evening my name is Carlos Rosario and I'm the chair of the Planning Commission welcome to this

evening's Commission please Commission meeting please remember to turn off your cell phones the

parking validation machine for the garage under City Hall is located at the back of the chambers

If you're able, please join me as we salute the flag.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic of

the Holy Spirit, one nation under God, and to the liberty of justice for God.

all right we'll now start with the roll call um vice chair bickford here

uh vice chair borosio no he's not oh sorry commissioner borosio here

here

commissioner bondall here commissioner cantrell here commissioner cow here commissioner casey

here our newest member uh commissioner amy escobar welcome to the san jose i am here

commissioner nguyen yeah commissioner oliverio commissioner young and we have quorum for the night

All right, before I begin, I want to remind the Planning Commission members and members

of the public to follow our code of conduct for meetings.

This includes commenting on the specific agenda item only and addressing the full body.

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

All members of the Planning Commission, 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 this meeting may result in removal from the meeting.

This meeting of the Planning Commission will now come to order.

Summary of Proceedings.

If you want to address the Commission, please fill out a speaker card located on the table

near the audiovisual technician and deposit the card into the basket.

There are also speaker cards in the back of the chambers and at the side entrance.

for this hearing is as follows after staffs presentation applicants or

appellants may make up to a five-minute presentation during the comment period

the chair will call out names on the submitted speaker cards and the order

received for those members of the public who attend in person as your name is

called line up in front of the microphone at the front of the chamber

generally each speaker will be given up two minutes for public testimony and

speakers using a translator will have up to four minutes at the discretion of

the chair the time allotted to each speaker may be changed depending on the

number of items on the agenda number of speakers and other factors speakers

using a translator will have doubled the time allotted after public testimony the

applicant may make closing remarks for up to an additional five minutes planning

commissioners may ask questions of the speakers response to commissioner

questions will not reduce the speaker's time allowance the public hearing will

then be closed and the Planning Commission will take action on the item

the Planning Commission may request staffs 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 rezoning prezonings general plan amendments and

code amendments is only advisory to the City Council the City Council will hold

public hearings on these items sections section 20.120.400 of the

Municipal Code provides the procedures for legal protest to the City Council on rezonings

and prezonings.

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.

Agendas and all staff reports for this meeting may be accessed at the City's website.

Moving on to Public Comment.

Public comments to the Planning Commission on non-agendized items.

Please fill out a Speaker's card and give it to the Technician.

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 in response to public comment the Planning Commission

is limited to the following options responding to statements made or

questions posed by members of the public 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 comment on public

Any comment for items not on the Planning Commission agenda?

We do not have any speaker cards.

Okay.

Then we will move on to deferrals and removals from the calendar.

Any items scheduled for this hearing this evening for which deferral is being requested

will be taken out of order to be heard first on the matter of deferral or removal.

Staff will provide an update on the items for which deferral or removal is being requested.

If you want to change any of the deferral dates recommended or speak to the question

of deferring or removing these or any other items, you should say so at this time.

Good evening, Chair and Commission.

Manir Sandhir, Deputy Planning Director with PBCE.

We do have one item for deferral tonight.

It's CP25-001 and ER25-007.

Staff, is there a specific report for the Commission?

uh yeah we'd just like to correct uh the agenda does say defer to january 14th 2026 i believe

there will not be a planning commission hearing that date so it will be revised to january 28th

2026. all right anything from the commissioners then we'll move to a roll call vote vice chair

bickford yes commissioner barosio yes commissioner bondal yes commissioner Cantrell yes commissioner

cow yes commissioner Casey yes commissioner Escobar yes commissioner Nguyen yes commissioner

