Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Hello and welcome to the Planning Commission meeting for September 8th, 2026. Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Thank you very much. City Clerk, may we please have the roll call? Commissioner Fung?

Present.

Commissioner Linscott? Here. Commissioner Rao?

Here.

Vice Chair Scharf?

Present.

Chair Kasolchon? Present.

Thank you very much. So we will move on to approval of the minutes. We will be approving the July 28, 2026 Planning Commission minutes. Do we have a motion?

So moved. Seconded.

And city clerk, may we please have the vote? Oh, I thought I voted, okay. Trying, I'm really trying.

Okay.

The motion carries unanimously.

Thank you, and now we will move on to oral communications. City Clerk, do we have any members of the public wishing to comment?

We have one speaker in person, Pamela Hershey. Welcome, Pamela.

Good evening, Planning Commission Chair, Tracy, city staff. My name is Pamela Hershey and I'm a law abiding citizen of Cupertino. I have been since the day we moved here in 1967. I just wanted to make that perfectly clear. My ask tonight is for the council to update the health and safety element to ensure the policies are being added to addressing the safety of the residents, especially during the campaign season. due to the election interference methods that may harass and violate the safety of residents. I'm concerned that with this election that regarding interference with the signed theft, harassing of residents and volunteers, And the illegal placement of the signs that this has really become really an unduly issue for our city. And the safety and the health of the residents as well as the volunteers that we're facing is really very unfair. We work very hard. We have jobs. We volunteer after work, we have families, and we are doing double the work, as well as getting harassed. And things are being taken that we've placed. So please review the element and the safety and health element and update it, especially this year during the camp pain season because of these interferences. Thank you.

Thank you, Pamela. Our next speaker is Rhoda Frye. Welcome, Rhoda.

Rhoda Frye, 40-plus year resident of Cupertino, a similar sentiment this evening and an ask. Signs pertaining to Mr. Fruin's campaign and Ms. Linscott's campaign, both of whom are city officials, were placed on my property without permission. They trespassed and they damaged my landscaping. Mr. Fruin is aware of this and has not apologized. Now Ms. Lindskog knows.

So what I'm going to ask is, this is my ask. I get it. Here's my ask. I'm not campaigning.

This is, stuff was... my property was vandalized yeah so you should please contact the sheriff's department this is not within the jurisdiction you know what i think it's a waste of the sheriff's department resources so this is what i'm this is what my ask is because i'm paying for sheriff and i don't want to contact the sheriff for this so this is my ask is that we consider having an ordinance that we're gonna say no more signs. We had issues with signs two years ago, we've got issues with them now. No more signs, it's plastic, it's bad for the environment, and it just isn't working in our city. So that's my ask. That is in the Planning Commission's jurisdiction and the City Council's jurisdiction. I think you are nodding and I appreciate that. So I was getting to the ask, and I think the ask is relevant. So this is a way to stop the nonsense and also protect Mother Earth. Thank you.

Thank you, Rhoda. We have no speakers in person and no hands raised on Zoom. Thank you very much, City Clerk.

Are we allowed to ask a question on that? Would that be in the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission?

So typically when members of the public provides oral communication, it's okay to ask a quick clarifying question, but then we should move on because it's not agendized for discussion.

Yeah, no, I only ask because if that is something that could be proposed in future agenda items, maybe I can ask it later.

I would recommend that we discuss this during future agenda setting. Yeah, thank you. all right so let's move on to public hearings agenda item two is to consider a use permit tentative map and site approval for a 35 unit townhome project at 1655 south de anza boulevard do we have a staff presentation looking wrong way

Good evening, Planning Commission. Yes, we do have a staff presentation tonight for this project, and with us tonight we have Emi Sugiyama, Senior Planner, who will be presenting on this item, and we're here to answer any questions after the presentation. I also wanted to add the applicant is also here tonight, and will probably have a presentation, and Emi can speak to that. Thank you.

I was just going to comment if we should do disclosures.

Oh, you're right. Pardon me. Let us all do disclosures. We'll start with Commissioner Fung.

Yes. So I did not meet with the developers. However, I do live, according to Google Maps, I do live 980 feet from the site. That is beyond the bound, the 500-foot bond, which would be an automatic disqualification. but it is in the area where it could be. It is possible that there could have been impact. So I just wanted to notify people of that. I did participate in the prior hearing for the prior project on this side as well, and I was the same distance back then. Thank you.

Are we just continuing on? Yes, so I did meet with the developer and I also met with a couple of residents that live behind the property.

All right, I have met with the developer and I have also spoken with some residents as well.

I have not met with the developer.

I met with the developer and I met with...

Thank you very much. And we will open the public hearing and return it back to Emmy. Thank you. Awesome.

