Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

The Planning Commission meeting will be starting shortly. Thank you.

Elizabeth, will the PowerPoints that staff presents be viewable by people at home? Yes. They will see the PowerPoints. Okay. And I'm sorry, just so I understand completely, the commissioners will also be viewable by people online. Okay, so the only thing that can't be seen is just they can't see the screen to vote. Fine.

I want.

Thank you. The Planning Commission meeting will start now.

I now call to order the Planning Commission meeting of June 10th, 2026. Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Statement of values as we gather we humbly seek blessings upon this meeting May we act with strength courage and will to perform our obligation and duties to our people with justice to all let us seek wisdom so that we may act in the best interests of our people and our neighbors and our country. All this we ask so we may serve our community with fairness and respect, putting their needs before all.

All the roll?

Sure. Commissioner Bhatnagar has notified us he's unable to attend tonight. Commissioner Biagini? Present. Commissioner Kuru? Here. Commissioner Wang?

Here.

Commissioner Bosa?

Here.

Commissioner Saleem? Here. Chair Kretzschlow? Here. Thank you.

Do you want the motion now? Yeah, let's make an excuse.

I'd like to make a motion to excuse Commissioner Bhatnagar.

Second. Chair Kru.

The motion was made by Commissioner Biagini, seconded by Commissioner Cherikourou to excuse Commissioner Botnagar. Please do a roll call vote. Commissioner Botnagar, I mean Commissioner Biagini, I'm sorry.

Yes.

Commissioner Chair Kuro.

Yes.

Commissioner Wang.

Yes.

Commissioner Boza. Yes. Thank you. Commissioner Solain. Yes. Thank you. Chair Kretchlow.

Yes.

Thank you. And the motion passed.

Okay. Declaration of commission procedures.

Thank you, Chair. Public hearings are conducted by the Chair in accordance with the following procedures. The Chair of the Commission directs all activity during the hearings. All comments shall be addressed to the Commission. Any item on this agenda may be continued to subsequent hearing. Applicants will be allotted up to 10 minutes to present and justify proposals following staff presentation of the item. Other speakers will be given up to two minutes The applicant is allotted up to five minutes for rebuttal or comments. No additional comments will be accepted upon the close of the public hearing, although the Commission reserves the right to direct questions to any speaker on any matter. Special procedure limits may be applied to any items as prescribed by the Chair. Appeal of Commission actions must be filed in writing within seven calendar days.

The copies of the current agenda and staff reports for each item on the agenda are available from the Planning Division office on the Friday afternoon preceding the meeting and available online. Continuances and exceptions. This part of the meeting allows for applicants, members of the public, or other interested parties to request that an item be one, continued without hearing, two, withdrawn, or three, taken out of order. Are there any requests from applicants, the public, or the commission for continuance or exception for any item on tonight's agenda? Anyone online?

Yeah, I'm looking, thank you. We have no hands raised online and no one in the chambers requesting a continuance.

Okay.

Okay, the Planning Commission has seven members. Whenever a full commission is not present, applicants have the option to continue their item to another meeting. And the consent calendar.

I'm sorry, what? Move your mic a little closer. Thank you.

Sorry. Consent calendar. There are two items on the consent calendar today. Secretary Cherukuru, will you please read the procedure for the consent calendar?

I believe there's one, just to confirm. We have one item, right?

Correct. There's one item.

Okay. The procedure for the consent calendar is as follows. Consent calendar items may be enacted, approved or adopted by one motion unless requested to be removed by anyone for discussion or explanation. If any member of the planning commission, staff, the applicant or a member of the public wishes to comment on a consent calendar item or would like the item to be heard on the regular agenda, please make your request now. Items listed on tonight's consent calendar with associated filed numbers constitute public hearing items. 1A, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of May 20, 2026.

Motion to approve.

Second. Commissioner Cherkrew.

The motion was made by Commissioner Biagini, seconded by Commissioner Chiricuru to approve item one on the consent calendar. Okay, give me just a moment. I'll go ahead and take the votes. Commissioner Biagini? Yes. Commissioner Chiricuru? Yes. Commissioner Wang?

Yes.

Commissioner Bosa?

Yes.

Commissioner Saleem? Yes. Chair Crutchlow?

Yes.

Thank you. The motion passed.

Thank you. Public presentations. Elizabeth, are there any members of the public that would like to briefly address the commission on any item not on the agenda?

We do not have anyone in the chambers requesting to speak, and we do not have anyone online.

Does Commissioner Biagini want to step down and address the commission?

Yes.

Please. There is also a period on the agenda toward the end of the agenda for Commissioner comments and announcements. So you can make your comments now, but you could also make them at that time.

Okay. Let me ask a question then. What I want to comment on is to agendize an item. What would be the appropriate place, here or under announcements at the end?

I would do it under announcements.

Okay.

And ask the Commission whether they would support putting an item on a future agenda.

Okay. That's what I'll do. Thank you. Thank you.

I propose to do it at the beginning of the presentation, the announcement.

I'm sorry?

Do you want to do it now? Do you want to do it now?

No, I'm going to do it under announcements and other items, under reports of commission, board liaison and committee. That's when I'll do it.

Okay, very good. Then we will move on to public hearing.

Okay. Public hearing items. We're gonna go over a public hearing recommendation on a rezoning to remove the historic combining district from 1341 Homestead Road, 906 Monroe Street to remain in historic combining district. in connection with a tentative parcel map application to subdivide the property into two parcels each containing one of the existing residences. CEQA status, determination of consistency with the downtown precise plan final R. Okay. Should we go over that one first?

Can we put the PowerPoint up on the screen? Or can we not? If we're sharing on Zoom.

I like the good old days when we had charts. You could just bring the chart and draw on it. Are we able to get the monitor to work? Okay.

