Good morning.

We are calling to order the planning director hearing of April 29th, 2026.

My name is David Keen, 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 Burton.

This meeting is being beheld via Zoom conference call.

Members of the public may participate by following the 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 join electronically and have audio input available on the computer or smartphone, they can use the raise hand feature in Zoom during the agenda item they would like to speak or click star nine on their phone.

Remember to keep your raise the hand feature until planning support staff can identify your turn to speak.

Second option to provide public comment is during the meeting.

You can call 408 535 8517 or email planning support staff at San Jose CA.gov and identify your name that is listed on Zoom, your phone number that you'd be calling into Zoom with, and what item or items you'd 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 is your turn to speak.

At that time, you will be unmuted and you 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.

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

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

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

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

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

I do not see any items for deferral.

Support staff or any anybody.

Does anybody have any wish to move any items onto deferrals?

Okay, not hearing anybody.

I'm going to see there's no items for deferrals.

So therefore the matter of deferrals is now closed.

So I'm now going to move 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 considered in one action unless an item 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 items removed from the consent calendar by the hearing officer.

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

Now there is one item.

It is item 3A.

It is file number SPA 20-012-01 and EER 25-249.

This is a special use permit amendment to modify an existing permit, file number SP20-012 to allow changes to site B of the affordable housing building to include a reduction in vehicle parking spaces from 51 spaces to 44 spaces, an increase in bike parking from 75 to 89 bikes, a reduction in square footage amenity space from 14,000 square feet to approximately 11,500 square feet, changes to the exterior finishes and materials, a reduction in the building height from 70 feet to 63 feet, and to allow the removal of 32 trees in this phase to allow phase one of a signature project to construct a five-story multifamily residential building with 89 affordable units, trail improvements to Kanoas Creek, the relocation of a bus stop on Blossom Hill, and partial demolition of the existing surface parking lot.

No changes to the previously approved density bonus requests are proposed under the approximately 5.39 gross acre site located at 605 Blossom Hill Road.

So the sequel is a determination of consistency with the Blossom Hill Station Project Environmental Impact Report adopted by City Council Resolution 80644 on August 9th, 2022.

So is there anybody who wishes to speak on this item?

I see one raised hand.

Yes, Lillian County.

Yeah.

H0664.

Yeah, I do have a comment, and I would like to speak on the item of the removal of the trees over 30 trees.

I totally object to the removal of all these trees.

Hi.

So that yeah, I'm gonna um I'll remove this from the consent calendar and move it to public hearing.

So because there's a member of the hotel that wants to speak, so then we'll move this to public hearing.

Okay, and then you'll get a chance to speak as part of public hearing.

So because there is public interest, I am moving item number three A to the public hearing portion of the calendar.

Um, again, this is item 3A.

I'm not going to reread the reread the full permit description.

This is special use permit amendment to permit SP20 to 012.

Um, staff, can I have a brief report?

Good morning, hearing officer.

Um, my name is Jacqueline Guerrero, and I'm the planning project manager with the city's planning division for item 3A on the agenda today.

Um, as mentioned today, the special use permit amendment is to facilitate the construction to site B of a previously approved project SB 2012.

Um, the physical changes to the project are minor and staff has analyzed the project to ensure that it complies with all applicable city policies.

Um assessing the project, we found that the project was still consistent with the general plan and zoning.

Um staff follows city council policy 630 for public outreach.

An on-site sign was posted on the project frontage, and this hearing was noticed at a radius of a thousand feet.

Um the environmental document for this project is a determination of consistency with the previously approved Blossom Hill station mixed to use project EAR, which was adopted in August 9th, 2022.

Um, the proposed changes as noted in the project description will not have a significant environmental impact and will not result in any changes or additions to that required mitigation measures identified in the environmental assessment for the project.

Therefore, staff recommends that the director consider the termination of consistency and approve the special use permit amendment.

Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you.

So now do we have an applicant's representative?

I see Daniel Ryan with EIH housing.

Daniel, you have five minutes to speak as the applicant's representative.

Thank you so much.

My name is Daniel Ryan.

I'm the director of real estate development for EAH housing.

