment
of
property.
B
Is
that
agreeable
to
you,
commissioner,
collier.
C
Sure
I
mean
ultimately
it's
the
city
council's
decision.
I
I
just
don't
think
it's
necessary
at
this
point,
because
displacement
isn't
imminent
and
I
do
think
that
the
city
has
ongoing
fruitful
discussions
about
how
to
avoid
both
residential
and
business
displacement,
but
for
the
purposes
of
of
moving
the
vote
forward.
Why
not.
B
B
B
My
pants
just
stop
go
ahead.
Okay,
commissioner,.
E
Thank
you,
chair
after
sitting,
through
hours
and
hours
of
discussion
about
bail
bonds
in
this
neighborhood
and
the
fact
that
this
what's
being
proposed
on
the
amendment,
was
never
part
of
the
community
discussions
and
all
the
outreach.
I
can't
support
that
and
I
would
ask
my
colleagues
to
not
support
it.
Stay
with
the
staff
plan.
Don't
deviate
on
something:
that's
not
in
our
purview,
understand
that
where
the
intent
is
coming
from,
but
specifically
this
neighborhood
and
specifically
the
the
types
of
businesses
that
are
there
that
are
not
welcomed
by
the
neighborhood
today.
E
B
A
B
Young,
yes,
motion
passes
with
oliverio
and
garcia
voting.
No.
A
B
A
A
A
B
All
right
with
that,
we
will
now
go
ahead
to
item
11,
good
and
welfare
11a
report
from
city
council
staff.
Do
we
have
a
report
from
city
council?
I
think
we
can
give
commissioner
alberta
the
space
to
give
that
report
for
talking
a
lot
about
council
member
days,
the
good
old
days
for
both
of
us
right
staff.
Do
we
have
a
report?
We.
F
Yeah
we
do
so
last
night
was
the
general
plan
annual
review
before
city
council.
It
was
very
late
night
if
you
remember,
there
were
five
general
plan
amendments
being
considered
by
the
council,
which
you
all
made
a
recommendation
to
the
council
on
for
approval
of
all
of
them
and
council
did
a
approve,
all
of
them
consistent
with
your
recommendation
and,
of
course,
as
you
remember,
there
were
two
of
them
that
staff
had
a
different
recommendation,
which
was
the
one
on
center
road
and
the
one
on.
F
A
F
Yeah
sharon-
those
were
all
approved,
as
recommended
by
planning
commission,
and
I
believe,
if
I
can
find
my
notes,
but
I
believe
that
was
it.
B
B
On
this
item
tonight
you
know,
colleagues,
I
do
advise
you
if
there
are
topics
that
you
want
to
consider
for
study
sessions,
I
do
recommend
that
you
email
staff
and
perhaps
we
can-
we
can
accommodate
that
from
a
scheduling
standpoint
as
well
we're
down
to
the
final
there's
a
four
and
a
half
months
of
our
term.
So
there's
anything
you
want
to
learn
about
shoot,
an
email
to
michael
who
should
we
send
the
emails
to
you,
robert
all,
the
above.