I think that's a good idea.

The demographics of the city.

So down below, we've also shown you, you know, what percentage of the folks we've spoken to come from each of the neighborhoods.

Um, and how that compares with the demographic breakdown of the city and how many people live in each of these neighborhoods.

We've done this for, you know, gender race, um and um other sort of demographic indicators.

Um I would say, you know, these things are never perfect, but I think we've done a really pretty good job of you know, coming up with developing representative idea of people in Sanford.

So in terms of the content of the plan, I want to call your attention to the second and third board.

compares with the demographic breakdown of the city and how many people live in each of these neighborhoods we've done this for you know gender race um and um other sort of demographic indicators um i would say you know these things are never perfect but i think we've done a really pretty good job of you know coming up with with developing representative idea of of people in stamper so um um in terms of the content of the plan i want to draw your attention to the second and third board so um one fundamental aspect of uh a comp plan the master plan is to cost out land use and land use really is is another way of talking about you know what we want the future of the city to look like so the map that you're looking at on the third board is a future land use map and this land use map um consists of a number of land use categories that are described in the table on the bottom left corner and I want to emphasize uh a couple of things about the land use map um it is not a zoning map these two things are not the same thing um the zoning map as you know is uh is a is a is a regulatory document is a legal document it tells you specifically on this parcel this can happen and that can happen the land use the land use map which we have here is meant to be much higher level than that right so a single land use zone can actually consist of multiple zoning districts um but this land use map is actually meant to indicate the sort of general um development patterns in each of these areas and as we go through this content in detail later we can talk about what each of these land use calegaries are um separate from the land use map we also have um other ideas specific ideas for the future of um you know infrastructure atomic development housing and all other multiple areas so these ideas are organized along the lines of what we're calling five visions and these visions again I think is a product of what folks have spoken up about in terms of what they want to see for the future of the city so I want to take the chance to just recap for you what these five major visions are the first one we're calling it the city of opportunity city of opportunity and that vision is meant to convey the idea that you know as Stanford accommodates and meets the challenges of growth in the coming decade um we want to grow in a way that's very thoughtful um that brings broad based benefits to everyone here living here in the city um the second one uh we're calling it the healthy city and this is to address the the the vision across the across the city that we want to have a city in the future 10 years from now that is healthy that is um resilient that is um uh taking action towards uh climate goals the the third vision is the connected city and this vision is about the idea that in the future 10 years from now we're gonna have a city where it's easier to get to where you want to go where destinations are more connected and people can get to those places um with in different modes um much more safely fourth um is the affordable city and this is very much you know top of mind um this vision is meant to um set goals for affordable housing affordability um you know 10 years from now but obviously making progress even before then um um meeting different housing needs and you know again creating the kind of housing that can help us meet the challenge of growth last but not least the prosperous city that visions about economic development and how do we create economic opportunity across the board for people across the skill spectrum and um across industries so with that said um what we have in the remaining five boards are what we're calling keystone projects so whereas these are very high level ideas we want to make sure that these high level ideas actually land as a tangible change that people can expect to see in the city each of those keystone projects you can think of them as a illustration of what these visions will ultimately become in the city so we'll have a chance to go through each of those in great detail but um so I'll I'll preserve you know I'll reserve commentary as we go through each of these boards.

So that's in the high level uh layout of the master plan and um you know we look forward to showing this to you but if you have any questions with high level comments right now we'd be happy to take them up as well yes uh chat's now question for you about process yes um just use your your own work yeah what was the concept to zero in overarching goals to be the final or more strategy yeah yeah if you would yeah uh that that's a great question I mean um you know there's no mapping formula obviously right um it's not the case that we you know get 300 questionnaires and those neatly will fall into five different buckets that that doesn't happen a lot of acknowledged that so um there is a heavy level of synthesis we have to do but what we've committed to uh throughout the process is to iterate right so take the first round of feedback develop some synthesis

Yeah, that's a great question.

I mean, um, you know, there's no mapping formula, obviously, right?

Um, it's not the case that we you know get 300 questionnaires and those neatly will fall into five different buckets.

That doesn't happen, it wasn't acknowledged that so um there is a heavy level of synthesis we have to do, but what we've committed to uh throughout the process is to iterate, right?

So take the first round of feedback, develop some synthesis content around that, and then take it back out to the community for validation, right?

Is this what you actually said?

So um maybe just to take one example around um you know both the vision and the strategies.

I mean, the vision certainly came out of um substantially came out of the first open cost.

Um I don't know if folks went the first open house, but there was a very specific question of you know what do you want the future of Stanford to be.

So it's a very open-ended question, and that question is really about getting at the question of vision, but so we took all of those comments, we um essentially bucketed the comments that we received and in order to kind of extract common thematic similarities between these comments, and that was a large kind of largely responsible for the input going into the visions.

In terms of the strategies, as you noted, there are many, many, many of them.

