Okay, good morning.

It's 9 a.m.

So we are calling to order the planning director's hearing for May 13th, 2026.

My name is Jared Ferguson, and I am 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 held 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 joined electronically and have audio input on their computer or smartphone.

They can use the raise hand feature in Zoom during the agenda item they would like to speak to or click star nine on their phone.

Remember to keep your hand raised until planning support staff identify your turn to speak.

You may also during the meeting 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'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 are unmuted.

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

At that time you'll 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 follows.

I will identify each project as described on the agenda.

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 the public meeting, I will ask staff to provide a brief report.

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

After the applicant has spoken, after the applicant or the representatives have 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 it 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 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 public 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 the 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, the zoning ordinance.

The planning director's actions on the environmental review for the permits under the California Environmental Quality Act CEQA are separately appealable in accordance with the requirements of Title 20 of the Municipal Code, 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 commenting on the specific items on the agenda.

Sorry, excuse me.

This includes commenting on the specific agenda item only.

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

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

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

The meeting of the director, the meeting of the planning director will come to order.

Okay.

So okay, uh item two is deferrals.

Um we do not have any deferrals for this meeting.

Um so we'll move to the consent calendar.

Just as a reminder again, there will be no specific discussion of individual consent items, as they're 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 and any items they wish to see removed from that consent calendar by the hearing officer.

If you wish to speak again you can use the raised hand feature in Zoom or click star nine.

So we have three permits uh on the consent calendar three items on the consent calendar we have three A, which is H25-029 V25-002 and ER25-164.

And then we have item 3B, which is HA 18-047-01 and ER26-005.

And then item 3C which is T25-010 and ER25-106.

So for those three items um yes uh Jason.

Uh good morning here officer this is Jason Lee uh project manager for this item that's showing on screen right now T25010 um I have a slight correction to the permit in section 6A the in the analysis for uh I believe it's the subdivision ordinance the sequa citation is wrong um it references a class 15 minor lands division uh the sequa is actually and it shows in the environmental review section below um section 15061b3 regarding a common sense exemption um so uh I would request that the hearing officer consider that and um allow that correction in your approval or your just okay okay thank you Jason okay um so with that um please uh raise your hand if you would like to speak and comment and let me know if there's an item you would like to see moved to the public hearing.

Okay thank you I I do not see any hands raised to speak um so with that I will go ahead and approve the consent calendar which includes the uh three items 3A 3b 3c uh shown on the the screen here okay uh we will move to uh section four which is the public hearing uh we have item 4a which is pd a 98-067-04 and ER22-202 this is a plan development permit amendment proposing the construction of a two-story single family house and permitting two existing wooden exterior decks on an approximately 2.46 gross acre site located approximately 520 feet southwest of Bergman Court and nearby buena avenue intersection at 2569 uh colnez court um this is located in council district eight um and has a CEQA of exempt pursuant to CEQA guidelines section one five three zero three a for new construction or conversion of small structures.

And the staff recommendation is to consider the exemption in accordance with CECRA and approve the Plan Development permit amendment so um do we have a presentation from staff on this?

Yeah, thank you, Hearing Officer.

Uh, we have a brief oral presentation.

Uh, my name is Alex Hughes.

I'm the project manager for the plan development amendment, file number PDA 98-067-04, located at 2569 Colness Court.

The site is located in the rural residential general plan area and seeks to permit the construction of a two-story single family house, among other minor exterior improvements, and would be the last single-family house out of the three originally entitled properties for single-family use under the PD zoning file number PDC 98-034.

The site itself is located on an approximately 2.46 gross acre site.

The proposed building is approximately 5,400 square feet, which comes in at about 5% floor area ratio.

The project site is surrounded by other similarly sized single family homes and has been found to conform with the PD amendment findings for consistency with the general plan, the zoning, and city council policy 6-30 for public outreach.

The proposed is exempt from CEQA under 15303A for new construction or conversion of small structures.

Therefore, staff recommend consideration of the exemption in accordance with CEQA and approve the plan development amendment.

Staff are available for questions.

Thank you.

Alright, thank you for that.

Now we will go to the project uh applicant or the representative.

They're here.

Up to five minutes.

Is the project representative?

I do see him on the attendee side.

Okay.

You should be unmuted now.

Hello, good morning.

Can you hear me?

Okay.

Good morning.

Yes, we can hear you.

Thank you.

Perfect.

Yeah, I'd like to thank everyone uh for having this meeting and discussing our project.

Just wanted to reiterate that you know the goal here was to meet all of the zoning requirements as far as setbacks, uh height as to not uh affect any neighbor and just be consistent with the neighborhood.

I don't really want need to add anything else to the project manager.

I'd like to thank him also for just going through the project, but if there's any specific uh design or technical questions, I'm here to help answer.

Thank you so much.

Okay, thank you very much.

Okay, with that, we will uh go to members of the public.

So please raise your hand and staff will identify you and then please state your name and you will have uh two minutes to speak.