They're working on it right now, so we just need a few minutes. Thank you.

Elizabeth, while we're trying to get this going, is there something we can do like two hours before where somebody from IT can come up and look at these and test them before?

That took place today. So it did take place today.

And it worked.

We will be obviously addressing this after the meeting to find out what the issues are. So thank you, Bill.

Get out the paper cups and strings.

All right, so we have it up on the screen. Does that mean that people at home can see this?

No.

Not yet.

Just being very expedient. Great presentation, love it. No, it's not. So the people at home cannot see this?

I can share it. You can do it at the same time. Oh, okay, okay. So you both have to advance. We're getting there. Okay.

Okay.

They will. But they'll see Daniel's version.

Okay, so let me ask the dumb question then. You see it on Zoom, does that mean like- All right, thank you. The other media, they're streaming, it's good?

The presentation is showing on Zoom and in the chambers at this time.

Thank you.

Okay, so we can go ahead with item two.

Thank you very much, Chair. Annual Subject, City of Santa Clara. The request in front of us today is to rezone 1341 Homestead Road in order to remove the HT status, which is the historic combining and be zoned solely DT, which is downtown. No changes are proposed for the 906 Monroe Street property. The project was previously reviewed by HLC on April 2nd, 2026. HLC recommended to approve the rezoning. Planning Commission is tasked with the recommendation for the rezoning for 1341 Homestead Road. City Council will have the final vote for both the rezoning and the tentative map. The existing site is 0.18 acres in size and sits across from Franklin Square and is abutting single family homes. The parcel is owned DTHT, which is downtown historic. The parcel has two single family homes on the property. The applicant has applied to subdivide the lot into two separate parcels. Each parcel will have one single family home. The subdivision will be reviewed by city council. The slide here shows the 1341 homestead property. Please note that this property is not a historic resource. The slide here shows the 906 Monroe property. This property is a historic resource and is on our HRI or historic resource inventory. The zoning map snippet here shows the DTHT zoning as is seen on the official zoning map of Santa Clara. The proposed zoning map snippet here shows the subdivision and the updated zoning for 1341 Homestead. Please note that the gray line is approximate. The rezoning action is consistent with the previously approved environmental impact report and MMRP that was approved for the downtown precise plan december 5th 2023 city council meeting in accordance with the california environmental equality act and no addendum is required for this act as such staff recommends that the hearing body recommend to city council that they determine the project to be consistent with the environmental impact report and mitigation monitoring and reporting program that the city council adopted for the downtown precise plan in accordance with the california environmental quality act and recommend to the city council that they approve a rezoning to remove the historic combining district from 1341 homestead road And that is it. Staff is here for any other questions, comments. And the applicant is also here. Thank you. The applicant is Paul Tai. He's currently outside of chambers. And the other applicant is Myron, who's online.

And this is for questions for staff.

Questions for staff.

I have.

Thank you.

Well, if you wanted to proceed with questions of staff. Oh, OK. That's alarming. Testing, one, two, three, four. Testing, testing.

One, two, three. Yes.

It's the Planning Commission, yep.

Testing, testing, one, two, three.

That's right.

Okay, can you hear me? Tell me when you want me to test because I'm going to put the phone on mute.

Hold on. Testing, testing, one, two, three. Testing, testing. I can hear you.

Eric?

You can hear me?

Okay, hold on one more time.

Testing, testing, one, two, three. Testing, testing. Can you hear me? Okay, I can hear myself off of that, so that's fine. Thank you. Well, the most important listener, my wife, can hear me. She did that on YouTube. So Zoom, I don't know if that's a problem. Yeah, that's what I just, yeah.

We are going to pause the meeting so we can do a little resolution here. So we will be pausing the meeting and starting as soon as we can. Thank you. Okay, so... Okay, I'm told that it's working. So everyone back in the chambers, please. We'll be starting, yes.

All right, can you hear me? You can hear me? On Zoom, yeah, everybody's good?

We are starting the Planning Commission meeting. We are on item two.

All right, so where we left off was staff hadn't finished the presentation, but Xander, I want to ask you, do we have to redo that? Yes.

Okay. Okay.

So start from the beginning an hour ago.

Thank you so much, Chair. Annual Subject, City of Santa Clara. The application in front of us today is to rezone 1341 Homestead Road in order to remove the HT status and be zoned solely downtown DT. No changes are proposed for the 906 Monroe Street property.

Hold on. Sir, we're redoing the presentation, so you can sit down. I think he can hear right now. I think it's okay.

Okay, but we're redoing the presentation again, so you can sit down for a moment. Sorry, I had trouble a little bit ago.

Thank you. I understand.

Hold on.

We have to repeat the presentation from staff. I understand. Okay, so you can sit down for the moment if you want. Sure. You can stay there too.

Okay. My hearing had a problem. Can you repeat what you said? My hearing aid's not in yet, so I feel one of my ears have problem, yeah. So I'm 86 years old, so bear with me. Are you okay?

Are you okay, yeah. So we're gonna redo the staff presentation because we need to show it.

Yeah, I heard he said that. Oh, okay. I thought you said something else, okay. Oh, okay, sure, sure, okay. Oh, okay.