And the applicant for the affordable portion of this project.

This project will create 89 very needed affordable housing units in the city of San Jose.

The amendments that are being made today are consistent as mentioned with the EIR already performed and adopted by the city council.

Any tree removal was already considered and adopted in that.

There will be replacement of trees as a part of the application.

So there will be new street trees and new planting occurring.

That is all.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

So now I'm going to move on to the public hearing portion of the agenda.

So anybody member of the public who wishes to speak on this item, please raise your hand now.

So I'm gonna have Lillian speaking.

Okay.

Um, and in deference to EAH, I actually live in an EEH senior housing complex.

Um, just so I I thought I'd throw that out there.

But uh, excuse me.

So the removal of the trees, I understand that it's part of the project, but my objection is probably with the city and the E and the uh EIR with Jacqueline and the EIR um and CEQA um requirements and how the environment is affected when we are uprooting trees.

And again, it's just one more project where the city has specified that okay, it's uh okay to uproot all these trees for the project.

And of course, the developer will um state that they will either put a park there or they'll plant more trees, et cetera, et cetera.

So um every time it comes up with planning commission, it doesn't matter if it's one tree, a hundred trees, two hundred trees.

I always feel the need to object to that because of, you know, we are trying to save our green spaces.

We are trying to save our trees.

We are um tree city uh USA, supposedly San Jose.

And every time that I um hear about that, I I feel the need to object to that portion of it, even though it's been, you know, um stamped, sealed, and approved.

And so that is my comment this morning.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Um I see Daniel.

Um he was the applicant's representative.

Um is there's anybody else, any other member of the public that wishes to speak on this item, please raise your hand or um call in to support staff and let them know if you that you would like to speak at this time.

Okay.

Support staff.

Have you received any requests for public comment on this item?

No, we have not.

We've not.

Okay.

So I uh do not see any more public comments.

So public comment is closed.

Um, Daniel or anybody from the applicant team, you have five minutes to um respond if you like.

If not, we could go to deliberation.

I have no additional comments at this time.

Thank you so much.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um, so um, planning staff for the item of trees.

Just want to clarify the area of the tree mobile is this the parking lot area that was already anticipated for development under the original permit.

These are parking lot trees.

This isn't uh like riparian quarter or other wild area, correct?

This is these are parking lot trees.

Yes, that's correct.

Okay.

And this was already this is already considered as part of the original project.

Yes, that is correct.

Okay.

Yeah.

And so as you mentioned, there's no increase in the number of trees to be removed.

No.

Okay.

Yeah.

So yeah.

So I think one of the issues that we have struggled with as a city is that we have a general plan that is encouraging densification of the city and existing urban areas and seeking to minimize new development in green field areas of the city.

Um, so this has been uh a struggle that we've had as a city going back for several decades.

And we do have an urban growth boundary so that we do not extend the city's sprawling into other natural areas.

But as part of that, the cost of that means that we are going to be intensifying existing developed areas of the city.

That was a very common method in order to basically make parking lots nicer.

However, in the current current climate, political climate, not excuse, not political climate, the current economic climate, and also based on our general plan, parking lots are underutilized space.

And as we seek to densify and encourage more housing and other types of development in urban, in the urbanized areas of the city, it does mean that these kind of landscaping trees that were required under past projects are now coming down because we are redeveloping the parking lots.

This was actually evaluated in the general plan EIR and determined that it was going to be, you know, what was going to be something that would occur.

However, to offset that, there are measures in place in order to have replanting of trees based upon the ratios that are listed in the permit.

So this was developed as part of an offset with the overall understanding that parking lots will be redeveloped over time, consistent with the general plan.

Landscaping trees will be removed.

However, there will be more trees planted either on site or off site in order to balance out the canopy.

While it's you know immediate removal of these trees, it will end up being, you know, there will be more trees planted around the city to compensate for it.

So with that, I am going to approve item number 3A, and that's SPA 20012 01 and ER25 249.

So seeing that action is approved.

So this concludes the public hearing.

And the next item is adjournment.

So adjournment at 9 16 a.m.

Thank you.