Oliverio is still not here commissioner Young still not here and myself is yes so that is

nine in favor and two absent to the chair yeah a motion and a second thank you do we have a motion

motion to defer to her second all right with the motion by bond all a second by who was that

casey all right one more time vice chair bickford how do you vote still yes so yes commissioner

borosio yes commissioner bondall yes commissioner cantrell yes commissioner cow yes commissioner

casey yes commissioner escobar yes commissioner newen yes commissioners oliverio and young are

absent and i am a yes so that motion passes nine with two absences do we have any other items to

defer all right moving on to the consent calendar there will be no separate

discussion of individual consent calendar items as they are considered to

be routine and will be adopted by one motion if a member of the Commission

requests debate separate vote or recusal on a particular item that item may be

removed from the consent calendar by the chair and considered separately the

public may comment on the entire consent calendar and any items removed from the

consent calendar by the chair staff will provide an update on the consent

calendar if you wish to speak on one of these items individually please come up to the podium

at this time are there any public speakers seeing none commissioners are there anything any is there

anything that you would like to discuss that is on the consent calendar

motion to approve a motion by commissioner bondal second second from commissioner cantrell

All right moving on to the vote.

Commissioner or Vice Chair Bickford.

Yes.

Commissioner Borossio.

Yes.

Commissioner Bondall.

Yes.

Commissioner Cantrell.

Yes.

Commissioner Cow.

Yes.

Commissioner Casey.

Yes.

Commissioner Escobar.

I will abstain.

Commissioner Nguyen.

Yes.

Commissioner Oliverio is not here yet and Commissioner Young is also not here yet and

I am a yes making that eight yeses two absence and one abstain the motion passes

all right okay moving on to public hearing generally the public hearing items are considered

by the Planning Commission in the order in which they appear on the agenda however please be advised

that the Commission may take items out of order to facilitate the agenda such as to accommodate

significant public testimony or may defer discussion of items to later agendas for public

hearing time management purposes we only have one item or public hearing the annual compliance

review of the development agreements and should we begin with the staff

presentation all right staff for the staff do you have a presentation tonight

thank you chair my name is John to division manager in the development of

you team in the PBC this is a compliance review hearing for the seven active

development agreements in the cities including Cisco shape property shape

properties for Jackson Taylor in Japantown Apple in North San Jose

Hitachi Western Digital in South San Jose Novellas Vista Montez home equity

Tasman apartment in North San Jose Museum place and Google downtown west and

downtown as background state law authorizes development agreements between

a local agency and a developer of or an owner DAs in the city of San Jose are

regulated through title 18 of the muni code these seven DAs have been adopted

by City Council State Law and Meaning Code

that requires the city conduct annual compliance reviews

to ensure that the developers are in compliance

with the terms and conditions of the development agreement,

which is why this item is before we hear it tonight.

The item does not involve consideration

of any new or modified DA terms and condition,

nor is this item associated

with any new or modified land use entitlements.

Each of these seven DAs are associated

with different land use entitlements

and have unique terms and conditions.

Staff has completed an assessment

of these DA terms and conditions

and concluded that the developers

compliance for the period between July 1st 2024 and July 30th of 2025 as

outlined in greater detail in the staff report however staff would like to

provide an update for the resolution for the Jackson Taylor Japantown DA exhibit

F replacing the fourth whereas which states whereas the terms of the amended

amended agreement is for a period of eight years from the date of the

property sales from the city to the original developer which occurred on

March 30th 2017 to now state whereas the terms of the amended agreement is

for a period of seven years from the deadline

to complete construction of the Center for the Creative Arts,

which must be completed no later than November 1, 2032.

And to reflect the, okay, therefore, this is to reflect

the updated construction language that is found

in the Third Amendment for that DA.

Therefore, if the PC finds the developer associated

with the respective DA are in compliance

with the terms and conditions of the DA,

staff recommends that the PC adopt all these resolutions

of compliance this concludes that presentation oh we also have Kevin ice

here from the office economic developments to help answer any questions

as well as planning staff

chair Daniel says what the city attorney's office so Commission we have

two recusals one for Cisco Systems DA and Google DA are there any other

commissioners who need to recuse themselves from a vote on any of these

items please speak now otherwise we'll go forward this is if you have stock for

example correct okay yeah any financial conflict yes for Google for Google okay

So the way we're going to do this is we'll vote on all of these items without

Cisco and without Google and we'll vote on those separately after this combined

vote. Actually can we clarify the amount of stock is important in this case right?