Okay. Good evening. Chair Solteron and commissioners, Emmy Sugiyama, planning staff here today to discuss this housing development project at 1655 South De Anza Boulevard. And I'll ask the video team. Thank you. All right. This project is located at the corner of South De Anza Boulevard and Prospect Road, where the city of Cupertino borders the cities of Saratoga and San Jose. The property is within the South Saratoga Sunnyvale Road conceptual zoning area, which I will refer to as the conceptual zoning area from here on out. It is zoned PCG res for planned development with a mix of commercial and residential uses. The site currently has an approximately 13,000 square foot commercial building with four tenant spaces. Additionally, the property was previously approved for redevelopment in 2023 to allow a mixed use project with 34 residential units and a commercial space. The city has also received a preliminary application under Senate Bill 330 in September of 2025, which vested the project standards that were in place at that time. The project makes use of a number of state housing laws, including the Housing Accountability Act, which limits the city's ability to deny, condition, or apply non-objective standards to a project. SB 330 also streamlines the permitting process, and as previously noted, it allows the applicant to lock in or vest fees and standards that are in place at the time that they submit an application. The project also makes use of the state's density bonus law to allow for additional units, waivers, and concessions. And finally, this project allows the city to be subject to the requirements of the no net loss law under Senate Bill 166, which requires the city maintain a list of housing sites that can accommodate the required arena. Here you can see an overview of the project's consistency with some typical development standards. The project applicant is utilizing density bonus law to allow for 10 additional units over the maximum density for the site. The applicant is also proposing density bonus waivers to address a number of requirements for setbacks while they are still maintaining a larger setback from the property line that is shared with the existing single family residences to the west. And the requested waivers will be discussed in more detail later in this presentation. The proposed project consists of 35 townhome units that are spread across five buildings with five below market rate or BMR units and 30 market rate units. There are seven units per building with each of them being three stories of living space and a rooftop deck for a total of four stories each. The proposed units range in size from 21 to 2,700 square feet. Each unit has a two car garage and the project also incorporates guest parking and central outdoor space for the residents. There will be 47 new trees planted on site and there'll be the existing trees along the shared property lines will be protected in place during construction. So here you can see the project site layout with the five buildings oriented perpendicular to the two street frontages of Prospect and South De Anza. The proposed BMR units on this are identified by the red dots. Here's a rendering of the proposed project showing the view from South Danza Boulevard. And through its review, the project was found to be consistent with the applicable objective standards of the city's general plan, conceptual zoning plan, BMR housing manual, and municipal code. The project includes a concession under the density bonus law to waive the requirement that the project incorporate a commercial use. Please note that the concessions and waivers proposed under the density bonus law can only be denied under specific circumstances, including that they have an adverse impact on historic property, health, or safety. In addition to this concession, the applicant is also requesting 11 density bonus waivers. For each of these waivers, the applicant has noted that imposing the standards could potentially result in elimination of units, reduced floor areas, or a substantial change to the design of the buildings, which is not consistent with the project as proposed by the applicant. So for three of the 11 waivers, the applicant is requesting a modification of the required building setbacks from Prospect Road, South De Anza Boulevard, and from the Western Property Line that abuts the existing single family residential development. The next three waivers are to allow for a modification of the required landscape buffers from Prospect Road, South De Anza Boulevard, and that Western Property Line. An additional waiver is being requested to allow for a reduced planting strip along South De Anza Boulevard. Three of the final four waivers would be to allow for an increase in the height of the buildings from 30 feet to a maximum of 44 feet, nine inches to allow for four stories where a maximum of three stories are allowed and to allow for an encroachment into the required building plane slope line. The final waiver would allow for an increase in the maximum floor area. While it's not required as part of the planning entitlement, the project will be required to provide public art. At this time, the applicant is proposing to provide a public art piece in the northeastern corner along South DeAnza Boulevard. And based on the project site characteristics staff has recommended and the applicant has also requested payment of parkland and loo fees consistent with the Quimby Act. The project was also reviewed against the city's BMR requirements and staff has found that the BMR units are generally comparable in size to the market rate units with the BMR units and market rate units, both being an average of about 2,400 square feet. The project has been found to qualify for a statutory exemption under the provisions of AB 130. In the analysis for this exemption, the city's third party consultant reviewed a phase one environmental site assessment or ESA and a transportation analysis and confirmed that the project would not have significant impacts on the environment and met the criteria for the exemption. And so with that, staff is recommending that the planning commission adopt the draft resolutions, recommending that the city council find the project exempt from CEQA and approving the associated permits. That concludes my presentation. The applicant is also here and has their own presentation as well, but if you have any questions, please let me know. Great.

Thank you very much, Emmy, and we will move to the applicant presentation.

Sorry, Chair. Are we doing questions to staff?

Apologies. We can do in either order, but if people prefer to ask the staff questions first, that's fine with me.

Could staff clarify what sort of noticing was done for the neighborhood?

Absolutely. So the project noticing consisted of the standard requirements for development projects, which were mailed notices to neighbors. We expanded the radius from 300 feet, I want to say to about 500 feet, if not more, for this project just to encompass the neighboring residential areas. In addition to that, we also have a site sign posted at the property to notify residents that there is a hearing associated with the project. And then in addition to that, the applicant also hosted a public meeting for the project, and I'll let them speak a little bit more to the details of that, but they did so prior to applying.

I also wanted to add that there was a newspaper notice for the project as well, in addition. And as Emmy mentioned, we expanded the radius noticing to well above 500 feet because we wanted to capture a couple of blocks of development. Yeah.

And we've received nothing in response to those?

No, we have yet to receive any.

Thank you.

Question?

So the previous project had proposed mitigation for the increase in VMT, including providing e-bikes for every unit and some sort of promotion of mass transit. I think they were just gonna provide bus schedules or consulting on how to use transit. So for this project, How are they getting around that to qualify for the CEQA exemption? Because it's about the same number of units as before, isn't it? So it should be the same VMT as before.

Right. So on a higher level kind of overview of that, the project is considered exempt from CEQA and therefore is not required to complete the VMT analysis. That's part of our code requirements. We don't have another requirement. way of requiring it, and its conformance with VMT is not a criteria for the AB 130 statutory exemption.

Okay. Yeah, I was just reading that that was one of the reasons that an infill project wouldn't qualify for CEQA exemption is the increase in traffic, but you're saying AB 130 says that traffic doesn't matter anymore.

Right, so I think if there's a significant impact to traffic, so a transportation analysis was completed in association with the project, from my understanding that there was no conclusion that there was a significant increase or transportation impacts associated with the project, which I think could potentially trigger an exception to the exemption, if I'm using correct terms for that in SQL language.

I guess you're saying that AB 130 changed the requirement between the previous project and this project?

Correct.

In terms of traffic? Yes. Okay, thank you.

Do we have any other questions for staff?

Yes, Chair.

Okay.

So just going back to the, so you have no public feedback on this project, but Has there been a sense of how many homes were within that 500 feet? Is that 500 feet actually capturing any homes? Because there is a certain separation between the location of the parcel and is it measured as the road goes around or is it measured as the crow flies?

I think as Pew kind of tried to clarify there, it was more than 500 square feet, sorry, 500 feet radius. That was just my best guesstimate there. I assume that it would probably be closer to 1,000 in some places. The radius was made to follow the lines of the neighborhoods and the streets of the neighborhood to encompass entire neighborhood blocks.

So we feel like a certain number of homes that abut the property were in fact part of that noticing?

Correct. It was intentional.

Okay. It just seemed like none of the neighbors I talked to felt like they were noticed, but that's fine. My other question was the ICANN, is that part of this parcel?

No.

It's not, okay. All right, thank you.

Thank you. I have just one clarifying question for staff. Would it be possible to have some context on why the first approval didn't move forward that was granted back in 2023?

So we wouldn't have any knowledge of that, but my understanding is that it probably didn't financially pencil out for them. Got it.

Thank you. Any other questions for staff? All right. Then we will now move to the applicant presentation. Thank you.

Good evening, Planning Commissioners. My name is Josh Verotsos, Vice President of Development at Dividend Homes. Nice to see you all again. We're a private home builder founded in 1994, specializing in single-family homes and townhomes throughout the Corps Bay area with active or upcoming projects in eight cities, totaling more than 550 new homes. Of those 550 homes, 233 of them are in Cupertino. We value the opportunity to develop the for-sale housing in this great city and look forward to being a long-term partner in meeting the city's goals of providing housing for its residents. We're pleased to be here tonight to present our new 35-unit housing development at 1655 South De Anza. These homes will range from 1,550 to 2,150 square feet, offering three and four-bedroom floor plans, each with two private parking spaces and either side-by-side or tandem parking. Each home will also include a private rooftop deck and open space for enjoyment by the homeowners. The project was designed with care to respect the privacy of the single family homeowners behind us. We designed the access road to provide a buffer, which at its shortest point is approximately 36 feet, and as you move up the site, closer to 45 feet. In addition, we work with our project arborist to protect and maintain the trees along the rear property line to maintain the privacy for the existing single family homeowners, which we know is very important. In total, 20% of the units will be reserved as affordable, fully meeting the city's below-market rate requirements. As staff noted, we're protected by SB 330, the Housing Accountability Act, and state density bonus law. We greatly appreciate the efforts of city staff and the collaborative process that has guided the proposal. We are confident that this community will deliver high-quality living experience for future residents of Cupertino, and we're excited to get building it. Joining me this evening is Rita Raj Sharma of the Dahlin Group, in case you have any specific questions about the architecture or the land planning concepts. We're happy to answer any questions you may have, and we appreciate your time and your support. Thank you.