Thank you so much. The project was previously reviewed by HLC on April 2nd, 2026. HLC recommended to approve the rezoning. Planning Commission is tasked with the recommendation of the rezoning for 1341 Homestead. City Council will have the final vote for both the rezoning and the subdivision. The existing site is 0.18 acres in size, sits across from Franklin Square and is a budding single family homes. The parcel is zoned DTHT or downtown historic. The parcel has two single family homes on the property. The applicant has applied to subdivide the lot into two separate parcels. Each parcel will have a single family home. The subdivision will be reviewed by city council. The slide here shows the 1341 homestead property. Please note that the property is not a historic resource. This slide shows the 906 Monroe property. This property is a historic resource and is listed on the historic resource inventory of the City of Santa Clara. No changes are proposed for this property. The slide show, sorry, the zoning map snippet here shows the DTHT zoning of the official zoning map of Santa Clara. The proposed zoning map snippet here shows the subdivision and the updated zoning for 1341 Homestead, if approved. The rezoning action is consistent with the previously approved environmental impact report for the Downtown Precise Plan, which was approved December 5th, 2023 at a city council meeting in accordance with California environmental quality act and no addendum would be required. With all that being said, staff recommends that the hearing body recommend to the City Council to determine that the project to be consistent with the Environmental Impact Report and the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program that the City Council approved for the Downtown Precise Plan on December 5th, 2023 in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act and recommend to the City Council to approve a rezoning to remove the historic combining district from 1341 homestead Road and That is that staff is here for any feedback or questions and the applicant is here as well. Thank you.

Thank you very much. So Any questions for staff?

I do Thank you through the chair. So I You clarified that the subdivision is going to City Council. Why would it not come to Planning Commission?

Right. Under the City Code, subdivisions that result in four or fewer parcels skip the Planning Commission. In the interest of streamlining, the decision was made at some point in the past to have City Council approve those with no recommendation from the Planning Commission. Frankly, it's a little surprising. I would think if you want to streamline it, you'd just have it go to Planning Commission and not City Council. Maybe that's something the Council should think about next time they modify Title 17. But yeah, that is the current streamlining method in our code. You do not participate when there's four or fewer parcels at the end.

So again, I'm not sure if AI is picking it up, but is that like on a charter or is that just Article 17 in our Munich? What's the Munich code? Okay. And so this is just for the rezoning. And this property was in Mills Act and was, yes, and not removed or removed in 26. And then there was a reapplication that was dissolved.

At this point in time, the Mills Act still stands from when it was first approved.

Say that again.

The City Council did not take action to expel this property from the Mills Act list.

Okay, so this property is still on Mills Act. Right, right.

The Mills Act only speaks to the 906 structure and does not speak to the 1341 homestead structure.

Okay. Then if the property is still under the Mills Act, would this go back to the assessors for the actual contract in the actual land that is under Mills Act? There's a whole process for the property that is originally availing tax benefit.

It is possible that the Santa Clara County Tax Assessor's Office would need to reevaluate the Bills Act deduction, property, et cetera.

Okay, so just balancing the two, which precedes the other?

I think, sorry.

Because this has gotten tax benefit for the larger property. and SSRS has a certain tax code to this property. Not the structure. Note that the Mills Act is for the land. And so when it is a larger 1.18 acre or whatever the acreage.

Well, presumably the Mills Act agreement obligates them to maintain the property in a certain way. Exactly. Has a ten year list of items they have to do to maintain the property. I'm guessing, I haven't seen the contract, but I'm guessing the improvements relate only to the 906 Monroe house and not to 1341 Homestead, in which case the reduction you would think would be because of those improvements they're doing on 906 Monroe. If you're just taking 1341 out, It doesn't change their obligations under the Mills Act.

It's the land. So it's the tax break on the land, the property on the land versus the improvements. Right. The land value has been...

I don't know the process by which it would be changed, but it's sort of a county issue, isn't it? It's not... It's sort of disconnected from your...

No, I'm just saying in the context of the Mills Act, which is a historic contract governed both by the city's inventory as well as, of course, legislation. the ability for a subdivision to happen. I'm just streamlining your thought process around how the process should align because there's a duality to it. There's a county overlaid with a 1.18 acre tax benefit on the Mills Act contract and you're subdividing the property that needs either a validation or a post approval to happen.

I will say that the HLC, we talked about this a little bit at the HLC meeting, because the Mills Act contract for 906, I believe was done in 2007 or possibly earlier, so that 10-year gap is already filled out.

No, that is a self-renewing contract. Mills Act is a self-renewing. Every point in time, you're always 10 years. That is an LSAC contract.

What I was going to say is that we do need to look at how we renew those contracts and if we do need to have the applicants update anything as such as the 10-year plan and create a new 10-year plan. That is something that HLC has asked or at least directed us to think about on how we renew those.

I'm bringing the awareness. You're here for a rezoning. I'm not belaboring what Planning Commission has the Approval authority there's Mills Act referenced in our state in our staff report Bringing daylighting to the intent that Mills Act is governed by the county's assessors Okay, that's it from my side All right, do you have any public presentations And

The applicant will have 10 minutes.