Isn't there a dollar value? Correct. Two thousand dollars or one more.

No.

Was it $10,000?

$2,000.

$2,000.

Yeah.

All right.

We will vote on.

Over here.

Oh.

Yeah.

Apologies.

Commissioner Cowell.

Yeah.

So I have a clarifying question, at least for the commission's sake.

In terms of owning stock or having an investment in this,

like are we talking about owning a single stock or is it because let's say I

think a couple of these companies are generally included in like the major

basket of stocks like the S&P 500 type stocks if you understand what I'm saying

so if it's a clarification yeah if you don't have any control over individual

stock correct right if it's part of a mutual fund of some sort then you do not

have to recuse yourself okay thank you that's helpful I will need to recuse I

I have Google and Apple.

Nice.

Yeah.

Typical.

Okay.

And we will have the first vote on everything other than Cisco,

the Cisco, Google, and Apple DAs, and then we will move on to Cisco,

then Apple, and then Google.

Commissioner Casey.

Yes, a question for staff, and I guess legal.

um are we in a position to ask questions about these like some of them don't seem

as though well maybe they're in compliance but I guess is there any input

we get in terms of the agreements or questions about why some seem to be

continuing to drag out and needing extensive extensions and things like

that is that right to the staff through the chair of Commissioner Casey if you

could confirm which particular ideas you talk about then staff can provide the

additional information. Okay thank you. Thank you chair. So in terms of the Cisco

agreement it looks as though I'm reading this. Sorry before we have any discussion

about Cisco, Apple or Google we're gonna have to ask those particular

commissioners with a with a conflict to leave the dais. So are we just going to

talk about Cisco or are we gonna talk about? I had three different ones I just

quick questions okay so if we can take them in order and we can talk about

Cisco now we can ask not vice chair Bigford to step out of the room okay

fair enough museum place then sure sure if we're gonna talk about museum place

then oh she's got to go to okay all right Japan town sure okay okay all right I

I wasn't going to do those.

Okay, all right.

So museum place.

The question there in terms of the deadline

and it coming up in terms of having to build the construction

of the museum, I mean, it seems clear at this point

that they're not going to make the April 28 date

based on not having permits filed

and starting anything related to that.

I guess what, with these agreements,

I understand that they're, you know,

they're not necessarily required by law,

but we do enter into them because there are some benefits

to the developer being able to lock in the terms and conditions

and the processes at the point of creating this.

But at what point do we circle back and start saying,

hey, we're not going to be making these dates.

What do we need to do in terms of either rectifying that now

or putting more pressure on them to actually meet their commitments?

Sure.

For a specific New Zillian place, just for the sake of everybody else,

we're clearly looking to see their compliance right now.

So we're not necessarily getting to the bigger discussion

whether or not we should modify the terms of development agreements or anything, we're

purely doing a compliance report today.

As far as the context of the museum place, they currently have an application online,

currently now for development for a data center, and they're aware that they may have to come

back to do an amendment to the development agreement in the future as part of any future

proposal of a different type of entitlement.

But a data center is supposed to be a 60,000 square foot museum exhibition hall.

Yes, it was a data center in conjunction with the mixed use with residential as well as

their proposal.

So the city council is taking that for early consideration and ultimately when they do

come forward with a project, that project will be for the planning commission and the

city council.

Through the chair, if I may add some context.

I think the applicant has applied for early consideration,

but I believe they're still refining their proposal.

So at this point, it's uncertain

on when that would be heard before the city council

or how that would affect the development agreement.

And I'd also like to add, sorry, Mr. Ice,

we're not going to be discussing the particulars

of the actual project.