Great, thank you. Do we have any questions for the applicant?

Yeah, I have one. Um, so, um, the staff mentioned you, you hosted a community meeting as well.

We did.

Uh, what was the radius and how many people showed up?

I don't know the radius. I did the mailers myself, so it was a lot of flyers, but unfortunately we had zero people show up. I even took a picture for our planner Danielle. I'm sorry. Yeah, no, it was a warm day, but we sat out and had pizza in front of the old Coach House liquor site, and nobody came in an hour and a half.

Was it an evening or a weekend?

Yeah, we did it, I think, at 5.30 on, it was a Tuesday or Wednesday during the week. So, unfortunately, nobody came.

And how far in advance did you send out the postcards?

I think we did it about two and a half weeks before. We typically try to do it close to the meeting so people get them, but I know it looks like junk mail, so it's tricky.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions? Commissioner Rao.

I was going to say it is election season. They may have thrown it out along with other election mailers.

You know, I'll just clarify briefly. One of the residents that I spoke to did seem quite aware of the project. So I don't think that everyone missed the notice. I think that they may have been okay with what they were seeing and didn't feel any need to show up at the hearing. That's my guess. But I did have a question. Was there any outreach done for the businesses? Did you hear anything back from them?

no but i do uh full transparency i don't have a relationship with the existing tenants the landowner we're in contract to purchase the property the landowner communicates with them and as they've uh i do know the two remaining tenants towards the rear of the site on month-to-month leases there's been obviously a previously entitled project and a for sale sign on both frontages and has been kept in the loop that we'll be purchasing the property we're buying the property in november so they know that it's coming Almost everything towards the front along South De Anza is completely vacant at this point.

Got it. Thank you. And I had another question. I noticed in the plan set that the construction area and the staging area and the parking area is right next to the homes. Do you foresee that causing a lot of noise? And if so, is there a different place that that might be placed?

Oh, we could absolutely revisit it. As part of the planning process, we have to do a construction staging plan. And really early in the process, we haven't always figured out our sequencing of building the project and how it will work in terms of production home building. But once we ultimately decide which way we'll build the project, We can absolutely do our best to respect the single-family homeowners and move our construction trailer and parking as far away from it as possible. We recognize that obviously the rear portion of the site is next to single-family, whereas we have a gas station and a commercial office building on the other side, which I think would be much less of an impact to those people than to the backyards of a private landowner.

okay great thank you because i did go back through the the previous public hearing a few years ago and it sounded like there were a lot of families with kids in this in the on the back side so i think that might be appreciated sure wonderful vice chair so are you prepared to answer questions on the environmental site assessment

In general, I didn't write the phase one.

So I was reading and I didn't read all 800 something pages. But one thing that I noticed and I had a question, is there any living space on the ground floor that's against the. Yes. Against the ground or is it only the garage?

No, we have living space on the ground floor.

You do. So are you going to be putting in any kind of vapor barrier between the ground and the.

first floor because I'm just noticing this vapor encroachment condition screening and all it says it's presumed unlikely that it exists but they didn't do any testing apparently you know we're not going to be under County oversight so we won't be putting in a vapor barrier system the site was didn't trigger a phase two testing requirement I know that there's a case closure that existed on the corner gas station but no further action was required on that that parcel

Okay, yeah, I'm reading it. It says the remaining contamination didn't provide a significant threat, but then it goes on to talk about the vapor encroachment, and apparently that was never tested. It just says it's presumed unlikely that it exists. and I guess that's sufficient for you. You're not gonna put in like some of these other projects. I know in Saratoga, one of the Pulte projects, they have like 24-7 ventilation in each unit.

No, we've done that. I don't think it's merit in this case. That's typically when you have an active, like a PCE, TCE or some other contaminant that requires the Department of Environmental Health oversight. A vapor barrier system is quite extensive, it's costly, and I don't think there's any reason to believe it's necessary in this case. Okay, thank you.

Any other questions from commission? I had one other question. So one of the feedback from the residents was a, so first of all, thank you for keeping the cypress trees, but there is a gap. There are two gaps between one of the homes, it's the second house from the south, where they can actually have a very clear view into what is eventually gonna be three story homes and vice versa, the homes will be able to see them. And is there a possibility to close those gaps with maybe have the arborist consider some trees, any sort of filler foliage that can go in between the cypress tree gaps?

yeah that's not a problem we can meet with our landscape architect i just want to make sure that the root systems of the existing cypress trees are safe you know obviously we have a tree protection barrier but we can look uh coordinate between city staff and the arborist and our landscape architect to try to get some plant trees in there that will eventually provide additional coverage i respect people's right to have privacy great thank you commissioner rao

Yeah, my question to staff. So the Phase 1 ESA, is that something that staff reviews, or do we have an environmental consultant like Placeworks that does the review on our behalf?

Right. In this case, we had Placeworks do the review.

And is Placeworks on the call?

They're available for questions, yeah.

Maybe this is a question for Placeworks then. Is the ESA different materially from what the prior incarnation of the project was two years ago? Has there been any analysis of the ESA from two years ago to see whether there was any sort of remediation required at that time versus now?

I might answer that question. Actually, there was no remediation required for the prior project either.

Okay.

Yeah.

And the gas station is separated from the parcel by the ICANN parcel, is that right?

No, the gas station abuts this parcel on the eastern edge.

And are there requirements that apply because there is a gas station that abuts the parcel?

Not necessarily. They will follow all building code requirements as it relates to construction.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions from the Commission? Vice Chair?

I seem to recall in the previous project there was some concern by the Sheriff's Department about the connection between this project and the buildings that they occupy. Do you remember that, Pew?

Yeah, I do, actually, unfortunately.

Is it the same situation here or what?

No, not necessarily. There's actually a project proposed on that site right now for residential development. And so the sheriff's building is proposed to be demolished. With that, there's going to be 100 or 120 homes on that site as well. And this condition is essentially to require that opening should that be developed with some of that residential. So it doesn't necessarily materially impact the share of department's operations.

Okay. But will it impact the other project that's going to be built there?

In a positive way, yes.

