Good morning.

We're calling to order the planning director's hearing of September 10th, 2025.

My name is John 2, and I'm the hearing officer for today's agenda on behalf of and delegated by the Director of Planning Building and Code Enforcement, Christopher Byrne.

This meeting is being held via Zoom conference call.

Member of the public might participate by following the instructions listed on page two of the agenda.

If you would like to provide comments, you have two methods to identify yourself to provide public comments.

Keep your raise hand feature on until staff identifies your turn to speak.

During the meeting, you can also call 408-535-3505 or email finding support staff at Central Za.gov and identify your name that's listed on Zoom or phone number that you called into the zoom with and what items or items you would like to comment on.

All members of the public will remain on mute until staff identifies your turn to speak and you're unmuted.

At that time, you'll be unmuted and provide comments during the allotted time.

If you exceed your allotted time, you may be muted so we can move on to the next speaker.

Please note the following.

The hearing procedures and order input will be as followed.

Identify each project as inscribed on the agenda for those items list items on the consent calendar.

I'll ask if anyone wishes to speak on the item.

If a separate discussion is warranted, I'll move the item to public hearing portion of the agenda.

If a separate discussion is not needed, the item will remain in consent calendar for approval.

Those items listed on the public hearing will ask stats to provide a brief report.

The applicant or the representative who wishes to speak an item will have to five minutes to speak and should identify themselves by stating their name for the record.

After the applicant or the exhibit has spoken, any member of the public who wishes to speak on the item may provide testimonies up to two minutes per speaker, either for or against the project.

All members of the public should identify their name for the record.

Following comments from the public, the applicant may make additional remarks for up to five minutes.

I'll then close the public comment.

I may ask staff to answer questions, respond to comments made by the applicant or the public or further discuss the items.

I will then take action on the item.

If you challenge these land use decisions in court, you may limit it to raising only those issues or someone else raised at the public hearing or reincorrents delivered to the city at or prior to the public hearing.

The planning director's action on agenda will be final when the permit signed and mailed, unless the permit or environmental clearance determination is appealed.

The planning director's action on permits are appealable in accordance with requirements of title 20 of the municipality code.

The planning director's actions on environment review were permits under the California Environmental Equality Act are separately appealable in accordance with requirements of title 21 of the municipality code.

For begin, I'll remind members of the public to follow our code of conduct at the meeting.

It's a good commenting on the civic agenda items only.

Public speakers will not engage in conversation with the hearing officer or staff.

The hearing officer, staff, and the public are expect to refrain from abusive language.

Repeated factory comply with the code of conduct, which will disturb, disrupt, or impede the orally conduct, the meeting may result in removal from the meeting.

The meeting of director's hearing will now come to order.

Alright, the first matter is the matter of deferral.

Any item scheduled for this hearing this morning for which deferral to feature meeting data is being requested.

We move to this portion of the agenda and consider the matter of deferral.

I'll identify or any item to be deferred and ask for comments from the audience.

If you want to change any of the deferral items or speech to the question error for any items, please use the raise hand feature in Zoom or click star nine to raise the hand and speak.

I'll now open the public hearing.

The following eyes are proposed for deferral.

Item 2A PDA 98-06704 and ER22-202 is a plan development permit amendment proposing the construction of a two-story family house permitting two existing wooden exterior decks on approximately 2.46 Cross Acre site.

Located approximately 250 feet south of Benjamin Court and Gerber Bowie Avenue at 2569 Conan's court.

Is requesting a deferral from the 82725 and is proposed to be dropped to be noticed at a later date per staff's request.

Does anybody want to speak to the matter of deferral of item 2A?

Once again, raise hand feature or star 9.

All right.

Going next to the item deferral item 2B, which is H24-061 and ER24-296, which is a side of the permit to allow the installation of promptly 2,000 square foot prefabricated modular building with an associate sign on an approximately 119 gross acre uh water water facility located at 4190 Zanker Road.

Um SQL exemption pursuing seat grounds 1503 for new construction of small structures.