Yeah, good evening, planning commissioner. Yeah, my name is Paul Tai. Actually, from 1986 to 2000, no, to 1990, In 1992, I had development involved, several development in the city here, Senegal. So the previous manager, city manager, Ron, was a very good friend of me. That's why I come back to help Myron, Myron, his son, to do this job for him. And I found out it was very strange. Oh, I also worked for the city. Later on, because 1991, the Kuwait War, First of all, after Vietnam, so economy very bad. And real estate is worse, okay. So I wind up, I have to show my company, not doing any design and development. So I work for Citi, Santa Clara right here. And Citi... Santa Clara City, at that time, David is a big official, a very good friend of me, too, in San Jose. So he invited me to work here. So I worked for more than 10 years in the city of Santa Clara. So I pretty know about the environment, the places, people, everything here. So actually, the previous... Copybook director Bruce laughed at me. He said, Paul, you cannot fight it. You joined it. So I said, that's why I'm joining City Hall. He laughed at me. So he and I are very good friends, too. I work late every day, so he comes. Sometimes he comes in late. We have a good talk, everything. Anyway, back to the project. So when my run, he's selling the two houses on, excuse me, Monroe Street. Then, one house have two house. The one along 905, 906 along Homestead Road have two house. So then what can we do about that? How do we put that in the real estate to sell, name it for us? Townhouse, no. No. Single family home, no. And then I checked county, county only had one APN, I see the number, for two house. Wow, very strange. And the house built a long, long time ago. So I said, maybe we have to consult the city. So I talked to Leslie. The commissioner, right here. I mean, the manager, parent manager. Several meetings, finally recommend me maybe put single-family home. In my mind, not that good, because I've been developed by myself. I'm also a licensed engineer, licensed architect, a licensed mechanical engineer. If I using that term, later on, maybe Myron, the realtor, didn't know we have problem. So I come back to consult Leslie, and then finally, actually I convinced them to spend the money to rezone it. We spent a lot of money. This city is almost $15,000 for the city, for the fee. And then that's the whole process. I said, take it out. doing the good recommendation from last year, the pursuit to rezone the last portion, the 1341 to be not historical. Then we are deviated from the ordinance. Then we can hopefully, today we can approve it. After City Council approve it, then we can totally make it clear, title very clean, very clear, rules they have no, in future, the buyer find out, can sue the city, can also sue Myron, can also sue the owner. So this is all clear. And then in my mind, hmm, actually, a lot of cities have this problem, Sao Jose has the same problem. She should clean it up, because a lot of people build home right here, after a long, long time, they build house without addition, something without permit. A lot of house no permit, addition, or do they do that? So city, building department has been a lot of enforcement inspector go to, enforce the law to rectify them, get them back to building permit process. The city has some job and also revenue and also good for the citizens. They buy insurance better and then to the county is also good because all clean. So that's the reason why I convinced the owner to spend the money to help the county, help this house right here to separate. Actually, maybe, this happened for a long, long time, maybe about 40 years, 30 years. Maybe there's still a lot like that. If we got approval, we should send something, fly outside, recommend that it come in. maybe give them a discount or something to do it correctly for them, to change the ADU, whatever. And see, we need housing anyway, yeah. SB 2039, we already need housing. So two house have separate meter, separate water meter, P&G meter, separate entrance, a very nice house. So finally, they take my advice to self-spend the money and the time, and then you guys also help. And the planning department, Daniel and Leslie, also very helpful. So that's by talking today to try to actually eliminate problem for the owner, and maybe potential in the city, because people have the same problem, okay, hey, how come they can have two houses, one lot, I cannot have two houses, one lot? They eventually have problems, yeah. And also, Myron's also my friend, you know, his father-in-law and I used to have breakfast morning at the, I've been talking problems. The reason why I had COVID three, four years ago. I stayed in hospital for three weeks. My doctor was working in my daughter's hospital. She's also a doctor. She drove from Ukiah down to pick me up, bring me up to her place, to her hospital. I have two children, one daughter also MD, my son also MD, neurosurgeon in NYU. But actually, I'm telling you the truth, daughter's better than son. My son call me maybe three, four months at one time. My daughter call me every day, concern my health, everything. Anyway, so that's why I lose some, it's very strange. The virus takes over the cell. I felt my tongue rotation not fast enough sometimes. I have tongue tie something, so that's why talking a problem now. I hope you all understand. That's my try to help. I'm 86 now. Try to do the best I can. They have people. Yeah, that's it.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Thank you.

Do we have any questions for the applicant?

Thank you One quick question just for my own sake of what year was that the house and homestead built that little thing cuz I remember as a child was The house is always there. So was that building the 40s or the late 30s?

1890 and 1898 Yeah

1890 and then the second little house was built in 1898.

Correct. All right.

Thank you very much. Thank you.

They upgraded it. Thank you. Thank you.

All right. Discussion?

Yes. through the chair and to the staff. So what is the square footage of the lot that is coming up from a rezoning perspective? How do we know how much area we're rezoning in the zoning map? If you don't have the lot line, how do you know what's the rezone DT to be?

So sorry about that, staff. We do have a parcel map that is submitted, so we do have that information. I can share it on

Okay, that's good only because I was like what are we putting the zone only on a house which does not make any sense As we are still having just a few issues.

I can say that the smaller parcel is going to be about 52 feet in Length and 48 feet in width and what's that in a square footage of a lot?

52 times 48 It says on their point zero five seven eight

Point zero five seven acres or so it's two thousand four hundred square foot lot.

Yes Okay, and that means our minimum lot size in the downtown zoning district. There is no Minimum lot right and it'll meet the setback requirements for the existing house same Yes Which is 20?

No, so for the downtown zoning, there is not a...

Setback requirement.

Right, for this particular use.

Oh, fascinating. Okay.

There you go. Those were my questions. Thanks. To answer your earlier question a little more thoroughly, a subdivision by itself does not trigger a reassessment, but the transfer of one of the two subdivided parcels to a new owner would trigger a reassessment by the county assessor. At that time, presumably, they would take into account the Mills Act existing and make adjustments. Makes sense. Sorry to belabor since you went there.

When they are paying then the property taxes for the 0.18, I will correct my memory here, it's not one, 0.18 acre, when they are doing the subdivision, it doesn't affect their property tax base for either property.

Not until there's a transfer of ownership of one of the parts.

But this has been sold independently, as you can see. There are two different distinct owners already on this property. They are not owned by common title.

It's not a...

Right at this point in time, there's only a singular APN, which would result in a singular owner.

As far as I'm aware the moment you we do this there will be another AP number correct, right?

There is a possibility in the future that one of these two if approved if approved that one of these two parcels will be sold Yes, which will then trigger a reassessment from the tax assessor is fascinating.

We should ask the owner of Are they two different property owners on this individual? Sir?