This is just to discuss the development agreement

of each one of these.

so to get into so the public wasn't aware that we would discuss the

individual projects so we have to refrain from speaking about the

individual projects but asking clarifying questions like that I think

it's fine but I just want to make sure that we're all aware that we're not

going doing a deep dive into the individual specific projects here okay

all right but I just okay hopefully at some point we can add more value than

just saying they're in compliance today no further questions Commissioner

Candrell. My question is on Google West and the part of their agreement was... So before we start

talking about Google we have to ask all of those who have conflicts to lead the

diet. I knew that. I knew that. We can do it now if you want to... Well if we want to do it now and

then we can do everything in clumps that's great. This won't take long. Sure. So everybody who has

conflict regarding Google will be asked to leave the dais wait outside I'll come

get you when we're done but then for everyone who wants to talk about the

Google DA get all your questions out now okay sure would it be more practical to

take that motion on the non-conflicted items get that out of the way and then

if you're conflicted you can leave for the night versus having to go set out the room for 10 15

minutes come back in you know type of thing fair enough sure i agree commissioner borosio

commissioner escobar return we'll take discussion of all items other than cisco google and apple

and if there's a motion motion to approve all items on that agenda item minus cisco apple and

Google okay we have a motion from Commissioner Oliverio and a second from

Commissioner Beckford thank you any questions Commissioner Cal I hope I'm

doing okay thank you I think the question that I have for staff is just

to kind of clarify my understanding.

This is my first time coming across, you know,

this kind of report.

So I'm trying to understand kind of the big picture in terms

of what is, what we're being tasked to do.

It looks like there are seven projects that have been approved

and in progress, like, yeah, in progress.

And for each project, there is a compliance with the,

well, there are two sections, compliance with terms

and then compliance with obligations.

And then I also just heard a moment ago

from Commissioner Casey that we're not,

like based on the question,

like we're not diving deep into specific projects

and we're just working with, we're just talking about the compliance piece,

I guess I'm just trying to understand, like, the big picture, you know,

you can kind of help me compartmentalize here what exactly it is that we're doing.

That would be very helpful.

Sure.

So the compliance agreement is to see the progress of the development agreement,

which can include entitlements, which can include obligations such as paying to park fees

or different aspects, or in other cases, paying for community benefits

programs, and these terms range anywhere from 10 to 30 years.

So when we're talking about questions, we can talk about the projects that have already been entitled as part of the development agreement.

I think the case that was the example earlier was about another application online that's outside of the scope of the DA.

And what the attorney was saying, that's not really the appropriate form to discuss the compliance of it.

There's a different form to discuss that project in itself.

But you're perfectly fine to talk about a project that's in the DA that's already been entitled, or in process that still needs to be entitled.

That's fine.

I see. And then I guess my follow-up question there is, after reviewing staff memo and the draft resolutions, just I guess a global picture, it seems like administration's recommending that we adopt the resolutions for the seven projects.

Yeah, it's more of a check-in of the DA.

That's kind of the way I would say it.

I'm giving you a check-in of, hey, we have these seven DAs that have long terms.

We want to give you kind of an update.

Do you agree that our analysis has confirmed that the check-in is correct

and they have a compliance with their current DA?

You might have heard other things that say, hey, I heard that this DA was supposed to do this.

Can you clarify are they consistent or not?

I see.

So that's really the intention.

It's not to create a new DA.

It's not to modify a DA.

There's a separate form for that.

Got it.

Okay, thank you very much.

Through the chair, if I could add to that,

I think this forum also provides the public an opportunity

to understand where the different development agreements are at.

So the state law requires this public hearing process

for the annual reporting on these development agreements

to ensure that the public is aware of the status

of these projects as well.

Got it. Thank you.

That's very helpful.

All right.

Yes, Commissioner Bigford.

yeah so so just on the the same note from Commissioner Cow is item number four

which would be the DA for Hitachi I just want to clarify a point about the dates

because it says for the annual compliance review period July 1 through

June 30 and this agreement was actually from September 23rd 2005 are we only

certifying through June 30 we're only certifying what happened in the last

year words are required to hold a compliance here in six months after the

evaluation period so we're kind of at the end so apologize that it's a little

later than usual but yes you're certifying what happened in that period

that's related to their DA thank you

all right anything else all right do we have a motion now for all okay let's go to the vote

vice chair Bickford yes Commissioner Borosio yes Commissioner Bondall yes Commissioner Cantrell

yes Commissioner Casey yes Commissioner Escobar yes Commissioner Nguyen yes

Commissioner Oliverio yes Commissioner Young yes and myself is yes and the

first time I think on the council we have a 10-0 vote to

Commissioner Cal?