Okay. Yeah. All right. Thank you.

Any other questions from Commissioner Rao?

Yes, so the project intends to place artwork on the premises, is that right?

Correct, yes.

Okay. And then given the entry and exit into the project is going to be to South De Anza Boulevard, are there...

line of sight requirements on the exit out of the parcel and what is the distance to which that line of sight must exist at the point of egress or ingress or egress I guess right I'm not exactly sure of the dimensions of it but there are line of sight triangles for every driveway entry and exit in the city and those were included on the plans and reviewed by our public works department to ensure that they met our standards and so the PUBLIC ART PIECES LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THOSE SITE TRIANGLES, AND AGAIN, THEY'VE BEEN CLEARED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT.

DO WE HAVE A DIAGRAM FROM THE ASA OR OTHERWISE THAT SHOWS THE LINE OF SITE VERSUS THE PUBLIC ART?

YEAH, WE DO. LET ME GO AHEAD AND PULL UP THE PUBLIC ART LOCATION. And right here, I do have a little star indicator where the public art is located, so I'm going to move. But there you can kind of see the proposed public art piece location, and then this hatched area is going to be that line of sight triangle.

Can you explain that a little more slowly? You're trying to...

Sure, absolutely. So the the proposed public art piece is this gray dot here, previously represented by the yellow star, which I moved over to the left. So that's why it's there. And then the hatched area shown here is the site triangle for the driveway, which has these little bricks right here. It's just a small representation of it. If I go back a couple of slides, I think we might be able to find a site plan, which better shows again, the line of sight on both sides of that driveway.

And so at the point of location of the public art, it is still overlapping with the line of sight, correct?

It is outside of the line of sight. So again, the line of sight is a triangle shape.

Is it possible to zoom in on this?

Is there a way to zoom in? I think the closest thing I have to that is going back over to this smaller diagram, and that's the zoomed-in version of that hatched triangle. But this is available as sheet, I believe, C3.0, which is the civil site plan for the property.

So I guess I'm on zoom here, and I can zoom with my fingers, I guess.

Oh, good. OK, good.

But zooming with my fingers, it looks like it does overlap with the line of sight.

Well, the site plan does indicate that the dot is located outside of the site triangle.

And that determination is made by public works, or?

It's a site triangle that's objectively stated in the city's code, and they measure it out on the site plan, and the dot represents the public art piece, which is clearly located out of the triangle.

And I'll also note that- Yeah, I'm looking at it right here, and it's within the triangle.

Okay, so I think I'll also note, though, that the... Oh, maybe I should clarify.

So when we say within the triangle, that is within the actual shaded boundary of the triangle? Within the hatched area, yeah. Oh, okay, thank you.

It's actually located outside that hatched triangle.

Okay, understood. Thank you. I appreciate that.

Any other questions from the Commission?

I will ask a question about traffic. So a lot of residents will probably come out on Prospect instead of turning right on De Anza and then doing a U-turn on De Anza if they're trying to go north. They'll likely want to come out on Prospect. Any concerns about traffic? Has that been discussed with city staff? Or do we anticipate any issues there?

Right, so I think the project was reviewed by our transportation department as well as with the transportation analysis that was peer reviewed in addition to the review by our city staff. With that, they didn't note any significant conflicts with those two turning points. That being said, it doesn't necessarily account for every single scenario, right? I don't think that's possible, but it sounds like there's a concern of anyone maybe cutting across prospect. Is that the?

Yeah, I'm just wondering if people are turning left on Prospect. Has that been studied and made sure that the infrastructure will handle the increase in potential number of left turns there?

So based on the traffic analysis, I don't believe that it has indicated that there are increased number of trips to and from the site. And so it doesn't necessarily impact what's coming in and out.

Okay.

In fact, they're actually closing one driveway on Prospect. So it's actually improving the situation a little bit. They're moving the driveway further away from the intersection, so that helps all in all. Oh, okay, great.

Commissioner Rao.

Yeah, and just to reiterate, this was a retail shopping center, like a strip shopping center, so you'd have probably a lot more floating traffic going in and out of the stores as visitors compared to 35 townhomes where guests may visit occasionally, so is there any analysis of does this actually reduce the traffic coming out of this location or into this location? Is it fair to say, not looking for accurate analysis, but is it fair to say, there's a likelihood the traffic reduces as opposed to increases?

Yeah, so the traffic impact analysis that was performed concluded that there would be five net new trips during the a.m. peak hours, which is generally your work hours, and then no net new daily trips or p.m. trips. So overall, it's a neutral impact, but there might be, again, five additional trips in the morning based on that calculation.

And was the traffic impact analysis included in the agenda packet?

It was not, no.

I would probably recommend for council that may be something to include.

Absolutely. Any other questions from commission? All right, then we will move to public comment. City Clerk, do we have public comments on this?

We have one speaker in person and three speakers on Zoom. Our first speaker is Rhoda Frye, followed by Jennifer Griffin, followed by Feng Li. Welcome, Rhoda.

Well, I shouldn't be surprised that our wonderful planning commissioners have already answered many of my questions. I recall in the past being concerned about the issues with the gas station. I'm still concerned about that because we know what the impacts are to residents when when they live in a place that is polluted for long periods of time. The other thing that I think is unfortunate, and I know we're all going to agree on this one, is the loss of retail. This is what everybody's talking about, is that we need more retail. When people shop in Cupertino, We get a portion of the sales tax revenue with a share from the county, but there's another component of this too, and it's called the Bradley Burns tax. So when I shop Cupertino, I try to shop Cupertino as much as I can, but it's getting harder and harder, and we won't be able to go to the shops or restaurants that are there anymore. If I spend 100 bucks, Cupertino gets a buck. It all adds up. We need to have retail. And I guess your hands are tired. I mean, we keep on hearing about retail downstairs and living upstairs. And it already sounds, for Mr. Scharf, that maybe there is an issue about potentially living downstairs in this place, so that could be potentially solved by having that retail there. There was successful retail there in the past, and I see a big thick plan set that those guys have, so maybe all hands are tied, but... So I guess I'm just hoping that, you know, every time we see more loss of retail, right, the Panera area and the coffee shop and Staples Shopping Center, where we shopped at Staples, we're losing them, and retail's becoming extinct. So I know I'm preaching the choir, but I have to say it.

So thank you. Thank you, Rhoda. Our next speaker is Jennifer Griffin, followed by Feng Li, followed by Yao Lin. Welcome, Jennifer. Thank you. Can you all hear me? Yes, we can hear you.