Thanks.

Uh Mark.

Yes.

Go ahead.

Here I need to thank you.

Good morning.

My name is Mark Wu, and my wife Ivy is also here with me.

We live at 2570 Brokenman Court where the owner, we are downhill site property right next to this project.

I'm not here to stop this project.

Likely it means the city's setup and the height requirements.

I'm here to ask a few reasonable conditions to protect my family and my home.

My situation is that simple.

My neighbor's land is almost already 12 feet above my and their second floor sees another eleven feet above that.

So that their balconies will be 23 feet above my head.

I have a single store home.

No fence can help.

The plane shows four large balconies enclosed outdoor kitchen, all with clear glass routings.

Anyone see the stand there?

What look directly down into my yard, my window, every single day.

Our neighborhood gets very strong winds.

Wind carries the cable railing creates humming sound.

This is a well documented problem with this type of railings.

The voice, music, potential smoke from a coking or travel straight down to my home.

Outdoor lighting from 23 feet above cannot be blocked by any offense.

I also have a I'm here for five simple asks.

One plan tall trace along the.

Okay, thank you.

Are there any uh other members of the public who wish to speak?

Okay, I uh I don't see any other hand, so um we can go back to the project applicant for up to five minutes.

You should now be unmuted.

Thank you so much.

Uh so I completely understand the neighbor's concern.

I'd like to add come some context.

We're well over 200 feet, the building from the uh neighbor's address that they just referenced.

Unfortunately, we can do nothing about the ground.

We're we're not able to lower the ground any much lower.

This is what the existing grade is.

Um, you know, like I mentioned before, the height requirements meet the city's requirements, and you know, all state codes and regulations.

Um, you know, as far as the cable railing, I think we can discuss that with the city if there's an actual study, uh scientific study that attests to that noise issue.

We're more than open to changing the cable railing to something else.

Uh as far as privacy, uh the owner has every right to have a barbecue in their house, and we cannot control where the smoke ends up.

So uh we're trying our best, we're meeting all the city codes and requirements, and I'd like to add we're well over 200 feet from the neighbor that just spoke.

Thank you so much.

Okay, thank you for that.

Okay, uh, so with that, um, I just have uh a few questions.

Um, I think um first for staff, um, just if you wanted to respond from a couple of the comments from the neighbor about noise and and lighting, and maybe broadly about how this project is conforming um with the zoning.

Yeah, thank you, hearing officer.

So this property's zoning requires pretty much R1 standards.

Um, as far as it is related to noise, they're largely meeting those here.

Um, but uh the lighting specifically, I think was uh a prior issue.

This did come in as a code case, so they did have some light poles on the property that were existing before this proposal, and as part of the project, we required a photometric lighting plan.

They've provided that.

It's not showing any light spill onto the adjoining properties, and all lighting pictures are pointing down.

Um, also, I think uh an additional issue or question that had come up in prior correspondences was whether there was a geohazard clearance on this property, and they have obtained that geohazard clearance in I think September of 2024.

Okay, thank you.

Um, and then I guess just a question for the applicant.

I think you had said um, I know um the neighbor had mentioned some of the railings.

Um, I think you had indicated perhaps you'd be willing to consider some alternatives.

Is that is that correct?

Yes, we're certainly open.

I haven't heard of this specific issue with noise and then a safety hazard for cable railings.

But if certainly the city feels like this is an issue, we'd certainly consider other alternative railing options.

Okay.

Yeah, I would um, you know, it it if it's a change that you can accommodate, it seems like something that that might, you know, um, you know, help uh uh with with the neighbors' concerns.

Um then I the lighting um was mentioned as well, and then with the comment from staff around the downward facing lighting, um, you know, I think that that seems reasonable.

Um, I guess I would just ask that um, you know, perhaps um consider some some of the alternative railings um if possible in the next phase of this project.

Um if if it's possible to accommodate that neighbor's request, I think that that would um be helpful.

Um and then as far as the other concerns with noise, um, you know, as was was stated, I think, you know, there are some noise noise expectations of having neighbors, you know.

I think that that's um something that that's to be expected.

And um I would also say that you know, outdoor barbecue is something that that that many neighbors also also enjoy.

Um so um let's see, with that, I will um close the um the public hearing.

Um and so just again to um deliberate more um on this permit request.

I think from a larger perspective, this is a um plan development permit uh amendment um that complies with the existing zoning that allowed for the three houses.

Um and so this is that that house that's consistent with that zoning that was approved previously.

Um so this lot had been identified for for a house to be located there and based upon staff's review does conform with our our rules um for the single family home.

Um so I again I would encourage um the applicant to work and consider some alternative railings um for for those um as is as feasible for them.

Um so thank you.

Um so with that I will go ahead and approve um item 4A, which is PDA 98-067-04, and ER22-202.

So with that, um this concludes the planning director's hearing for May 13th, 2026.

Thank you.