Okay, good morning everybody.

We are calling to order the planning director hearing of October 29th, 2025.

My name is Martina Davis, and I am the hearing officers for today's agenda on behalf and delegated by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement, Christopher Burton.

The meeting is being held via Zoom conference call.

Members of the public may participate by following instructions listed on page two of the agenda.

If you would like to provide public comment, you have two methods to do so.

For participants who joined electronically and have audio input available during the uh on their computer or smartphone, you can use the raised hand feature in Zoom during the agenda item you'd like to speak on, or click star nine on your phone.

Remember to keep your raised hand feature on until planning support staff identifies your turn to speak.

During the meeting, if you have calling or if you are calling in and you are not joining electronically or you need to call in for your audio, during the meeting, please call 408 535 8517 or email planning support staff at San Jose CA dot G-O-V and identify your name that's listed in Zoom, your phone number or your phone number that you'll call into Zoom with and what item or items you would like to comment on.

All members of the public will remain on mute until the individual identifies they would like to speak and they are unmuted.

Planning support staff will identify you by name when it's your turn to speak.

At that time, you will be unmuted and can provide comment for 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 procedure and order of input will be as following as follows.

I will identify each project as described on the agenda.

For those items on the consent calendar, I will wish if anyone wishes to speak on the item.

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

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

For those items listed under public hearing, I will ask staff to provide a brief report.

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

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

All members of the public should identify their name for the record, although this is not required.

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

I will then close the public hearing and I may ask staff to answer questions, respond to comments made by the pub applicant or the public or further discuss the item.

I will then take action on 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 hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the city at or prior to the public hearing.

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

The planning director's actions on permits are appealable in accordance with the requirements of Title 20 of the municipal code, which is the zoning ordinance.

The planning director's actions on environmental review for the permits under the California Environmental Quality Act or CEQA are separately appealable in accordance with the requirements of Title 21 of the municipal code, which is the environmental clearance ordinance.

Before we begin, I want to remind members of the public to follow our code of conduct at meetings.

This includes comments on the specific agenda item only, or please comment on the specific agenda item only.

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

The hearing officer's staff and the public are expected to refrain from abusive language.

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

The meeting will now come to order.

Okay.

So first uh agenda item is deferral.

So any item scheduled for referral for a future meeting will be moved to this portion agenda and considered for the matter of deferral.

I will identify any items that are proposed for deferral and ask for comments from the audience if you want to change any deferral dates or question deferring any of these items.

Please use the raised hand feature in Zoom or click star nine uh to raise your hand to speak.

I will now open the public hearing and we have no items proposed for deferral today.

Um, so anyone wish to speak on that.

I will give a second raised hands.

Okay, none.

Uh the matter of deferrals is now closed.

We will move on to the consent calendar as a reminder.

There will be no separate discussion on an individual consent calendar items as they're considered to be routine and can will be considered in one action unless the item is moved to the public hearing calendar for separate discussion.

The public may comment on the entire consent calendar and any items to be removed to the consent calendar by the hearing officer.

So if you would like to have the item on our consent calendar today removed for comment and discussion, this would be your opportunity.

And as a reminder, you can use raised hand feature in Zoom or click star nine to raise your hand to speak.

So the item we have on the consent calendar today is H25001 and ER25013.

This is a site development permit to expand a parking lot for an existing commercial building to include adjoining vacant lot and removal of two ordinance sized trees on an approximately 0.4 gross acre site.

This is located at 748 and 760 South First Street.

Uh, it's in Council District 3.

The uh CEQA is exempt pursuant to CEQA guidelines section 15301 for existing facilities.

Staff's recommendation is to consider exemption in accordance with CEQA and approve the site development permit.

Would anyone like to remove this item from the consent calendar for a discussion?

Okay, it looks like I see one attendee with a raised hand.

Michael, you're able to unmute yourself.

Can you confirm you'd like to speak on the H25001 and ER25013, the parking lot on South First Street?

Hi there, yes.

Uh, I'm Michael Hazleton, and yeah, I was I was hoping to speak in opposition to that.

Um, do I do I speak now or is that just uh let's move that to the consent calendar or excuse me to the public hearing calendar and then I will um have you have an opportunity to speak.

So one moment.

Okay, so we have a request to remove the item on the consent calendar.

Uh so therefore we will move that to public hearing.

We'll hear that item first.

Um that leaves nothing on the consent calendar.

So the matter of consent is now uh concluded.

And uh we will move on to the public hearing.

So again, this is H25001 and ER25013.

