Remarks by Raj Chahal
41 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 2 of 2
- Play at 2:29:50
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
City Council and Authorities Concurrent · Aug 25, 2026
- Play at 2:32:33
“Vice Mayor Gonzales, can I also make another disclosure? I did receive a couple of emails from the appellant, Michael Fisher, during this process when he was requesting a meeting, and I forwarded those to city attorney, and those emails can be a public record as such and maybe attached to the post-meeting agenda item to this agenda.”
City Council and Authorities Concurrent · Aug 25, 2026
- Play at 3:11:52
“Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thanks for the report, Director. I have a question. First question is, how do we differentiate between architectural design guidelines for a single family neighborhood and community design guidelines, as mentioned in the report, versus the objective design standard? Because this was an architectural review. And I know we are talking about objective design standard as well as the design guidelines. How we distinguish between those two, basically. And my other question, I had the same question about the fire safety guidelines. How the setbacks reduction will make this…”
City Council and Authorities Concurrent · Aug 25, 2026
- Play at 3:19:30
“Thank you, Vice Mayor. Thanks, Nora. I appreciate that. I have a follow-up question. I know Council Member Jane touched on that. We did pass objective design standard for the El Camino Real Specific Area Plan. It happened past this project got deemed complete, basically. But we did pass some objective design standard under our zoning code. Was that also post that project when the project was deemed complete or was it passed before that? That's my question, thank you.”
City Council and Authorities Concurrent · Aug 25, 2026
- Play at 3:36:39
“I have a follow-up on that. I know I just listened to the conversation regarding objective design standard and the state laws. I do remember we were always, as city manager also mentioned something to that context, we were always told that if we do have objective design standard, that is the only way the cities can maintain their control. on land use zoning decisions, basically. And I'm hearing today that state laws can override even the objective design standards that I want a clarification on that because we were always told that if you have an objective design standard, yes, you can…”
City Council and Authorities Concurrent · Aug 25, 2026
- Play at 3:38:56
“So my point is the city has a right to strictly adhere to objective design standards and not to waive them off. Is that correct?”
City Council and Authorities Concurrent · Aug 25, 2026
- Play at 3:40:06
“Vice Mayor, this is pertaining to the discussion we have ahead. It's pertaining to the same question. That's why I'm discussing. Otherwise, I will not.”
City Council and Authorities Concurrent · Aug 25, 2026
- Play at 3:40:19
“So my question is, if objective design standards are there, it's the city's discretion whether to give that waiver or not.”
City Council and Authorities Concurrent · Aug 25, 2026
- Play at 3:42:45
“My question was different. My question was, We did have objective design standard approved under the regular zoning code. When was those passed and do they apply on this?”
City Council and Authorities Concurrent · Aug 25, 2026
- Play at 3:49:48
“I can't see the screen, but I think I'll do the same on page 17 of the development plans out of the 33.”
City Council and Authorities Concurrent · Aug 25, 2026
- Play at 4:50:25
“Go ahead, Council Member Chauhan. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I will not be supporting the motion and I'll give you multiple reasons for that. If you look at the resolution, let's go point by point. Resolution Clause 3B, it states that the design and the location of the proposed development and its relation to neighboring developments and traffic is such that it will not impact the desirability of investment or occupation in the neighborhood. will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of the neighboring development. That is completely wrong. It is impacting the neighborhood. It is…”
City Council and Authorities Concurrent · Aug 25, 2026
- Play at 1:06:49
“I would, yes. Just for that good. It's not good.”
City Council and Authorities Concurrent · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 2:12:58
“Yes. Thank you, Michael, for presenting this thing. Yeah. The reason I brought this thing here was because it puts extra economical burden on a resident to fix the property or the public street with the responsibility of the city, basically. So if you look at the other cities, because I was talking to this thing with city manager, and I said no other cities. And that's what the residents were complaining, that no other city mandates this thing, whereas our city does. So we looked at the different cities. None of the other cities, Milpitas, Sunnyvale, Mountain View, or San Jose mandate this…”
City Council and Authorities Concurrent · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 2:27:25
“Your hand is up. I raised my hand to make a motion that I know I understand Council Member Cox's point that we should bring it back to Planning Commission. I think it is more time consuming when we go there. Basically, we have all the data what we need to be and its impact is on few number of residents and it's a drop in a bucket of improvements we are trying to do on the city where we have a 700 plus million dollar ADA and sidewalk improvements. So I would like to make an alternate motion that I would like that council amend the section 17.15 of the city code to eliminate existing…”
City Council and Authorities Concurrent · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 2:35:41
“Madam Mayor. As mentioned by City Manager that it doesn't fall under the preview of Planning Commission. Correct me if I'm wrong. So I can make a motion that staff bring back As per the discussion today, staff can bring back this item back to revise amend the Section 1715 of the City Code to eliminate the existing requirement for residents, the requirement to street improvement retroactively and I know there are not many. I don't know out of those 25, 50, 60, how many have already complied with, how many have not complied with. When I say retroactive, if somebody has not complied with due to…”
City Council and Authorities Concurrent · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 2:43:04
“Yes. So when I said retroactively, I did not, I do not mean that city has to reimburse the people who already done with it. First of all, I do not mean that. I've only meant what city manager partially mentioned that if we issued a permit asking somebody to do this thing and they have not complied with it, they should not be made mandated to comply with it, retroactive. That's my only, if somebody has not done it, they should not be compliant with it. But I can support the planning commission, but this matter has been going on for more than almost six months, at least six months. And if we…”
City Council and Authorities Concurrent · Aug 18, 2026