Thank you. Good to talk to you all this evening. I will say that we spent a great deal of time in the city looking at the previous project several years ago. I think that there was a lot of analysis of it. There were existing issues with traffic. The e-bike situation children going back and forth. This is Monta Vista High School I'm assuming. My husband grew up his family home was directly behind this project area. He would play in the Blue Creek the creek area adjacent with his brothers etc. etc. So I'm greatly disappointed that we're losing retail again. This is the seventh project to hit Cupertino where major historic retail that has been there for at least 75 to 80 years is basically being wiped out. It's not the developer's fault. It's just that we have a lot of careless, clueless housing laws that have been pumped out in the last three to four years, which now they're coming so fast that nobody can keep up with them. They make no sense. But the casualty is the residents of Cupertino and also the neighboring cities of Saratoga and San Jose. This area is a very important entry point into Cupertino, across the street of San Jose, Saratoga's across the street. Lots of active retail. We go, we eat at Jake's. There's a new Mexican restaurant that's right on the corner at Blue Hills. And I cannot reiterate that we have to protect our retail. We were in Scotts Valley, my husband and I, on Monday. Brand new retail in their lovely Target shopping center, which has been remodeled. Brand new coffee shops, hair salons. active retail people everywhere shopping why can't we have this in cupertino so my main complaint with this site is that we have again we're we're not looking clearly at who needs and lives in the city we need retail to support also i went over there this afternoon i'm very familiar with the area my husband's family home is still back there And his medical offices for his family were immediately adjacent. That entire shopping, the travel lane that goes on to Prospect was completely filled up with medical, with cars from the medical complex. What happens to that? I also could not get out onto Stevens Creek, onto South De Anza Boulevard. I had to drive through. the gas station and come out onto Prospect. I'm really concerned about the safety of this. Thank you.

Thank you, Jennifer. Our next speaker is Fang Li, followed by Yao Lin.

Is it possible for the remote speaker to speak in person if they're now here?

Yeah, that should be fine.

Go ahead.

One of the reasons we don't appear in these kind of meetings, and I think the reason is why is the plan indeed looks much better than the original plan approved. The tree was kept. The setback is, I think, is longer than the original plan. The backyards are close to each other. The other actually very important is most of the people leaving that in that areas we are all tech companies workers with kids from 2 years old to 7 years old so it's very busy for us from 530 to 630 so it's very hard for you to reach us during that time.

Sorry, can you please speak into the mic?

Yeah, yeah, I'll speak into the mic. So I just want to explain. So I think to us, the most important thing is, first, privacy. Second is construction noise. And third, I think traffic, maybe a little bit, but I can explain. Privacy, the major thing is, I think, based on the plan, I see several exception requests on the setback and the heights. I'm just wondering if it's normal or it's kind of, it's regular request or it's like... not Euro with that height and with that distance. So that's one thing, yeah. Because the closer to the home, the taller the rooms, especially I have to talk, then it's easier for them to see all the windows everywhere in the backyard and also in the house, yeah. Construction noise is because during the construction, most of us work remotely three days a week for the company. Also, we have kids who come out to school from 5 PM, 4 PM. They come home, they're playing in the back house, and they work on studies. The I think one of the counselor and actress already mentioned that you fit us The area sitting area is like near to the answer rather than far away from house. That'll be good. Yeah For the traffic, um, I think it's good point Maybe it's not worse than today, but the on the prospect road turnoff is actually very risky I can imagine in the future The residents coming out of Jamestown, they turn left. In the meantime, the residents outside the town hall, they turn left or turn right, and they are very close. So this could be some potential concerns. But I do agree, in theory, the traffic shouldn't be, it depends. Maybe the time window is different. For the commercial, their time window is different from the commute time window. So that part I don't know, I don't have strong confidence on whether it's a good thing or a bad thing, but just want to call it, most of us will turn left in that area during that time.

Yeah.

Cool. That's it. Also, thanks for the city councilors. They come to our house, knock our doors to ensure we know where I have this. That's the most efficient way to communicate. Thanks a lot.

Planning commissioners.

Our speaker on Zoom lowered their hands, so we have no remaining speakers in person or on Zoom chair.

great thank you very much city clerk and thank you to the members of the public for coming in to speak we will now bring it back to the commission do we have any further questions yes so the uh 44 feet height is that with the rooftop deck or is that

Sorry to interrupt. It looks like our speaker on Zoom raised their hand once again. If you want to reopen public comment, Chair? Oh, yes. Let us reopen the public comment. Thank you. Welcome, Yao. Yao, you're unmuted. Are you hearing me? Yes, we can hear you.

Yeah, hi everyone. Yeah, I agree with what other speakers have mentioned and I want to touch point on a few more questions I have in mind or concerns in mind. First thing is about the notice and announcement of this project and thanks a lot for Mr. Rao who came to our house and notify us just before this meeting. So I haven't have got the chance to review the set plans. I think like three years ago there was another plan that another project plan where they had the poster just on the set like a very large poster on the side so we came to know while there is a project ongoing and And then currently there is still like on sale, on sale notice on the site. So we were like, we had the impression that that is still on sale. That's why like we were not aware of this project at all. Yeah, and One more thing I want to mention is about the trees. And thanks for preserving the current trees. Yeah, but I would also like to have the, like, there may be some gaps along all the boundaries. There may be some gaps, like there is still see-throughs. So I hope that can be examined and make sure that the entire boundary is covered by trees. Yeah, and also if there is plan to uh plant new trees hopefully it's like a bigger bigger enough tree like not something that grow from the beginning so that it may take a few years to grow and uh Another thing is about the traffic. So I do, I have the same concern with the other speaker that we mostly turn left from Prospect to Yanma. So I'm concerned about traffic there because it seems it's a very like short term and a lot of people here, we work, a lot of people here living in the Jamestown or other like neighborhood, Is is the like the work and the North, so we have to like turn left there. Oh yeah and Another thing is about during the construction. During construction, we want to make sure that there's a plan in place to make sure that it's our daily life. Because this construction may take a few months to continue. And then hopefully we will have families and kids living here, playing in the backyard. Thank you, Yao.

That is your time. Thank you.

We have no remaining speakers, Chair. Thank you very much. And actually, we will let the applicant respond to any of the comments if they would like.

respond to is um the construction concerns about you know keeping the site clean staging all that we're going to be a good neighbor we're going to notice we have to notice the neighbors when we start construction I think we have to give them an update on our schedule we're going to start demolition the different stages we do that we provide our project superintendent provide my phone number my email there's a superintendent on site all the time we recognize that the single family homeowners will be concerned about noise and dust we always abide by all the you know the requirements the hours that we're allowed to work we're not starting early and working late we abide by the rules we're going to get red tagged so we're going to be a good neighbor and we can do everything we can to push like i said the construction staging area towards south de anza we don't want angry homeowners we want them to be happy homeowners so i want to be a good partner thank you

Thank you, do we have any other questions for the applicant before we close the public hearing? Sounds like Commissioner Fung.

Yeah, sure. We didn't talk about the, on the plans there's a, the driveway path does look like it has a connection to the place immediately north, and I'm curious if we could comment on what your intent was today about how that would be implemented.