Staff's recommendation is to defer to the September 17, 2020 director for staff requests.

Does anybody want to speak to the matter deferral?

Item 2b.

Once again, star nine or raise hand feature in Zoom.

I do not see any hands being raised currently.

So therefore, I will defer item two A and two B to the either be dropped to re notice or to the specific date specific specified by the staff recommendation.

The matter deferrals now close.

Moving on to the consent calendar.

There will be no separate discussion of individual consent calendars.

As they're considered to be routine, it will be considered in one action unless an item is to be is moved to the public hearing calendar for separate discussion by the hearing officer.

The public may comment on the entire consent calendar or any item removed from the consent order by the hearing officer.

If you wish to speak on one of these items, please use my Hayes hand feature on zoom or click star nine to raise a hand to speak.

Um just for so we can get clarity.

I'll go through each item and then ask if anybody wants to speak on that specific item or move from the consent calendar.

Item 3A, PD 23-012, T23-012, and ER23131.

Plan development permit to allow the construction of an of eight two-story single family residents, the demolition of an existing single-family resident, and then removal 33 trees, 28 ordinance size, five non-ordinate size, and 50 replacement tree and intended map to allow the subdivision two lots into eight lots and dedicated approximately 8,918 square feet for a street extension on approximately 121.21 gross acre site located at 2595 road.

Exempt per sequel guidelines section 15332 for infill development.

Staff recommendation consider exemption with Code and approved plan development permit and attended map.

I do see one hand currently being raised.

Susan, do you want to speak of the matter of three A?

Please unmute yourself, Susan.

Let's see, am I unmuted here?

Yes, you are.

Yes, okay.

I just have a question about the in loo fee.

Is this the time to bring it up, or is it do we wait till after this is approved?

We can move it to the public uh calendar and then we can uh open comments at that point.

But so you asking to pull item three A to the public hearing calendar.

Yeah, I'm I have a question about the in lieu fee for the trees.

Okay, are you the applicant or a member of the public?

Oh, I'm the landscape architect on the job.

Okay.

Let me see one second.

I see one other hand raised up to see whether we'll pull the items.

Okay, just mute for one second.

Uh last name Chinny.

Yeah, this is yeah.

Hi, can you hear me?

Yes.

Yeah, so uh my property is is adjacent to the uh applicant's property on mission hill place.

And um I um I'm not sure if uh if the plan is to open up the mission, one second, one second.

So um this is the matter of whether or not to pull it off the consent counter.

We can do public hearing on it.

So you're asking for the item three A to be pulled to the public hearing.

Yes.

Okay, no problem.

So just uh stay hold for one second.

I see two other hands.

Okay, I see four hands uh currently up.

Are these all to speak on item three A?

So let me ask the other people.

Uh Manji, are you item speaking on 3A?

That's correct.

Okay, you can leave your hand, you guys.

So I'm based on the number of hands.

I'm gonna pull item 3A to the public hearing.

So if you have a comment about 3A, please lower your hands and then we will move it to public hearing.

We just want to continue the rest of the consent calendar before we get to it.

Um call in.

Is this on item 3a?

Please unmute yourself.

Uh I'm not sure what history A, but also how question regarding the open of the uh the road.

Uh, like like the so this is on tune five nine five three A, the one that's not currently on uh Quimby Road, right?

Is this the on that property?

This question about that property.

Yes.

Uh oh, yes.

So once again, as I told everybody else, we'll move it to public hearing.

So, okay, okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

Item 3A will be taken off of the consent calendar and move to public hearing.

So let's move to item 3b.

PD 25-066 in ER25061.

Is a plan development permit to allow the construction of three retaining walls up to seven feet in height and minor landscape improvements on an approximately 140 uh point one gross acre site loaded at located at 300 Kerner Avenue.

Sequel exam pursuits guidelines 15303 for new construction on conversion of small structures.

Staff's recommendation is considered exemption in accordance with Sequo, approving plan development permit.

Does anybody want to speak on the item of 3B?