It is a site development permit for a uh parking lot to replace an existing parking lot at 748 and 760 South First Street.

Okay.

Michael, if you want to go ahead and raise your hand again so we can identify you to speak, and you will have.

Oh, wait, hold on.

Sorry, excuse me.

I skipped a couple steps.

Uh staff.

Do you have a report?

Yes, good morning, hearing officer.

My name is Cora McNaughton.

I'm the planning project manager um for this request for a site development permit to expand a parking lot for an existing commercial building to include an adjoining vacant lot.

Um, this project would include the removal of two ordinance sized trees, and it's on an approximately 0.4 acre site.

So the subject site consists of three contiguous lots with about 135 feet of frontage on South First Street at the eastern terminus of Union Street.

The site is currently developed uh with an approximately 4,200 square foot commercial building, a surface parking lot that serves that building, and then contiguous to that a vacant lot that is used for vehicle storage.

Adjoining uses include religious assembly to the south, retail to the north, multifamily residential to the east, and an auto repair shop and auto sales lot to the west across uh South First Street.

So the project is consistent with the general plan land use designation of mixed-use commercial and the Martha Gardens specific plan.

It is also consistent with the standards of the mixed-use commercial zoning district, the citywide design standards and guidelines applicable to parking areas and city council development policies.

A class one categorical exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act for existing facilities has been prepared for the project and is included as part of the permit.

The exemption statement concludes that the project meets the requirements for a class one exemption.

Therefore, uh staff recommends that the planning director find that the project is in conformance with CEQA and approve the site development permit.

So this concludes staff's presentation, and I'm available to answer any questions.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you, staff.

Is the applicant here and would the applicant like to speak?

So applicant, if you're here, please raise and you would like to speak, please raise your hand now.

Okay, I'm seeing Greg Evans.

I'm assuming that's the applicant.

I see you nodding, Cora.

Okay, so let's go ahead and unmute Greg.

And Greg, you have up to five minutes to speak.

Hello, good morning, everyone.

My name is Greg Evans.

I'm the project manager for this proposed parking lot expansion.

We're really excited about this project.

As Cora knows, we've been working closely with the City of San Jose and the planning department to conform to all applicable standards in our proposal to expand the parking lot here.

We think it's a suitable use for the site.

We think it's a significant improvement over what has been a largely vacant lot for you know the past 10 years or so.

Um we're we're removing a couple of ordinance trees as stated, uh, but we're pleased to replace them with far more trees that we think will add shade, uh 50% of total lot coverage and improve the overall aesthetics of the site.

Um so yeah, it is it is a parking lot uh expansion, improvement over what is there, and happy to explain further uh if requested.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, so um now is time for public comments.

Um I see Michael's got your hand raised still.

Thank you.

And you will have two minutes to speak.

Hi there.

Uh my name is Michael Hazleton.

Uh I'm speaking today in opposition to the proposal to turn a vacant lot into another parking lot.

Um, this kind of project might seem like a small routine thing, but it sort of just represents the kind of land use that works against our city's long-term goals for sustainability and livability and climate resilience.

Um, first off, parking lots are really one of the least productive uses of urban land, um, and this is right on First Street, which should be kind of a walkable uh urban place.

Um, they generate no housing or community space and and they also don't really generate any tax revenue.

Um, they just generate a lot of heat and more water runoff.

Um, they they also raise local temperatures through urban heat island and you know, cutting down trees.

It's really not ideal.

Um, as well.

Um, especially in in our neighborhood here where like there's kind of a lot of uh lack of trees in a lot of space and plenty of parking.

Um, and also just adding more parking just encourages it more driving, which means we'll just have more congestion and more noise and more emissions, um, which is sort of the opposite of what the whole climate smart San Jose goals are and to reduce vehicle miles traveled.

Um, so really I think this could be a lot better uh while it's a vacant lot now.

I think there could be better uses of land that we should we should think about before just like turning it into a parking lot.

Um, yeah, thanks for taking your time um to listen to me speak.

Thank you, Michael.

Okay, um I'm gonna ask staff, can you speak to the the tree replacement?

Because as I understand, when we have uh that there will be more trees replaced than removed, uh can we talk about those tree ratios real quick?

Yeah, that's correct.

So there's two ordinance ordinance sized trees that are being removed.

The required replacement ratio is four to one.

So that would be uh a requirement of eight trees to be planted on the site.

Um the applicant is actually going to um plant 10 trees on the site.