Yes.

There it is.

11.

11-0.

11-0.

All right.

The motion passes.

We have.

Commissioner Cantrell.

Probably a late question, but maybe an important one.

Will we still have quorum for Apple, Google,

and Cisco individually?

That's right.

Yeah. So, great question.

quorum needs to be present but the member it's a majority of those who are

voting so if there's some who leave they're still present okay

Commissioner Oliverio motion to approve Cisco

second by cow

any discussion on the item

commissioner Casey okay all right

we'll move on to a roll call vote then

Commissioner Borossio yes Commissioner Bondall yes Commissioner Cantrell yes

Commissioner cow yes Commissioner Casey yes Commissioner Escobar yes

Commissioner Nguyen yes Commissioner Oliverio yes Commissioner Young yes

myself is a yes at 10 to 0 with one absent vice chair or recused recused

all right the mo thank you the motion carries so we'll move on to Apple now

and I believe Commissioner Bigford can return

Commissioner Olivero motion to approve Apple second

Wait for Commissioner Bigford to return.

We can start with, does anyone have any questions?

Commissioner Casey?

If I can just fill the time while we wait for them to come back.

A quick question for staff.

With the development agreements, I saw the City Council approves them.

approves them do they typically come to the planning commission before they go

to the city council for approval like will we see new ones in the future

that's a good question I don't think there's been many that I ever skipped

planning commission you typically it involves some kind of entitlement that

usually involves the planning commission so I would say that for the most part I

think you will see most development agreements as at least a recommendation

okay so we could have input into them at that point in time yeah okay thank you

Commissioner Bickford are there time limits on development agreements and I'm

assuming so because some of them I've seen have had renewals would the city

ever decide to terminate a development agreement hi I'm Kevin ice director of

real estate with the city city managers office of economic development and

cultural affairs each development agreement has its own term so and then

they have there's specific terms for extension under certain conditions under

them and so you have to first consider the terms of the agreement itself beyond

that it's a decision of um you know city council in in deciding whether uh it wishes to enter into

any other modified terms under a different agreement or modified agreement

any other comments or questions

i see none we'll move on to a roll call vote vice chair with the motion by oliverio and

a second by commissioner bondal vice chair bigford yes commissioner barracio has gone

on has recused himself commissioner bondal yes commissioner cantrell yes commissioner cow yes

commissioner casey yes commissioner escobar has recused herself commissioner newin yes

Commissioner Oliverio?

Yes.

Commissioner Young?

Yes.

Myself is a yes.

It is nine in favor and two who have recused themselves from the vote.

So the motion carries.

For the Google, for the last one, I will need to recuse myself.

So the vice chair will have to recuse herself.

So would you mind taking over the floor?

Daniel said that.

Is he city attorney out of his place?

He did recuse himself.

He indicated that it was allowed when we spoke about it beforehand,

but we'll wait for him to return.

Or you could nominate a commissioner if a commissioner wants to volunteer to chair.

I wanted to come back to this again late.

Yeah.

The question is whether the Planning Commission Secretary

can chair the meeting.

Okay.

While the Chair recuses himself from this item.

Okay.

Thank you.

I will recuse myself.

All right.

Commissioner Oliverio.

Motion to approve Google.

Second.

Second from Commissioner Casey.

Okay. Any questions?

So the Google West agreement has some community,

I forget what the term is, benefits.

Thank you.

Wow. I'm curious about some specific benefits

and if what benefits are still active and will when will they be paid for so the development

agreement has it that there was set up a committee and a certain amount of fun I believe it's

about five million dollars set aside for them and that a lot of the other triggers will occur

when the actual developments of the office developments come forward but the development

green does set aside that those money that came from those committee groups the formation of those

committee groups the funding to form those committee groups were already

paid out even before the development seems started okay the second question

has to do exactly with those funds that were paid out there was a million

dollars allocated to the Gardner community my understanding that the

Gardner community included the community and not PRNS specifically

however those funds have been commandeered by PRNS.