So during the planning process, staff asked us to coordinate with a neighbor on the Dollinger property to discuss a potential connection for the future. So I spoke to Jason, who's doing the entitlements over there, and we basically had our civil engineers coordinate to make sure that the driveways would line up if and when the Dollinger property is redeveloped into townhomes. So when we build the site, we'll just be putting up a good neighbor fence and stubbing a road. And then I have no idea what the ultimate fate of that project is. I know they're in the planning process.

So the plan is to at least, as submitted, you are building the fence across that?

Yes. We're going to stub it ready to go to be connected if and when it happens in the future. Great. Thank you.

Any other questions?

Yes, sir.

Yes. Commissioner Rao.

So I want to admire this conceptual plan. It's brief, but it's really probably the original objective design standard. It's pretty prescriptive in the use of the word shall, which I assume is objective and is mandatory versus should and may. So there's a shall stipulation here. I believe it is 19A, 19A in the South De Anza conceptual plan. And it reads, the building height shall be limited to one or two stories, except that third story may be permitted if a finding is made that the third story adds interest to a building, does not adversely impact surrounding properties, particularly in residential districts. Is that a finding that the applicant sought a waiver for?

Right, I just want to make sure that we're reviewing the same plan here. So this property is subject to the South Saratoga Sunnyvale Road conceptual zoning plan, and it's just below the South De Anza conceptual zoning area, which I believe is the one you're referencing with that language. So I just want to double check that.

Okay, because I thought the map on the city's page showed otherwise. Okay, we can take other questions, I will come back.

Vice Chair?

So I had a question on the BMR. First, I'm thrilled that you're having some of the BMR not moderate income, but I thought we had a 20% requirement and there's 30 market rate units, so wouldn't it be six BMRs and not five?

So that is a function of the density bonus that they're receiving. BMR requirements are on the base density, not on the bonus.

So what is the pre-density bonus?

26 units is the base. And so the calculation ends up being 5.2 units. And our BMR manual allows them to pay out the 0.2. And as a result, they're providing the five units. Okay.

Okay, great.

Well, I appreciate that there's finally some non-moderate income BMR because I don't know when the last time we saw that in for sale housing was. Thank you.

I wanted to just follow up on some of the questions from the community members. The first, would staff be able to opine on the height exception and how often that happens?

With townhome projects, more than five all the time.

Pretty much of late. All right, thank you. And then on the question of traffic, I understand some of this might sort of need to be monitored, but would staff consider any sort of changes to the turnout or the current way the traffic is marked out on the road based on this project?

Fortunately, I can't speak for the transportation manager, but with any street improvement plans, they are always thinking about that and how to make it safer. The street already has a, I won't say a separated bike lane, but a buffered bike lane already there, so they are always thinking about that. And like I mentioned, in addition to the fact that this is the further driveway from De Anza that is open, there is one driveway that is closed. So they are reducing the number of conflict points with bike, pedestrian, and vehicular traffic.

Okay, thank you. Commissioner Rao?

Yes, thank you for that clarification. That map is actually well north of where the project site is. So what we're saying is this is now subject to the South Sunnyvale-Saratoga conceptual plan, and I'm looking at that, and I can't really see anything of consequence in that.

So I think a similar standard that's applied to this project is the one you were noting from the South De Anza Boulevard plan is the three stories not to exceed 40 feet from top of curb. That's going to be condition 18A in the Saratoga Sunnyvale conceptual plan. And if you need additional information regarding the height or any of those setbacks.

Right. Yeah. I think the key difference is 18A here says three stories, whereas 18A in the other one says two stories. with exceptions made for a third story. Now, the talk we reviewed says four stories, but that's the rooftop deck. So is there a reason we call that four stories?

Yes, it is definitionally a fourth story. That's just what it is under the city's municipal code definitions.

So we have to treat the rooftop deck as a fourth story?

Because of the little entry pop-up over there. When you do a cross-section, it has a ceiling and a floor. That is considered a fourth floor.

Is that unique to this project or all projects?

All projects.

Okay. So how do we then explain this 18A that says three stories not to exceed 40 feet from top of curb?

A waiver is being sought by that. So we have a waiver.

Okay. The waiver specifically is for, I guess it covers both aspects, the three stories and the height of 44 feet?

Yeah. I mean, they have unlimited waiver, so it doesn't matter.

But is that explicit?

They're explicitly called out, yes.

Okay. I will come back. I have more questions, but someone else can go next.

Any other questions from the rest of the commission? Nope. Then back to you.

I guess my next question was around the traffic management plan that is not included in the docs. Is that right? That comes with building permits?

The construction management plan? Yeah. Yes, that does come with building permit review. That is a standard thing that city staff reviews.

But we could condition as part of the approval some recommendations around traffic management or construction management. Is that right? Is that part of the purview of the planning commission or it is not?

So there are standard requirements for traffic management during construction that are outlined in our municipal code. The project is currently conditioned to follow those requirements. I don't believe that because it's not objective, necessarily we would be able to require anything additional to that, but if the applicant is amenable to it, you may be able to discuss that.

The project also is on a busy thoroughfare, I will say, which is different from other projects that may or may not be located further from freeway exits and busier streets. But with that said, if the applicant is amenable, that might be something that the commission could look at.

Understood. Does staff have any sort of sense of how many... kids bike to tessellations and how much of a bike route that route is to schools. I know on the construction management for the Linda Vista project, we had talked about prohibiting trucks prior to school start hours. Is that a concern for tessellations?

Yeah, that is in the municipal code. Those are identified, you know, if you're within certain schools and things like that, you cannot have construction traffic with at certain hours of the day. And that's the standard that, you know, public works looks to and applies.

And would that apply it in this case is desolations within that distance?

I can't tell you off the top of my head, but I think Desolations is a little bit too far from this project. Desolations is located, I want to say, at least three-quarters of a mile from the site, maybe more.

So we don't think this is any traffic?

No.

We should ask Commissioner Fung. He would be intimately familiar with the neighborhood. It's probably a mile and a half. It's more than a mile. Yeah. Okay. Thank you.

Any other questions from the commission? Okay, then we will close the public hearing and we will move on to comments. Does any commissioner have comments on this project? Yeah, I have a comment. Yes.

So all in all, I want to commend the project. I think it's well done. I think you guys thought through a lot of the objections ahead of time. And in terms of the privacy and maintaining the trees and you know, the construction, all that. So I want to recognize you for that. And also, I think this is a really good example if, you know, for young families, we need more young families in the city. So something that, you know, is affordable, a three bedroom for, One and a half million dollars in a in a Monta Vista school area is is very attractive So so I think this is going to be a very popular project and thank you for that And also I think the BMR units is going to be very very valuable.

So, thank you Thank you any other comments Commissioner fun.