Myron is online. I just think he needs to be able to talk. I think he has his hand up. All right, Myron, if you want to unmute, you're all good.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Yeah, I think I can add some context and some light to this for all of you. It is the intent of the owner who owns currently this whole lot. There's not two owners on it now. Once we subdivide this lot, it'll be the same owner that owns both lots, but it is our intent to sell off the smaller house, use much of those proceeds to improve the larger house, the 906. We have submitted to the planning or to the HLC a new 10-year revised plan with a list of many things and improvements that this house needs that we intend to begin working on right away. It is likely that we will at some point in the future as well sell 906 also and find a nice family that would take that. But our intent is to make it nice and kind of bring it back to what it's supposed to be, a nice historical home. It's been over the past years, whatever, whoever owned it before, they've had dormitory style type bathrooms in there and other things and we're looking to put those back to make it a single family residence is what we're looking to do.

Thanks, Myron. Sorry, just to thank you. Thank you for helping express the ownership. So when you do sell, please advise the owner that they will be subject to the new Mills Act land reassessment as well.

Okay. Yeah, that'd be for 1341. Our intent is to hopefully keep the Mills Act on 906. Yes. It is a beautiful home and we're going to make it even nicer and keep that look. I think that's a valuable asset to the city's historical heritage. And our goal is to keep it that way. And I think by subdividing and separating these two, I think it helps achieve that for a long-term basis. You're not kind of commingling two types of properties on a historical property, which I don't think 1341 should technically benefit from the HL or from the Mills Act. And I definitely think 906 should.

100% agreed. Thank you. Any other questions? No. No.

Anyone would like to make a motion?

I'll make a...

Sorry, hold on one minute.

Do we not need to close public hearing?

Oh, I'm sorry, yes. That's what they meant when they said make a motion. Would someone like to make a motion to close public hearing?

I move to close public hearing. Second.

The motion was made by Commissioner Cherukuru, seconded by Commissioner Boza to close public hearing. Let's see here, Commissioner Biagini? Yes. Commissioner Cherukuru? Yes. Commissioner Wang? Yes. Commissioner Boza?

Yes.

Commissioner Selane? Yes. Chair Kretschelow?

Yes.

Thank you, the motion passed.

And now Commissioner Biagini.

Sure. Motion that the Planning Commission recommend that the- Oh, Lance, sorry.

I'm sorry, did Lance say something? Yeah, I was just curious, did we need to skip the rebuttal and all the other parts of-

Well, given that Mr. Van Raesveld is aligned with the property owner, I didn't feel it was necessary to.

I just wanted to understand the process. Yeah, no, absolutely. Thank you. Thank you.

Motion that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council determine the project to be consistent with the Environmental Impact Report, the EIR, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, MMRP, that the City Council adopted for the Downtown Precise Plan on December 5th, 2023, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA. Second.

Second.

I'm sorry, who made the second?

I did, the chair.

Okay. The motion was made by Commissioner Biagini, seconded by Chair Crutchlow to approve staff recommendation one. Commissioner Biagini? Yes. Commissioner Chiaracuru? Yes. Commissioner Wang? Yes. Commissioner Bosa?

Yes.

Commissioner Slane?

Yes.

Chair Crutchlow?

Yes.

Very good. The motion passed.

Another one that's needed? Who would like to do that?

I'll do that one. Recommend that the city council approve the rezoning to remove the historic combination district from 1341 Homestead Road to 906 Monroe Street to remain in historic combining district.

Second.

Motion was made by Commissioner Bosa, seconded by Commissioner Biagini to approve Staff Recommendation 2. Commissioner Biagini? Yes. Commissioner Kuru?

Yes.

Commissioner Wang?

Yes.

Commissioner Bosa? Yes. Commissioner Selane?

Yes.

Chair Kretchlow? Yes. Very good. The motion passed. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Thank you to the client for preserving our historic resource.

Thank you.

Thank you. All right the next item. Number three. Public hearing recommendations related to the adoption of the third zoning code cleanup ordinance and rezoning of properties currently designated TN transit neighborhood to R6 transit neighborhood residential.

Staff?

Thank you, Chair. Second, while I get the presentation. All right. I think we are good. Okay. So we're here this evening to present to the Commission the third cleanup of our zoning ordinance. In January of 2024, the Council adopted our first comprehensive zoning code update in over 50 years. The zoning code is our primary regulatory tool that implements our general plan. The zoning code was a substantial body of work. And as such, we have ongoing updates that have been presented since adopted. So as I said, this is our third update to that plan. I'm just going to go over some of the bigger items that are presented in the zoning code cleanup. There are a number of smaller spelling errors, cross-references and such that are also being fixed with this. One of the bigger items is incorporating the provisions of the HT historic combining district into the zoning code. When we adopted the zoning code, we did not incorporate HT. We left it in the old zoning code, which was very confusing. for everyone, so we'll be including that in this zoning code. We're going to allow for existing wireless facilities to be reinstalled as building mountain facilities after the redevelopment of the site. Differentiating institutional uses from assembly uses in our PQP public quasi public zoning district. And this one's important for uses such as Sutter Health that is going to be applying for a PQP district. as you all know, which is not relevant to this, but as a reference, and this would be why. So one of the things we're also adding is an additional height allowance for PQP, and it would be specific to medical services, hospitals, and universities. Currently in the code under PQP, those facilities are allowed to go to 60 feet in height. This would allow them to go to 200 feet in height. And again, it would just be for medical services, hospitals, and colleges and universities. Some of our streamlining actions that we're proposing. We have a requirement in the code to post our public hearing notices on our website. It's a very onerous requirement and we feel that this should be removed as part of our public outreach as we're mailing the notices, we have an event calendar, we have the agenda, and this is an extra step that is currently required for staff to do. but does take quite a bit of time, so we're requesting to remove it. With the adoption of our objective design standards citywide, we're removing the public hearing requirement for architectural review for multifamily development projects, and this would be consistent with state law. And then also rezoning our Tasman East District from what was TN in our old code to now the new R6 zoning district, which was adopted as a part of the new code. And both of those actually align. It's just a naming confusion from the old to the new, so. Then some consistency actions, adding some definitions to be clear in the code on what we mean. Adding a definition of what a dwelling unit is, revising our definition of demolition to align with what the state building code requires and then demolition is actually a qualifier for whether or not you're required to go to architectural review. So there is some definition of demolition under that qualification, but not for the larger code. So we're incorporating that as a definition that will apply to the larger code. refining the definition of smoke shops to be more clear, and then making the general plan and zoning code definitions of floor area ratio consistent with each other. So right now there's some inconsistencies between net and gross and what is included in the floor area ratio calculations, so we're making those definitions consistent. We're also revising our visibility clearance diagram. On the slide here, the one on the left is our current one. The proposed one is on the right. This is in coordination with our public works staff. They have a definition of visibility. This new diagram aligns with that visibility triangle that public works has for street design. The big difference is it's 100 feet either way at the corner versus our current one has 125 feet one way and 50 feet the other way. So it's more even on the proposed versus the current. And then finally, to be consistent with state law, we're including fully unbundled parking. So that means no assigned spaces for multifamily rental projects that are greater than 15 units. And that's my high-level overview. So staff is requesting for the Planning Commission to recommend that the City Council adopt the zoning code cleanup and Apply the r6 transit neighborhood district to properties currently zoned TN on the zoning map Consistent with the general plan if you have any questions about what I've presented or any other items that were in the attachment I'm happy to answer them Yeah, I have a question about the notifications are you a