What's the read on that?

Is that where those funds were allocated?

I just want to make sure that we're staying within the bounds of development agreement.

This is within the bounds of the development agreement,

specifically on the funds for community benefit and their use, specifically.

I think that's fair I just want to make sure that we're being thoughtful about

exactly staying within that yeah that's my only question okay I wanted to know

where the funds were supposed to go as a part of that agreement and was it in

fact some white PR and S how that work so I just want to be clear to the

establishment of this fund commission to provide the community with stabilization

funds was under the development agreement I believe okay however how

those funds are dispersed is not part of that so I just want to make sure that

we're like the specifics about Gardner getting a million dollars I don't know

if staff here is prepared and not only that but I want to make sure that in the

whole reason we're talking about this because I don't want to make sure I want

to make sure that the public who may have an interest in hearing about this

this wasn't noticed to them that's the whole reasoning that we tried to I'm not

trying to stifle the discussion I just want to make sure that if we're gonna

have this discussion the public has been given notice that we're gonna have this

discussion because it is a fair discussion that should be brought up so

maybe we agendize this for another time or we can have a more full discussion

about it so I think I'll clarify since I did do that it was the project manager

for the downtown west project so I think the dispersions of the fund is

actually to the committee in terms of where they would spend their specific

money and they set aside the money to the committee to decide where that goes

I don't have a current update of where the committee stands on that specific

fund I can reach out to PRNS and try to give you an update to see the status of

any decisions on that specifically but I don't think that it was under the DEA to

specifically allocated it was I think will be given to the committee

themselves to decide how they get dispersed with certain guidelines of where it could go.

Okay. I would definitely like to, we can either agendize it later if you want,

or I can accept that at a point certain, and we can discuss that point later,

that we'll understand the interpretation of where the funds were supposed to go,

and by what jurisdiction.

And I think that is something maybe we can discuss at a future date, because the commission

that was established to disperse these funds has not met for some time.

I know.

I think after they haven't met for some time before the disbursement of those funds.

So I'm not clear what the decision is.

so yeah I think we can we can discuss that we can provide you an update with

that and reach out the departments that is more in tune with the committee itself

okay just can we set an expiration for that I think the next planning

Commission I can provide you an update specifically that's fantastic thank you

very much

Oh, my apologies.

Commissioner Young.

Thank you.

John, I just have a question of whether we have heard anything from Google.

Is there any movement towards, you know, fulfilling this agreement just for the Commission's

interest?

Sure. The development agreement for Google was a 30-year agreement, right, that had multiple phases and multiple triggers, depending on kind of the office developments and the residential.

So in addition to that, to the development agreement, as well as the development standards, includes a bunch of interim uses that are allowed.

So they've submitted multiple interim uses to kind of redevelop, reuse a lot of those spaces, specifically for such as activation, concert spaces, retail, pop-up, food trucks, events.

those have all been submitted and understand that a couple of them are

except the creekside development where there is currently a beer garden is

currently operating and it's my understanding that you know they are

still looking at and evaluating the other public improvement process and a

bunch of other planning need to examine prior to actually submitting any future

development permits or any future building permits okay great thank you

Any other questions?

Okay.

With that, we have a motion from Commissioner Oliverio and a second from Commissioner Casey.

Let's go through the list.

Chair Rosario and Vice Chair Bickford are recused.

Commissioner Borossio is also recused.

Commissioner Bandell?

Yes.

Commissioner Cantrell?