Please use a raise hand function and or plus star nine.

Once again, use a raise hand function or star nine.

Alright.

I see no current hands on item 3b.

So item 3b was approved on the consent calendar.

Item 3A will be taken to public hearing.

Okay.

So if you want to comment on item 3B, which is the project of 2595, uh Quimby Road, you can use a raise hands function.

But prior to us going to public comments, um, I'm going to allow staff to provide um their staff report.

Go ahead.

Uh thank you, hearing officer.

Uh, my name is Cameron G.

I'm the project manager from the planning division for this item.

This project consists of a planning a planned development permit and a tentative map to allow an eight-lot subdivision and the construction of eight two single story, uh, eight two-story single-family residences.

The project also includes a street extension of Mission Hill Place westerly towards Sandhill Drive.

An existing single family residence on the property will be demolished, and 33 trees will be removed to facilitate the development.

The site is surrounded by single family residences on all sides.

The project is consistent with the general plan land use designation of residential neighborhood, as the development would result in a density of approximately 7.9 dwelling units per acre, which is within the allowed maximum density of eight dwelling units per acre.

The project is consistent with general plan policies regarding the establishment of single family subdivisions that continue the established neighborhood pattern.

The site is located within the APD Planned Development Zoning District, file number PDC 90-073, which became effective on May 17th, 1991.

The subdivision and single family residences are consistent with all development standards of the Planned Development Zoning District, which includes setbacks, lot size, building height, and parking.

The project is consistent with all applicable objective design standards of the single family residential design guidelines.

And the project is exempt from further environmental review under section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act for infill development projects.

An on-site sign has been posted on the property since January 22nd, 2025.

Notices for public hearing were mailed to property owners and tenants within a 500 foot radius, which is consistent with this council policy for public outreach.

Staff has been available to answer any public comments.

Staff recommends approval of the planned development permit and tentative map, and this concludes staff's presentation.

Staff, do we have know who the applicant is so they can reset their presentation?

Yeah, sure.

The applicant is uh Simon Lin.

If they wanted to add anything.

Simon, you have five minutes if you want to present your project before we take public comments.

Please use a raise hand function, Simon.

If you want to speak first.

Okay.

I would like to hear the uh comments from the public before and then we can answer the questions.

Okay.

So you okay, you're waving your five minutes.

Okay.

So I think we had four hands prior to this before pulling it off the consent calendar.

If you do want to speak on it, please raise your hand function now.

Raise your hand now so I can call upon you.

Okay, one second.

Susan, you can unmute yourself, please.

Am I unmuted?

Yes, you are.

Okay, I wanted to know what the fee is for the tree mitigation, the NLU fee.

Um, because we tried to we put as maximum trees in as we can possibly get, and we're still very short.

If the project was not a planned development, it would have been a one-to-one ratio.

But because it was a um planned development, it was a four to one.

And uh based on the last time I heard what the inloof is, it would add almost $8,000 to each individual house.

Um, so if you can ask, let us know about that if this is the time to um try to ask for an exemption to the in loop fees.

Thank you, Susan.

All right.

Um, please unmute yourself.

Good morning, thank you.

So uh my question is really to also in regards to the trees, but a different topic.

Um, you know, there was a rather large uh I think that's considered ordinance level tree that was cut um October 31st of 2023, I believe.

And I just don't know.

Uh I guess I'm the only question I'm posing is whether or not that was put into the calculus of um any fees that are due.

Um, because it looks as if the development notice was posted after the fact.

So I just didn't know if that went into the calculation or if that was done prior.

Um, and then if so, I you know if anybody can speak to that or if I'm posting this in the correct uh, I guess venue.

Uh yeah, happy to hear thoughts on that.

Thank you.

Uh last name, Chenny.

Please unmute yourself.

Yeah, hi.

Thanks.

Um, so my question is about the extension of the mission hill place, uh, all the way to San Point Drive.

Um, and it's also a clarification.

So are we are we opening it up so that it becomes a through street?