Um, and this is to um to meet those replacement requirements, but also to meet the city's um citywide design standard regarding shading of parking areas.

So more than 50% of the parking area will be shaded by trees at maturity.

Um in that sense, there the actual number of trees will increase uh significantly on the site.

Um, do you have what types of trees are being planted?

Well, I'll have to look at that.

Don't have that at the top of it.

Okay, I don't need the species, but uh, we're talking trees that will shade, will provide shade.

Correct.

There's a there's a mix of large and small trees.

Okay, great.

Okay.

Okay, all right.

I think that was my only question.

So actually, you know what?

I have a question for the applicant is uh is this parking lot intended to be used for the adjoining business or um do you intend to use it as a standalone parking establishment?

Uh it'll be tied to the adjoining business.

Um, and if if I could have a few extra moments, I'd just like to respond to Michael's comments.

Sure.

Um, Michael, I I appreciate your feedback and and I hear all of your concerns about this proposed use for the area.

Um I did want to add some additional context to the project, um, to perhaps shed some light on on a couple of your concerns.

Um, some things you mentioned were you know using the lot in a way that promotes climate resiliency, um, in addition to this being an expansion of the existing parking lot.

It'll also include the addition of 16 uh publicly available DC fast charging stations, adding to, you know, the the available allotment of stations within the city of San Jose, which is a nationwide leader in EV adoption, um, gives more people in that area the opportunity to access charging, and perhaps we'll incentivize them to choose to switch their internal combustion vehicle for an electric vehicle.

Um, you also mentioned stormwater runoff.

Um, we are treating all stormwater runoff in compliance with applicable codes.

Uh, we'll be installing a uh underground infiltration tank.

Um, so zero stormwater will actually run off the property into the right of way.

In addition, um, we're modifying the existing curb cuts.

Currently, there are three that serve these two adjoining properties, and we are reducing them to a single curb cut.

As a result, we are required to treat that off-site stormwater separately.

Uh, to do so, we are also installing an off-site bioretention uh facility around the corner uh to treat the proposed uh modified right-of-way as well as a tributary area in the street.

So both on-site and off-site uh stormwater is is treated fully in conformance with with local uh and state code.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Greg.

Okay, so with that, I am going to close the public hearing and um let me just speak to this item for a second.

You know, I do agree from an urban form standpoint, you know, parking is probably not the first use the city would like to see either.

Um, however, this does meet our code requirements.

Um, I think in some ways it will incrementally improve the area, additional trees, rejection of curve cuts.

Uh, the site has been paved, has been used for storage and parking in the past.

Um, and then to the point of now, this is not part of this permit because they do receive streamline permitting, but UV charging stations are an improvement in the area, and this does provide them the opportunity to provide those so that kind of mitigates some of the greenhouse gas concerns around that.

Um, so given that it does meet our policies and does provide some improvements to the area, I will approve the site development permit and consider the exemption in accordance with CQL.

So let it let's move on to the next item.

It is um public hearing calendar.

The site development permit to allow construction of 737 unit multi-phase residential project, including a seven-story, 505-unit market rate apartment building, a five-story, 132 unit, 100% affordable apartment building, and 100 four-sale townhouse units configured in 14 three-story buildings, subject to state density bonus law, including a request for one incentive slash concession and five waivers for the use of stucco, minimum lot sizes, tree canopy coverage, tree spacing, and driveway placement on an approximately 9.82 gross acre site.

The project includes demolition of three existing buildings, totaling approximately 164,006 square feet, and the removal of 148 trees, 116, which are ordinance size, 68 non-ordinate sized.

There is also a tentative map to subdivide two lots into up to 31 lots, 16 residential lots and 10 open space lots, five private streets.

On an approximately 9.82 gross acre site located at 211 through 281 River Oaks Parkway.

This is in Council District 4.

The CEQA clearance is 211-281 River Oaks Parkway Residential Project Environmental Impact Report.

State Clearinghouse Number 2024110255.

The staff recommendation is to certify the 211 to 281 River Oaks Parkway Residential Project Environmental Impact Report in accordance with CEQA and approve a site development permit and tentative map.

Okay, so first staff, do we have a report?

I do, and I actually have a couple of slides to share if you don't mind.

Share screen.

Okay.

Everybody see the screen.

Okay.

Morning everyone.

Uh Alicatianza, I'm the planning project manager for this application.

Uh so you just read a mouthful of a project description, so I won't uh belabor the point.

Um I just want to give some context for what we're talking about today.

So this is a 9.82 gross acre site located in North San Jose.