I think I might have to abstain.

i'm not sure if i should approve this without an understanding of how those funds were allocated in

use um commissioner control you may have the option to request a friendly amendment to the

motion to direct staff to come back with an update that could be a possibility looking to

the city attorney yeah i mean if if you i think that was a separate kind of discussion if you want

want to have a separate discussion on this it's but at this point you have to

vote yes or no okay no

Commissioner cow yes Commissioner Casey yes Commissioner Escobar has recused

herself Commissioner Nguyen yes Commissioner Oliverio yes Commissioner

Young yes okay so we have six yeses one no and for recusal motion passes thank

you we will have all the other commissioners rejoin the meeting so

please bear with us for a minute

Thank you.

all right so we're finished with item five is that correct there we go all right so on to item six

referrals from the City Council boards commissions or other agencies staff any

items yes I have a quick report from City Council so at the meeting last week

on December 3rd the City Council approved the historic preservation

ordinance amendments that were also recommended for approval by the Planning

Commission they also approved the Eichler design standards and the PD

zoning located at 908 Burn Court C25-038.

For upcoming meetings next week, we have on December 16th the Mega Ordinance Amendments

Package moving forward that addresses a number of state laws and housing element programs

that was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission.

And then in January, we are expecting an item before council on SB 79, which is recent state

legislation that goes into effect on July 1st associated with allowing for

high-density housing near transit areas staff is currently analyzing all the

options available under that state law to take for to counsel for direction on

January 27th we also have habitat plan amendments that will be going to counsel

for direction that would be coming to Planning Commission once those are ready

and I also want to note that there are three appeals that are currently being

processed by our team one associated with the Tropicana conditional use permit

that the Planning Commission approved or sorry denied in November and one

associated with the PayPal Stadium special use permit modifications related

to noise mitigation as well as Lundy Avenue industrial use project the

and both of these were approved at the directors hearing that's all of my

updates thank you January there would be many a meeting a council about SB 79

but was that you mean Commission I meant council I do have updates for

commission as well if you'd like me to go into those although I do see

Commissioner cow do you have any questions on

Commissioner Cal.

Yeah, so I actually raised my hand at the end of item five just as like a,

I don't know if this is the appropriate time to bring it up,

but as like a process question, Commissioner Cantrell had brought up something

and I heard that there could have been a friendly amendment to,

like for his situation like that he brought up and I guess I'm a little

confused in terms of just general process like is that he was told that he

could only vote yes or no but then like is there any friendly amendment potential

like afterwards like I guess the vote already went through and it passed but I

don't know if that addressed Commissioner Cantrell's concern and I

I guess I just wanted to ask that to get some clarification on what the process is in that situation

Through the chair, I'm happy to start or and city attorney can weigh in

So typically when a motion and a second is made

There is an opportunity for other commissioners to weigh in and propose an alternate motion, I believe

And if that does not happen, then the commissioners have to vote yes or no on the motion that is on the floor

and because voting had started we couldn't go back to propose an alternate

got it okay thank you okay continuing with reports report from about the

Commission yes so a few reports so I'm hoping that the email issue that all the

commissioners were experiencing has now been resolved I think we were able to

get our city emails back on track for all the commissioners so I understand that

was a pain point so hopefully that's resolved the City Hall will be closed

from December 24th to the 2nd of January so this is my understanding is like the

city staff goes on furlough we will have critical services still available to

people code enforcement staff for example or any health and safety needs

those will still be monitored and accommodated but the planning staff will

mostly be away and thus we will not have any Planning Commission meetings for the

rest of the year so this is our last meeting of the year so happy holidays to

everybody in January we are lining up a few things I think our next general plan

task force meeting will be on January 21st and I think we are exploring a

potential study session on the cost of development study that went to City

Council yesterday through I'm sorry on Monday at a study session I thought we

were targeting January 14th for that study session but if you know we have to

see if that date still works for everybody and that might also be a joint

study session with the Planning Commission and the Housing Commission

because it's the cost of residential development study

Sorry, just a note, I have that on my calendar for the 21st of January, the Planning Commission Task Force meeting.

That is correct.

Thank you.

All right.

Anything else?

Let's see.

From Good and Welfare.

I would like to welcome Commissioner Escobar to the commission.

Thank you for your time and service.

I know Commissioner Escobar and I formerly worked at the County of Santa Clara,

the Planning Commission, so really excited to have her join.

Thank you.

Yes, you're welcome.

And anything else for the public record?

All right, with that, this meeting of the Planning Commission is adjourned at 7.19 p.m.

Thank you.

Thank you.