Sure. I had a couple I Normally, at this point, I would say something about these roof-tight decks are really gonna be a problem. I think you've done a really good job here minimizing the impact, having the feature with it and minimizing the impact. In particular, with the layout not being directed over the adjoining residential areas. I am a little surprised I don't know if there was consideration of not having rooftop decks. Maybe that was required for you to be able to have some outdoor space and it might have been better than balconies in terms of impact. You know, one of the things, one of the issues that's been raised here is that this does make you into a four-story home instead of a three-story home, I think, without adding extra height. The other impact that you get from having the rooftop deck is that you're actually using quite a bit of square footage for the stairs that get there. So that's something I would just say would be... A consideration, although I don't think there's any problem with the way that the layout was done. I think traffic actually is a little challenging. There's not so many units here that this is a huge flood of people, but the traffic is a little challenging. There's very little space to turn around. If you were, many people would be heading north toward 85. It would be hard to do that using the South De Anza exit. maybe they'd go to Prospect, that's probably a little challenging too, it's a pretty quick turn. So one of the things I would say, I asked about the connection route, and of course that's very dependent on who your neighbors are to the north, but that would definitely be something I think would be an improvement probably for both of the projects, even though you're this much smaller one of what's being considered there. There was a lot of concern about compliance. I think, since your current neighbor is the Sheriff's Office, you're probably gonna be a pretty good neighbor, I suspect. Everybody knows where they are. Everybody knows where to complain. And then, I did wanna speak a little to school impact. This actually... My neighborhood, this project is my neighborhood and it's actually been reclassified to being a Limbrook area. The people of Limbrook will appreciate that. They're very, very small and it's difficult. It's been a challenge for FUHSD. to maintain schools at different sizes. So I think the selection will be a plus. Definitely what you're offering will be the kind of place that families will be at. It's big enough that people who have families will find it to be very desirable. So I think that that's a plus for all the schools. I believe that that school would still attend Kennedy. and probably have a choice between Blue Hills and Lincoln for elementary. Blue Hills is another case where that school in Saratoga is very small based on its natural attendance. So having an opportunity to have more people will be fantastic. And of course, both school districts, both FUHSD and CUSD can appreciate the significant tax revenue that comes from having a new project there. And then I would comment that at the time when my son was in school, this was Regnard and Regnard and Monta Vista and of course both those schools today are under a lot of, well of course Regnard's elementary is closed and the home for tessellations now. And Monta Vista is actually constantly challenging Lindbrook as a how do we maintain sufficient population to be a viable school. So I think that this kind of, this development, it doesn't have some of the negatives of, you know, of a higher density project in the midst of single family homes. You know, you solve a lot of the problems with traffic access. The concerns that have been raised here about, you know, is it gonna be fire evacuation danger and things like that. These are all non-issues for this project. So I think it's really great. I'm glad to see it looks like a good project. And also, I was gonna say from a notification process, I do drive by this site every day. I'm just outside of the notice range, so I didn't know about the event you were having, but I do see that, I think the notice, the planning department notice was very prominent, very prominent, very noticeable, and I think it had been up for a while, so I think that's been a positive part. Of course, It would be hard for people not to see that side for anybody who lives in that area that you know the affected area. So I think that's actually been really good.

I think that's it for me.

Thank you, vice chair.

So this may be going backwards a little bit, but is there solar on all these units? I thought that's requirement under state law, but I don't see it in the rendering.

There's solar, yes.

So with the rooftop deck, where is the solar?

Half of the building would have a rooftop deck. The other would have a pitched roof, and so it would have on the roof side.

It's the shaded part. Is it the solar? It's the what? There's a shaded section on the top. The shaded part is solar and the white part is the deck. Oh, okay.

All right. Very good. Thank you.

Yes, I did actually have more questions and not ready to closing yet. The tree replacement plan, what is the tree trunk diameter? I think we have like 15 trees being replaced. Can we put up the tree replacement?

If you give me a moment, I'd be happy to do that. You're looking for the tree replacement chart that was provided in the staff report?

Yeah, either the staff report or the resolution, either one.

Okay, give me one moment for that. If you have any other questions.

And these are protected trees, but not heritage trees, correct?

Correct. Yes, these are development trees, so they're protected by that category.

I guess the replacement plan depends on the diameter of the trunk size of remote trees, and that was not in...

It's in the staff report.

It's in the staff report, so maybe we can put that up.

I think it was in the staff report it called for box trees. Yes, yes.

There's a mix of them. Alright. Thank you, video. And we'll get down to it in a second. There we go. So you'll see here there's a mix of how large the existing trees are, that's gonna be in this column here, and then the requirements for each of those replacements is noted here, and then what the selected replacement type is is over here, again, with some of them selecting to do two 24-inch boxes and others just one 36-inch box. And I'll also note that the applicant is proposing additional trees, not just those that are required for replacement.

And so I guess I'm confused. So if you scroll down, the sum total of this is what? A total of 28 trees?

So either they plant 28 24-inch box trees, or they could plant 13 36 and two 24-inch box trees on the two extremes. And so they have chosen to plant a combination of six 36-inch box trees and 16 24-inch box trees. which is in the range of what the code requires or allows.

How does the code give you that flexibility to?

Because for the replacements, if you look at column four, essentially it says they could either plant two 24-inch box trees or 136. So in some cases, they have picked two 24-inch box trees, and in other cases, they've picked the 36-inch box tree as a replacement.

So we feel the math works out right and they can come in under on the trunk size?

They're actually meeting the city's requirements.

Okay. Yeah, it certainly feels like on the surface that looked lower, but okay, I understand. Thank you.

all right well I will make my comments so I wanted to thank both the applicant and staff I think you know I listened back to the original public hearing on this project many years ago and there was a lot of objection from the community and I appreciate that the revision really does take the community's need for privacy and space into account so I thank you for revising that and also for keeping the original trees I think that's something that doesn't happen very often in a lot of our projects, but the original trees really are superior to the new young plantings and will provide better privacy for the neighbors. So thank you for that. I also thank you to staff for providing the ESA. I think it helped give us a little bit more visibility into We did have concerns, or at least I did, looking into the gas station right next to this property, and it's in close proximity to other gas stations, so helpful to get me more comfortable with where this project currently is at. And as the other commissioners said, I agree. I think I know personally a number of families that have been able to move into Cupertino because of townhome projects like this, so I can tell that this is a type of housing that there is demand for and that people find valuable. So I think it will be good for the community. Those are my comments. Any other comments from the Commission?

Yes, I feel like we are going to closing comments and I'm still with questions here. So on the fire court, if the building height is about 30 feet, the fire court requires a 26 foot wide access road. Is that correct?

We wouldn't be able to speak to that, but as we discussed earlier today, the fire department has reviewed the plans and has cleared them. They are the ones that are responsible for making those decisions related to the fire code. I would not want to speak for them.