Uh it's bounded roughly by River Oaks Parkway, Iron Point Drive to the west, Cisco Way to the east, and the new Abram Agnews Elementary School to the north.

Uh, you can see the Cisco site kind of off to the northeast, and then River Oaks Park is directly to the south of this site.

Uh, so as you mentioned, the site is a uh this project is a large 737-unit multiphase residential development and includes a mix of affordable uh market rate apartments as well as town home units, the demolition of those three existing buildings that are on site today, um as well as the removal of 184 trees, uh, as well as a tentative map to subdivide two lots into up to 31 lots, and then as you mentioned, an application under state density bonus law.

So, in terms of project review, this is uh the exhaustive list of what we reviewed as part of this project.

I just want to highlight a couple key points.

Um, because this is a housing project, it was reviewed for all applicable objective and quantifiable standards in accordance with state law.

Um, a couple important items to note as this site uh has a general plan land use designation and zoning of industrial park.

However, it is located in the transit employment overlay, residential overlay, also known as TERO.

Um, and that requires a minimum residential density of 75 dwelling units per acre.

Uh so this project has a residential density of just about 76.2 dwelling units per acre in conformance with this requirement.

And because this property is in this overlay, instead of being subject to the normal industrial park standards, it's subject to the tarot zoning standards in Title 20 of the municipal code.

So the project is consistent with all applicable development standards with the exception of uh density bonus waivers for minimum lot size.

And that's specifically in the townhome portion of the development.

Um, and a couple other points to note.

So this project is actually subject to a couple different documents for design guideline review.

So it's within North San Jose, so it's subject to the North San Jose Design Guidelines.

Um, where those guidelines are silent, we then defer to the citywide design standards and guidelines.

Um, so uh two documents there for um design guideline review, and then I'll touch on uh outreach as well as CEQA and a couple later slides.

Uh so with regards to California Environmental Quality Act, also known as CEQA, uh, the City of San Jose is a lead agency prepared a draft environmental impact report for the 211 to 281 River Oaks Parkway Residential Project.

It was circulated for public review and comment from May 1st, 2025 to June 17th, 2025.

And this draft EIR concluded that the project would result in no significant and unavoidable impacts.

All potential impacts determined to be less than significant with the implementation of identified mitigation measures, and the developer is required to adhere to a MMRP mitigation monitoring reporting plan.

We did receive 10 comments during public circulation.

Those comment letters came from County of Santa Clara Road and Airports Department, the Santa Clara Unified School District, Valley Water, the Amamudson tribal band of San Juan Batista, as well as individual members of the public.

And none of those comment letters received raised uh issues regarding adequacy of the draft EIR and no new significant impacts or mitigation measures were identified.

With regards to public outreach, uh we had a couple meetings for this project.

So firstly, we had an on-site sign posted since January of 2024.

We also held an in-person community meeting on June 17th, 2024.

And we also had an EIR scoping meeting that was virtually held on November 7, 2024.

Uh concerns raised during project review included affordability level of the units, removal of trees, particularly the redwood trees up along River Oaks Parkway, overall site design, need for additional park space, building height and massing, residential density, street widths, fire access, traffic congestion, pedestrian safeway, excuse me, pedestrian safety, the need for more commercial space, particularly grocery stores in the area, access for school children, and also construction crew access and routes.

So with that, staff recommends that the director certify the environmental impact report and approve the site development permit and besting tenant map.

And we have the applicant here to provide a presentation on the project itself.

And if you don't mind, I don't know who's running the slides, but can you pull over show you Lee?

He's got his um hand raised.

And then also SC, I believe is Scott.

There we go.

Scott Connolly.

Okay, promoting you both to panelists.

Hello.

All right, hello.

Okay.

Hi.

Uh so Alec is uh would you like us to start here?

I've got show you from Studio T uh managing the slides.

Yes, I believe they'll have to give you a timer.

You got it.

Or maybe not.

Yeah, I don't know.

I can put a timer on my I have a timer.

It'll just be in the background though.

Yeah, we'll let you know.

When you're at the five minutes.

Okay.

Fantastic.

Well, thank you, Martina and Alec.

Good morning, everyone.

Uh, my name is Scott Conley with Valio Partners representing the applicant.

Appreciate y'all being here today.

Um, we're excited about the opportunity to present this 737 unit project today, which will bring not only much needed housing to North San Jose, but also a diverse mix of housing.

As you know, this site's been vacant for many years.

And when we were first introduced to this site about two and a half years ago, it was in the time when builders' remedy applications seeking to lower density were abundant.