Sending the notifications to the physical address or to the owner's address?

The public hearing notice we send to the physical address and the owner's address. Both, yes. And then the agenda gets posted online. Yeah. And there's a calendar event online as well that links the agenda. So right now we're posting the public hearing notices on the calendar event. So it's kind of like a double work. The agenda is there, but we're also posting all the notices.

Do you expect any loss of communication at all, any degradation of the communication to the people that would be interested?

I don't think so, no, because it's just, again, on our calendar event. So you have to click on the Planning Commission calendar event, and when you click on that, you can click on the agenda or you can click on each individual notice. It's all on the agenda. And you notify if you're on that, yeah.

Sorry, just to extend that from a layperson perspective.

Yeah.

Yeah. We are all in the web world. You're still mailing notices.

Correct, yeah.

And you're putting it on the newspaper, which I don't know what that is. The weekly is still considered.

For certain items that goes in the newspaper, yeah.

That makes no sense. Posting on the, it seems like almost oxymoron that we are taking away what an AI interface does. and a web interface does versus what is now really archaic is the paper version of it and a physical version of it. So for me, that doesn't resonate at all to say removing a web interface that makes it much more, because if a person has to go and be mindful that I need to look for planning commission and that agenda and that is on the calendar of the city, Versus a searchable, what are the notices out there that I haven't seen any city remove web notices as a future state. That makes no sense to me. Just positioning logically you're not enabling a future AI interface that can scrub and say, there is a public notice that you need to go to.

It's a question of redundancy, I believe, because we are absolutely continuing to post meeting agendas. So every item on the agenda, every item that you do at a meeting will be on the agenda that goes online. And if you sign up for eNotify through the Santa Clara app, you will absolutely still get those notices. The only redundant aspect is when there has to be an official public hearing notice. As you know, certain items are designated as public hearings. So in addition to the posted agenda on the website, there would be a posted public hearing notice on the website. How does it look today?

That's what I'm going to show you.

Thank you. And what would the redaction be?

Sorry, this is moving very slow.

No, no, no. Thank you. And I'm familiar with this view, so it makes me feel at home.

And I agree with the newspaper being archaic, but that is still required by state law. So the owners of the Santa Clara Weekly will be happy to continue to receive that revenue.

No worries. I just want to see what it looks like today. Yeah, I think it would help understand it for sure.

Because it helps even the public understand what does it mean to have that redacted. Because most people, including me, I get my notifications on Facebook.

You're using Facebook still?

I know. I'm still under the cape. We've read about that in history class. I know. I still am a book reader.

I use Facebook.

Just because you got less than a year. Okay.

There we go. Okay. Is it working?

Yeah. So you have meeting agendas. Okay.

So this is the city's homepage.

Yeah. And you have an interface right there that says meeting agendas.

Yeah. So you can click on meeting agendas. That's one way you can find it. Okay. But where we post them is you go to our event calendar. And today is the 10th. They go to Planning Commission, hopefully it opens.

Yeah, I know, this is going down the path of what a legislator would have, but what I'm seeing... Let her show it, though. Yeah. Mine is upstream, okay, but... Go back to... Yeah.

So then you just click here on the event. and it provides you the notice of the item.

So what I'm saying is, if I'm a neighbor, somebody's building a house next door, hopefully, well, 500 feet, you're mailing it out, but let's play the, that they haven't seen their mail, I don't, but let's say that they did, 500 feet away, there's a neighbor, there's construction activity, noise happening, whatever, with the notification being removed, how would they know what agenda to go click on?

You're already clicking on this agenda.

You mean... How would they know that I need to go to Planning Commission website to look for whether on May... And they didn't get a notice. June 10th, this item... Did they get a notice or did they not get it?

So they didn't get a notice in the mail and they just want to know.

Yes.

I don't know that they'd find the notice on here either, because they wouldn't know what to search for.

So let's say I want to know when the Sutter General Plan is going to be heard.

We have project pages, so it'll be on there.

Okay, so you have all the projects.

Yeah, so let's see. So I searched Sutter because that was the one you gave me, but we also post the information on the project page for the project. So once it's here, we'll have a section for it. We don't have any hearings for Sutter right now. Okay.