Okay. Can you speak to what is the width of the road on this project? It's 22 feet?

It is. I mean, if you could pull it up. Right, so the project, yes, the streets themselves are 22 feet wide paved. There are some driveway aprons in addition to that on either side of that 22 feet paved street width.

Because I know when we had the Linda Vista project, this was discussed at length, and we spent tens of minutes going into aerial fire

Right. If the fire department had found something, they would have commented on it. It would have been a condition of approval, and they have not. They've found it to be compliant with the code, and they've added their own conditions.

Okay. So this is outside the purview of the planning commission is what I'm hearing.

The building and fire code, yes.

Okay. Well, not so much building and fire, but whether we should require a 26-foot wide driveway. Correct. Would that be under the purview of the Planning Commission?

That would be under the... If it was required, fire would certainly require it, and we would make that as a condition of approval.

So our code itself does not... embed any assumptions on the width of the driveway?

We only require a 24-foot backup for cars to back out safely. If it did not involve any backing up, then we allow, I believe it's a 22-foot wide driveway for two cars to pass.

When you say backing up, you mean out of the garage? Correct. That's not the case here?

There are the driveway aprons. So the building, it's clear of buildings. So from face of garage to face of garage. Okay.

And we believe we meet that requirement. Yes. Okay. And speaking of garages, how many parking spots are provided? I don't know if the staff presentation covered parking.

There are two per residence. Those are going to be the garage spaces. And then there are additional guest spaces located on property. I believe there are seven of those, including one ADA space.

Seven guest parking spots.

Correct.

And those will be open to all vehicles. It's not going to further reduce down to three because four became EV parking.

Not that we're aware of. Not with residential projects.

The seven guest parking and two parking per unit. How many of those are tandem?

Let me go ahead and check that. But I believe it's about half of them are tandem ones.

15. Sorry about that. About half of them.

15 are tandem?

Yes.

And did they need a waiver for the use of tandem?

No, we only require one parking space per unit, so they're providing two.

Okay. So no waivers were needed. I feel like we did something around a waiver on a previous project for tandem. Maybe I'm confused.

We only require one per unit.

Okay. Yeah, I will leave my time. Thank you.

Vice chair.

Oh, so I appreciate commissioner around bringing up the 26 feet because the count, are we not subject to the County requirement for 26 feet for width for buildings over 30 feet? I mean, how, How are they able to do this?

It would not be a county requirement. It would be a requirement of the fire code, and with however the project is designed, they do meet that, and I do see that the applicant might have something to add to that.

Oh, okay, great. So the fire code requires when your building's about 30 feet.

Can you speak into the mic, please?

The fire code requires when your building is above 30 feet for aerial access, but you need it on one side of the building. If you notice buildings like the two next to De Anza, you get it from De Anza itself. The one next to Prospect, you get it on Prospect. The two internal buildings right next to where the short end of the building is, the road is wide.

Sorry, can I pause you? Can you put up a view of the parcel so that we can follow you as you speak?

Could you put the civil site C3 down?

It is being shared on the staff monitor video, if you could.

Yeah, there we go. Yes, so the building two and building four, which are the ones right next to De Anza. Those are, the aerial access for fire is from De Anza itself, and fires approved De Anza is wider than 26 feet. The building five, which is the one down on Prospect, you're fighting it from Prospect, so the short side of the building is within 50 to 30 feet, and Prospect is wider than 26 feet. The two buildings that are building three and one internally, as you can see, the road going up to the north, which is connecting up, that part is 26 feet and the building is 15 feet away from it. So you fight the fire from that side. And similarly with building three, as in that road is, if you notice, and this was done carefully to save both the existing trees and also meet the fire access. Next to building three, the road is widened up to 26 feet and it narrows down to 22 feet as you go down to its prospect where you don't need the fire access.

So I understand the staff cannot answer FHIR questions, but is the applicant able to answer FHIR-related questions? Have you completed FHIR review?

Yeah, it's been part of the whole FHIR review application.

And the FHIR review signed off on the aerial apparatus? Yes.

Any other questions or comments?

Oh, I mean, if you did one really long building, but you could still reach the edge of the building with the 26-foot road, that just seems a little bit odd that you really can't get to the inner units. But I guess the code didn't take that into consideration.

All right, do we have any other questions or comments from the commission? Do we have a motion from the commission?

I'll make a motion.

So let me get back to the thing.

I'll make a motion that the Planning Commission adopt the draft resolution recommending that the City Council find the project exempt from CEQA and make the required findings of no net loss and approve the project with the resolutions as listed by staff.

And second.

Would you be open to an amendment on this motion to allow for the applicant to have the applicant's arborist work to cover gaps in the trees?

If I may, Chair, the gaps are shown to be covered on the site plans, but to the extent that there may be further gaps, then yes, absolutely.

Yes, because I did look at the site plan, and the gaps are currently covered by shrubs, which are not equivalent.

Chair, if I may move a substitute motion including your amendment. Do I have a second?

I'll second that.

Thank you. Any further amendments?

I'm sorry, what was your substitute motion?

Basically, including your amendment to the original motion, which is for the arborist recommendation to cover gaps in trees, which was reported by residents in the neighborhood.

Okay. City Clerk, may we please have a vote? The motion carries unanimously. Great, thank you very much, City Clerk. And we will now move on to, we have no old business or new business. Do we have any staff and commission reports?

I do not have a report. I just wanted to, and this kind of leads into upcoming agenda items. The health and safety element will be coming to the Planning Commission for a hearing on the 22nd. Just aside from that, I do not have a staff report.

Thank you. Any commission reports? Seeing as there are no commission reports, we will move to future agenda setting. Do we have any items for proposal?

Yes, I was going to ask the city attorney the question I asked earlier, which is the agenda item proposed by the member of the public who has patiently waited till the end. Are we allowed to propose a future agenda item for a study session on a political sign ban ordinance?

So, Commissioner Rao, this is the portion of the agenda where commissioners are free to present suggestions for an item for the future, as long as there's a second.

Okay, so I'm going to then propose a future agenda item for a study session on a political sign ban ordinance. Do I have a second? Sure, I'll second it. Thank you, Vice Chair.

Any other agenda items? Or sorry, was there Commissioner Fung? Did you have a comment?

Is there an issue about conflict on an item of that nature? The question was whether there was an issue of a conflict of an item of agendizing, considering agendizing an item of that nature with this group.

And I think Commissioner, following that question, is directed to the fact that Commissioner Rao is currently a candidate. I don't believe he has a financial interest in this future agenda item. It's a future agenda item that's applicable to all future candidates. So having said that, we're on the section of the agenda where a candidate can make that request to place an agenda, so I think it's okay. Okay.

All right. Any other comments or agenda items? As there are none, then we will adjourn the meeting.

Thank you.