Because right now my property is at the dead end of Mission Hill Place, and from a safety and security standpoint, that was why we purchased the property about five years ago.

If the plan is to extend it to Sandpoint Drive, that means it will be um available to traffic uh from both ways.

Um what's you know, it it it does have an impact on uh safety security and privacy, uh, especially uh for the residents of mission place.

Um so though that's that's a concern.

So that that's that was my uh my first question.

And uh the second one was the construction that's gonna happen is gonna directly impact impact my property because we are right adjacent to this property and we have small kids.

So uh I guess my question is what's the time frame for the development and uh what measures would the applicant or the city take in order to reduce the impact, um the noise, the dust, and whatever comes with it on my property and my family.

Thank you for your comments.

Colin, please unmute yourself.

Colin Zang, please unmute yourself.

Okay, can you hear me now?

Yeah, we can hear you.

Yeah, basically, uh thanks about Cheney.

Uh, have exactly the same concerns concern of uh Cheney.

So first uh is like when they opened up the mission hills.

Not only me, I also talk with my neighbor uh in house opening way, also the mission hills.

Uh they all have exactly the same concern, like the uh impact our safety and and also the neighborhood building.

If they open up, I extend that uh that road to the sand drive away.

So that's the first one.

Second one also have a uh seven years old uh case and uh a home.

Um, like the the time and estimate time to build that instruction and how they would plan to not impact us uh as also the neighborhood, right?

So basically, that's the same concern of a whole as a chini.

So I just wanted to uh speak out of myself also uh on behalf of my my neighbor uh in that two routes.

Thanks.

Thank you for your comments, Colin.

Is there anybody else who would like to speak on this specific item from the member of the public before we provide the applicant as well as staff responding to questions?

Please use your raise hand function or star nine.

All right.

Once again, star nine or raise hands function.

If anybody else wants to speak any additional comments or questions, all right.

I'm going to now allow the applicant an additional five minutes to respond to comments.

Simon.

If you would like to unmute yourself.

Hi.

Hello.

Hi.

So the first uh question about a tree that was cut um uh on the property.

Um that's so that was that took place in 2023.

I'm not exactly sure which tree, but uh if there is any tree that was cut that should should have should be taken into uh calculation for the um replacement trees, and the second question about uh mission place, yes, it's going to become a through uh through way, uh and you'll be you become more like a drive.

Um and uh you will be uh connected to the same point.

So as far as the construction is concerned, the time frame is not certain yet at this point, but uh it depends on the facing, and we still need to talk to the developer.

But I can see that grading and drainage is most likely going to take place in 2026, and the actual building would probably take place in 2027.

Um, and that's as far as I know at this point.

We will, of course, surround the site with uh chainling fences, and uh make sure that we we manage the site well uh for safety reasons.

And that's that would be my answers to the questions.

Thank you.

Thank you, Simon.

Uh staff, would you like to provide any comments and responses?

Yeah, sure.

Thanks, hearing officer.

Um I did want to add that um, I guess I just wanted to uh address for Susan's comment about the inlu fee for the trees.

Um because this is located in a planned development zoning district, it is not subject to the city's uh standard tree replacement requirements.

The planned development zoning district, which was became effective in 1991, uh does call for uh replacement ratio of four to one for every ordinance size tree that's removed on the property.

Uh so the uh believe the applicant is proposing to plant 50 replacement trees.

That's about the number that the site is capable of um of uh yeah of planting uh due to the space.

Uh and so there's about 72 trees that will still need to be accounted for per the replacement ratio of the planned development zoning district.

The current uh in loo fee per tree is one thousand dollars, so that would be a cost of $72,000 for the remaining 72 trees that are not replaced on site.

Um just to give that clarification.

Um the uh other question about the extension of Mission Hill Place.

Um, that was also proposed in the Planned Development Zoning District.

Um that became effective in 1991.

The existing single-family houses that are around this neighborhood, uh, were all constructed as a part of the same development permit, essentially phase one of this uh larger uh plan.

Uh these eight remaining homes are the remaining phase two of that plan.