But let's say the Keeley project. But if it doesn't have a project page, yeah. Like the Keeley project. I mean, I just want it to be explicit. Where can they go look for it? I mean, you'd have to know to look. That's the point. Yeah. So... You have to know what you're looking for. No, people don't have that kind of time or, you know, you're making it a little more complicated is my thought. Yeah.

Well, let me ask.

If they search it, it's going to come up here.

Right. It's still not a trivial way of doing it, but okay. Let's just say, first of all, show me what are you taking away?

So when you go to the event calendar for the meeting And you click on it this other would no longer be here And then what are the statistics on how many times people actually hit this link I Don't think it's a lot But we could, I think, maybe get that.

OK, so I'm not going to worry about it. I'm going to take your word for it for the moment. What I would suggest in looking at these is it would be interesting to look at how people hit the web pages and where they go. And that would be a good exercise. But yeah, I understand what you're saying, as long as they can get to it. But still, it's not. Yeah. The website in general overall needs a little bit of love.

Yeah. This will still be here leading you to the meeting and the agenda.

I understand.

Yeah.

Lance? Yeah, I would make a suggestion that you may before you commit completely to removing it, consult with someone to get it scripted. And if it's onerous to put out the information, but it's the same process every time, that's a candidate to be scripted. And you would choose the document and say, post it. One button click, right? And it goes everywhere it needs to go for you instead of having to incrementally each and every time submit it yourself. and I think you have sufficient IT help that they could probably whip this out.

What, chat GPT is what, about 20 minutes an hour? You have to assimilate that. That is your future workforce.

I use it every day. No, no, but I'm saying for the workforce. Okay, look, point being.

The notice we mail is not anywhere else on our website. It's only at this one location.

Here's the suggestion. If you're even going to look descriptive. It makes no sense to script it if nobody's hitting that link. Or if you have a very low number, the problem is more the navigation of the website probably needs to be revamped than anything else. If I'm not going to open a can of worms, I'm going to open a can of worms.

I was going to suggest that they improve the mechanism of revealing the information. That's a bigger can of worms.

If you're doing the scripting and you're trying to improve something that people aren't really using, are you helping the problem?

I'm making it worse. Long story short, just think about how the redaction looks to the public in the end, before we make that a broad zoning code change. That's my recommendation.

I have... Yes, please. Let me put it this way, from neighbors in my neighborhood, okay? Hey, what's going on at, I'm making up a number, 2387 Los Padres. There's all kinds of construction. Is that coming up before the Planning Commission? Is that something you could type in the search, whatever I said, whatever number I said, 2380?

You could try, yeah. Would it hit? That's the question.

Because I think that's, well.

So large projects get project pages on our website and our story map. the story map that we have so you can see them on the map. Single-family homes are not included as a large project. A majority of our projects are single-family homes. A lot of the ones in the neighborhoods that we get calls on are single-family homes. That's a lot of what we do. From what I'm hearing in my neighborhood,

I thought I saw a posting on the light post, but it's not there anymore. What's going on? Somebody asked me that question. I know the first thing I'm going to do is get on the web page and type in that address, okay, to see if it's coming up before a commission.

Yeah, if it's set for hearing, you can type in the address and it'll show up in Legistar. It'll show up in Legistar. If it's been agendized and the agenda has been posted, there's an address here. Let me rephrase that.

It's not going to be seven different clicks to get to it.

It's not going to be six.

It'll probably be like two or three clicks if you have the exact address.

The reason I say that is, God help me, I hear enough from people that say, don't ask me to go online because God help me, I'll never find it. If you get that many phone calls, then that's my point.

All our projects do have signs that are required to be posted on the project frontage, right? Even single family homes have to put their sign up that has contact information on it of the city so they can contact us that way. Or I can tell them. And big projects actually have information online.

You didn't find it online. I suggest you call the city.

Absolutely. We have a permit center counter with planning staff is staffed 8 to 5.

Unless it's Saturday afternoon when they decide to tell me about it.

Sorry, not on Saturday.

But on Monday they can call us. You get my point, though.

I think that's how most people end up checking out. And the only other thing I could tell them would be, if you don't see it on the agenda coming up this month, I can tell you when the next planning commission meeting is, then just keep checking every month. I don't know how that's going to go over like a...

there's so many ways to do this so look um i don't want to try and solve it here the only suggestion i would have because somebody might show up at city council meeting and ask the same question i just did thank you for doing that right um about how many people actually click it because if it turns out like right 100 clicks i would say we may want to keep it if it winds up it's like yeah we had 100 clicks in the last 10 years

That's something different.

You don't need it. That doesn't mean we don't need to fix a bigger problem that's not part of the Planning Commission.

And also, have other cities taken that kind of an impetus? Do you have a benchmark on how other cities are managing they are noticing? I don't think other cities.

You know, there is a really neat thing you can do in Google. You can go on there and say, anytime I see something change on this website or news about this item, please let me know.

Yeah.

It can be done.

That's what it should be led to. I'm saying it should be AI legible.

Let's do this. Yeah. Let somebody else figure out how to solve that problem.

No, but I'm saying I have any other cities taken that kind of an initiative as a benchmark. We are a local jurisdiction. What other jurisdictions have said we won't post public notices on our webpage? I can guarantee you.

I don't disagree. That's why I think the thing is not so much that it should be there, it should be there, but if that link is not being used and we're kind of guessing it whether it is or not, that's the real fact we need to have.

I'm not opposed to which link. The language in the zoning ordinance is what I'm taking more, that there will not be any web postings for public notice of public hearing.

Agreed.

Focused on. Focused on. In your language for a zoning ordinance, you don't need to go that far. It's a zoning ordinance. You just need to look at your notice to be accessible and position it to say, notice of public hearing will be, and position your zoning code. That is almost time agnostic.