And we took a different approach.

Our company's based in San Jose, and we felt it was important to design a project that fell within the vision and spirit of the underlying Terra Overlay and the San Jose Citywide Guidelines, especially with respect to density per acre.

And we're proud of the design that you see before you today.

For this project, as Alec mentioned, we're only using five waivers and one concession, which we think is a testament to the design efforts we put forth to comply with the tarot.

I will say one item to note is uh the area along River Oaks Parkway.

And in our original design, we showed the removal of all the redwood trees on the River Oaks frontage.

And what we learned during our community outreach with the neighbors was we came to understand the importance of preserving those trees or trying to preserve as many as possible.

And while some of the trees have been deemed not suitable to remain because of their health, or a few with proximities closer to future buildings.

We have been able to preserve and keep 10 of those redwood trees along River Oaks Parkway.

Show you next slide, please.

Okay.

So this is just a quick overview of the project area.

I'm sure all of you are familiar with it.

You can see the surrounding residential projects, along with several major companies, then the new Santa Clara Schools to the north, with obviously the center point being River Oaks Park, and our project lying directly across the street from the park.

Next slide show you.

This slide calls out some of the existing amenities in the area and transit connections, which include River Oaks Park is mentioned to the south, the Coyote Creek Trail to the east, bike lanes and bus stops along River Oaks Parkway, as well as proximity to the nearby light rail station on North First Street.

Next slide show you.

So this the project incorporates the following product types, which will each have their own amenity spaces.

So in the peach color on the north side of the property are 100 townhomes.

They range from 1300 to 1900 square feet, of which about 40 of them will have rooftop decks.

So that'll be a really nice identity for those units.

In the yellow at the corner of Iron Point and River Oaks are the 130 affordable units that include a majority of two to three bedroom units appropriate for families, along with two manager units.

These affordable units will be offered at levels up to 80% AMI.

And then finally in the beige color at the corner of Cisco and River Oaks are the 505 apartments.

One thing to note in our site planning of this project, and based on the city's guidelines, we felt it was appropriate to keep the massing of the buildings and the height closer to River Oaks Parkway and the lands closest to the school for for the townhomes.

So this is just a general overview of the open space within the project, including our greenbelt that separates the affordable and the apartment buildings, which are architect will talk about shortly.

But in addition, it shows some of the public improvements that will be done as part of this project, which include the widening of Iron Point Drive to achieve a 34-foot curb to curb distance, a new and enhanced crosswalk at the western leg of Iron Point and River Oaks Parkway.

You can see an example of the rectangular rapid flashy beacon on the lower right-hand corner of this slide, along with new and widened sidewalks along all three frontages of the property, including a new sidewalk that connects Iron Point, the terminus of Iron Point to the north to the existing pedestrian entrance of the school campus.

And the project will also be making monetary contributions towards a class four protected bike lane on Cisco Way, as well as traffic light cameras at River Oaks and Cisco Way.

What I'd like to do now, Alec, is turn over the remainder of the presentation to check Tang.

So if you could let him in if he's not already in, that would be outstanding.

Perfect timing because your five minutes is up.

So what we'll do is we're going to move on to public testimony, and then you will have an additional five minutes at the end, so you can use that to continue the presentation, or if you'd rather just kind of respond.

So let's go ahead and do it that way.

Um, all right.

So are any members of the public here who would like to speak on this item?

Please raise your hands now.

Okay.

All right.

I see one hand raised.

Oscar.

Go ahead and unmute yourself, and you'll have two minutes.

All right, good morning.

Um, my name is Oscar Masaregos.

I'm a field representative with the Carpenter's Union Local 405.

I represent about 37,000 members in Northern California.

For more specifically, about 3500 members, 3500 members in Santa Clara County, which 2,000 of those members we sat in the city of San Jose.

I spent years building homes, schools, and community spaces.

The kind of places where families grow and people feel safe.

When I look at this project, I see more than blueprints and lumber.

I see opportunity, the opportunity to create something lasting, something that strengthens our community.

But for this project to truly be great, it has to be built on more than just concrete and nails.

It has to be built on solid labor standards.

That means good wages, good health care, and a really or a real commitment for to safety, because no one should have to choose between earning a living and coming home healthy to their families.

It also means local hiring so that the people that live here can help build here.

When we invest in local workers, we we keep the paychecks and the pride right here in our own neighborhoods.

And just as important, just as important, we need apprenticeships that open the doors for the next generation.