Um there were a couple of questions about um noise and dust mitigation.

Uh, we do have a couple of um sequel planners if they wanted to uh add anything related to that.

Good morning, hearing officer.

Um I'm Charlie, you and I'm the uh C club planning manager for this project, and I can speak on air quality and noise.

So I understand there's some concerns about um operational noise and I can speak to that as well as to construction noise.

So, first of all, with operational noise, um this uh as we understand there is a hello.

I can hear you.

Yeah, like she's no longer in the meeting.

Can you speak on typical mitigation measures about noise or uh dust or construction?

Or David?

Yeah.

Good evening, or it's actually good good morning.

David Camperson Planet City's environmental review team.

So they have standard permit conditions related to noise, construction noise, and also construction air quality.

Typically, this means that um did that projects that are you know medium to small scale would need to use what's known as tier four equipment.

These are cleaner construction equipment.

Um, this is standard for urban projects that are located next to existing development like houses and schools, so it will minimize air quality, um, air quality impacts on the neighborhood.

Um, this is very common, and this is standard.

Um, in terms of noise, there will be a construction noise management plan, and that'll essentially be you know, meeting construction to the hours 7 a.m.

to 7 p.m.

Monday through Friday, unless there's an extension requested.

Um, this is also very common.

Um, and there's also public works, public works measures in order to address issues like construction staging and access.

So and all these are pretty common for this type of project that would occur in an urban area.

Thank you.

Uh, the staff have anything else to add before I ask any questions.

Uh nothing at this time.

Uh staff, can you tell me how many original homes were part of the PD zoning?

Yeah, let me pull it up real quick.

So the uh the original PD zoning encompassing both the phase one and the and this current phase of the project, is that correct?

Yeah.

Just keep in mind I've already closed public comments from the members of the public as you had an opportunity earlier.

So Suzanne, do you see your hand up?

But we've already closed the closing public comment portion of it.

Um, so the surrounding area uh included 109 single-family homes.

That was for that was for area A or phase one, um, from the early 90s, and then this is area B or phase two, which is the remaining eight single family homes.

Right.

So what I'm unfamiliar with in terms in general, whenever they write very specific development standards in the PZ PD zoning, it's usually very intentional.

So I understand while there is a concern about the overall fees associated with the inloop fees, you can't necessarily compare it to a typical subdivided lot and allow a one-to-one ratio.

This was called out very intentionally as a condition and or development standards as part of it, requiring a four-to-one ratio.

So that's the main reason that it's done.

I can understand that it would be seeming fair compared to current developments, but it is a PD zoning, which is you essentially zone in the development standards.

Staff cannot zone or exempt those specific development standards, right?

Um, and I appreciate the members of the public talking about their concerns about the drive-through track or the cut through, concern about basically cutting open the street to the member of the public, but as the staff has indicated, this was always part and shown as part of the original zoning of the site, the exact same entitlement that allow the development of those houses that those residents currently live in.

It's just a matter they phase the project to different uh essentially different phases, and this just ends to be the final phase as part of that project.

So although you've gotten to take advantage of it being a dead end, the intention was that long term for it to always remain a dead end.

Um, and in addition to that, I understand also as a parent with kids that construction noises, uh construction dust and other things are something to be concerned about, but it is not atypical, and we understand the disruption that construction can have, but they are regulated by our typical ordinances related to air quality, coordinations, encroachments, and other staging areas, conditions that we do the entire city.

So given that all these different considerations and staff explanation and the entitlement allowed on the existing zoning, um, I think staff has addressed it adequately, the concerns, um, acknowledging that maybe some disruption on the member of the public's uh as construction happens, but based on that, I don't see any reasons why you can't make the findings to approve the permit.

So therefore, I'm approving item 3A, PD 23 012, T25-12, and the environment associated with it.

Given this was the last item on today's uh agenda, this leads to the uh issue of adjournment, therefore we are adjourning the meeting today at 9 28 AM.

Thank you, everybody who's attended today.