Um the way we um develop those strategies and make sure that those are rooted in community in the community is we came up with a first cut of those strategies.

We actually took them back to uh this technical advisory group, which is actually uh 50, 60 plus member members plus group that are it's it's a group of sample citizens, right?

Um the benefit of that group is these are people who are committed to the process and they actually committed many evenings of their own time to the process.

What we were able to do is we had a very in-depth set of workshops with this with this technical advisory group to essentially like go through every one of the strategies, make comments on the strategies, you know, struct certain ones and added new ones.

Um, and this with this was how we weren't able to make sure that even though there were like tens of strategies and hundreds of actions, um, people in Stanford actually looked at them and gave us very detailed comments about each of them.

Um others want to have any um want to provide any additional comments there.

It's also I would say it's also informed a bit by the general statutes and what we are mandated to look at, um, including the infrastructure, economic development, um, provision of housing.

Um so there are some statutory requirements that we have to cut as well.

Sure, we lender.

Um, I do have a question just regarding tech or the makeup of that technical advisor of the first three times.

Yeah, where the people of Stanford are from, you know, background, stuff like that.

Yeah, um, I might ask maybe Dominique or Eliza, maybe you can skip more to the detail of the process, but um, but I think the general idea with the advisory group is we try to be as representative as possible.

Certainly from the neighborhood representation perspective, we wanted to make sure that the people coming from these different neighborhoods, the breakdown of that represent the actual sort of population composition of the city, but there were other um considerations made to consider representation across multiple dimensions, um, but it was a very thoughtful process.

I don't know if you want to add anything to that.

Yeah, yeah, I'll just think that the makeup of it included uh portion where residents that were from each of the 13 neighborhood, and that was an application process that everyone went through, and then in um in planning to that, we had technical advisors, people who are experienced in the topic to offer the environments.

Um, and it varied between whether it was a religious organization, a nonprofit organization.

Um, so we can really try to get a little bit representative standard across all demographic um language and spoken disability, so that we could really you know pull um real information from so that with that application process, uh if there were um communities that you saw that didn't have you know people represented from that, was there any more in-depth process to get people you know to allow those certificatings that may not have had people apply for these positions that would be part of this advisory?

Yeah, so for instance, if we had you know one neighborhood that had 50 applicants and there was only two five, and then we had another neighborhood where we only have one applicant, we then you know went back to that neighborhood and candid more uh when the neighborhood map that I think as well as reaching out to um different neighborhood organizations um and religious institutions and uh community leaders in each of the do you guys remember which there was a specific example where we did extra outreach um to get more more engagement from the college funds and and this is Lindy, sorry, you don't forgetting that too much.

Any more questions on process right now for it?

Yeah, just one chest.

Yeah, I bet you're feeling really um and then when it came time to uh actually grab any good words.

Um I I see a fair bound uh uh discrepancy of words in certain cases versus other cases.

So and I just wonder if you could speak to how that can happen to the extent of the spirit committee or and or any one or body of people actually beyond the flushing out of ideas that you know, actually what's responsible to sit down and kind of prove it and say you really mean this, or that right.

Um, so you know, yeah, I'd be happy to talk about the maybe the specific um instance of this discrepancy, but obviously the like someone has to hold a pen, right, in terms of drafting the plan.

So uh for the most part, the plan was drafted by the by the planning team.

So that's after a very intensive process of betting the strategies and actions with the technical advisory group, of course, with the city with the city's guidance and input as well.

So with that content as the basis, and that content again is the community driven content.

We then you know went back and drafted the language of the actual master plan, and that that's really the planning team's work, right?

So um I think the you know, the point you raised about the intent, the community's intent, and then the actual language of the master plan and whether there might be any discrepancy about that.

We certainly recognize that the this draft that exists right now does require another round of community betting, which is why we brought the draft master plan document to Nova Card two weeks ago, and then there's this you know, period think then and the formal plan adoption when the community can have you know a serious amount of time to actually read a document, provide comments, and we're definitely selecting the comments on one of the thought documents.

And to be even more specific, I'm really I'm very curious.

Um, would love some examples that really interested to hear any examples of what we're spying speaking about in terms of discrepancies, um, but me and there are city leads, um, there are for city employees that um lead the work in each of my topic areas, housing mobility, infrastructure, um uh community well-being and economic development who have also poured over every word of detail.

We've had workshops, we've done um individual reading and commenting.

So um we have certainly read all of the all of the yes, yes.

This is uh we simple the planning, yeah.

So was there any other automated automated scenarios and alternate designs that you evaluated, for example, future land use?

Yeah, what were the optimities that you went through and made a conscious position to say that that doesn't fit the directly away with this person?

Um maybe I'm just wondering what does technology do with.

I mean, yeah, um I mean the short answer is yes.

I mean, I think there has been a fair amount of iteration on the content of all aspects of the plan, the specific iteration how of what the information looks like will differ depending on the content.