We can teach young men and women how to work with their hands, how to build something real, how to carry on the craftsmanship that keeps our trades alive.

If we do this right, this project won't bring new housing or won't just bring new housing, it'll build hope, opportunity, and strong future for everyone involved.

So let's make sure we build this the right way.

Labor strong, community strong, with the commitment to the people who make it all possible, the workers that are going to be building it.

Yeah, thank you for your time.

Thank you, Oscar.

Um, is there anyone else in our virtual audience who'd like to speak on this project?

Please raise your hand now.

Okay.

I'm seeing nobody.

Uh, so we can resume the applicant presentation if you'd like.

And I think we need to give them the slides, the floor again for the slides.

Check, sorry about hogging the time there.

If you would like to pick up, that would be fantastic.

Five minutes always goes faster than you'd think.

Yes, it does.

Well, thank you, Check Tang and uh Shoyu Lu from C O T Square.

Morning.

Um, beyond the connections to the overall context, uh, we're blessed with the River Oaks Parks right uh adjacent to our property.

And so uh we're consistent with the North San Jose Urban Design Guideline.

We introduce a green belt that is really important to us to integrate the three different residential components into the plan that they're interconnected, but they also create uh community access to the larger park there.

Um, in addition to all the improvements that Scott has mentioned.

Next, please.

Um, we also looked at the design standard um across the city design standards, looking at transition and kind of presence of uh the buildings along River Oaks Parkway fronting on the park is important for uh the master plan that both the affordable and the market rate component has strong presence to the parking, taking advantage of amenities there, and also having the town home, the three-story townhomes adjacent to the school, recreating a more walkable kind of connections all the way around that uh back side of the project is also very important to the project.

Uh, you as you can see that we're very intentional about the massing, the seven-story massing on the on the along River Oaks Parkway and the park, and then transcending to um to uh iron points, uh five-story compatible with the adjacent property, and then the townhomes in the back.

Uh, and you you can see that it um it really becomes a complete neighborhood for the overall district too.

Next um for the affordable apartments uh is 132 units of uh really family oriented project it uh really does actively engage into that public uh the public uh green belt that uh threads through the site um amenities like for example play yards and uh courtyards that opens to that um public uh views next the market rate department flyer and five units is uh a mix of studios all the way up to three bedrooms um again this separated into in one project but uh several components that makes up for the finer grain blocks that's called for in the design guidelines um it opens up to the river oaks parkway and also shares the the mews with the affordable parks and architecturally um we really wanted this you to answer the call for the for the design guidelines to break up a major block into smaller finer grain kind of components um you know that is really unique in itself as a variety of different elevations articulations and massing that really enliven the street scenes as you can see on this rendering the entrance into the market rate but also for public news and is a as a way it addresses the the River Oaks parks as well next the town home project is uh mostly family oriented two and three bedroom units again as you can see there's a whole series of greenbelt networks that connects back to the to the green belt but also create more walkability along Levy Road and Enzo Road and creating complete communities next um this is a rendering from the townhomes looking for River Oaks you can see the kind of gradual transition and the step back on the on the apartment buildings that really um uh integrate uh the whole project into the neighborhood and so there's a series of gradations of scale of the project uh that makes this a uh a kind of complementary project next and with that I'll end and we're here to our whole team's here to answer any questions but our goal here as you can see in the rendering is creating a complete district um and I think um it is well integrated into the existing neighborhood thank you okay thank you all right so you know I don't believe I have any questions so with that I'm gonna go ahead and close the public testimony um just make a couple comments before I make a decision um I do yeah I want to comment to the applicant I was actually surprised to see how few waivers and concessions you were requesting when I reviewed the plans and permits so yeah I do think that is credit to the design the efforts of the architect of the project you know we have some very uh forward thinking design standards and so you know being able to meet the vast majority of them I do want to note that as um a very positive thing and yeah I do agree with the decision to put the larger buildings kind of flanking the park and kind of circle the park with those midrise buildings um create a nice atmosphere so um seeing as this project is conforming to the city's general plan zoning land use policies um that I have not heard anything that would create uh any inconsistency with our objective standards that there is no health or safety impact I have seen identified um and as I mentioned it is consistent with the transit uh employment residential overlay I am going to certify the uh 2002 excuse me 2021 to 281 river oaks parkway residential project environmental impact report uh state clearinghouse number two oh two four one one oh two five in accordance with CEQA and I will approve the site development permit and tentative map um for this project and with that this concludes the planning and director's hearing for October 29th 2025 and I thank you for your time today.

Thank you.