We can certainly gather more information before the City Council meeting. Just to clarify, there was no such obligation prior to 2024. The consultant that we hired to work on our zoning code put this line into the code, and frankly, most people were unaware of it. When I started reviewing some of the first resolutions we adopted after the adoption of the zoning code, of course, went through to make sure we'd done all the required noticing, so I kept putting a note in all the resos, hey, did you do the required website posting? And I kept getting responses back, what website posting? What are you talking about? And then when it became clear what this obligation was, it became clear that, well, wait, none of us meant for this to go in. This wasn't our idea, and it's a burden. Are we required to do it by state law? And the answer is no.

Okay.

You might be soon required to do it by charter.

I will comply with the charter.

I'm being totally serious. It's not something that I'm going to try and propose. I'm just saying the language, because it was so focused on newspapers and stuff like that, They decided to update it, say, all social media to the best of our ability, quote, unquote. But let's go back to we're not trying to solve all the navigation stuff. We are trying to solve one problem here, like about the notification. And I think Commissioner, Chair, or crew would do a great job at making this recommendation. But let's see what we can do to improve it.

And through the chair to Commissioner Cherukuru, to respond to her question about other cities, I joined the city six months back and to my knowledge, no other city posts their newspaper notices on websites, but I also did a quick search on address and this is the first link that comes up as long as it's agendized on a public hearing and that's the first link on the city's council page. So people can get to the meeting page or the public hearing page. Yeah. Thank you.

So then it is still accessible. Just watch your language in the zoning ordinance code to be much more positive.

We'll fix that as somebody makes the recommendation. Yes, thank you.

I'm sure Zender will help.

Thank you very much for doing that and volunteering. Zender, do you have something you want to say?

Well, I just I want to be mindful of all of your requests. To be clear, Commissioner, this was a line that was added by the consultant two years ago. We're now simply saying we're deleting that line. So there's not really any language I can add that will make it sound more notice friendly.

Sorry, I'm just focused on the presentation slide six. Oh, as we're explaining it to the public when we go to the city council meeting.

Yeah. Smart.

I read it like you said, you were removing something on the zoning code per se. If that's not, deleting the requirement, zoning code, streamlining action, if that is the statement on the zoning code,

I see. Eliminate a largely duplicative web posting requirement that is already mirrored in the agenda postings that... Be my guest at the language.

Frame it there. Did you get what I was focused on?

Understood. Horse is beaten. Thank you. No, no, no. No animals were hurt during this meeting.

All right, please, anybody else have any questions? Hopefully beyond just this, there's nothing else in all this that you don't?

No, everything else looks great, thank you. And I was, I will give you compliments too. I just don't beat the horse up. The ability for us to ratify the smoke shop definition.

Yes, I want to hear that.

I do want to make clarification. If that is actually built into the language, that you also add a percentage factor of square footage within a convenient... Remember we talked about what is the supplemental use of a smoke shop? We've talked about this. There is no way you can actually ratify just by definition what is considered primary, what is considered secondary in that.

This was a direct response to your meeting on that smoke shop application. You're primarily engaged in the operation of a smoke shop when 30% or more of the products sold are smoking and tobacco products and accessories.

I have one more thing that we want to see if we can add in there is the vicinity to schools too.

1,000 feet is the state law.

Not the state, I want it in the city.

I know.

I'll be bringing it up in announcements. Just what you're talking about so we can agendize it.

You can bring it up now if you want to. If it affects this, you have every... You might as well take it in now.

Hold on.

I want to do one thing real quickly before we get away from it. First of all, Commissioner Booza's question.

Okay, can we make the resolution to be a further distance and a thousand feet for the smoke shop for the city of Santa Clara? I know that you're saying the state requires a thousand feet. Can we make it like 2,000 feet?

I don't know if it's state or county, so let's be.

Well, for instance, San Jose, they sell pot, but we can't sell pot here. We can put ordinance in there.

I think the only thing about something like that might also be, let's say you said 2,000 feet, right? The other thing is we have to go back and make sure that, you know, who it affects currently, right?

Yeah, but grandfathered is always the cross. You sure? Yeah. All right. It's only for new.

The existing uses would become legal nonconforming unless we created an amortization clause, but we need to do some research on amortizing existing uses. Another question is, how much would you hit with a 2,000-foot radius? I mean, it would be nice to plot it to know actually. I mean, suppose the consequence is that you could have zero smoke shops. That's a prohibition. So as a policy call, I'm a little nervous about putting into the code a specific distance tonight without doing a little homework first.

You may want to look at the county. And I think there are eight other cities in the county that have the distance for smoke shop.

OK. Let me tell you what I think would be Smart. I mean, we've already had conversations in a previous Planning Commission meeting about smoke shops. We're talking it about again. What I would like to do is agendize a discussion on a Santa Clara ordinance regarding the distance between a smoke shop and anything that's youth sensitive use. whether that's a preschool, a daycare, a school. But I think that's something that we should have discussion on. I mean, we've heard already 2,000 feet. I know there's some cities in the area that also have this as a city ordinance. And I think it's time that we should have a full discussion on it and that means agendizing it. That's what I was going to say under public presentations or announcements, I'm saying it now.

It's very germane to your current discussion, so it's an appropriate time to bring it up. I would just respond that that is a great suggestion because that'll give us time to do some homework and figure out what are other cities doing and what would be the legal constraints depending on what radius you choose. And to make sure we're not preempted in some way by state law.

Exactly. And I don't, you know, I would assume that a current smoke shop, I'd probably be grandfathered, but I wouldn't know. There's a level of detail behind that. What does their lease say and the rest of it, right? That could, I just think it's something we should have a discussion on.

Well, I want to see the preschooler that can put the money up on the counter for the smokes. That's what I want to see.

Gotcha. All right. Anyway, so we can have a full discussion.

Good. Anything else about that real quick? Hold on, Lance.

Yeah, I'm very clear. Actually, yeah, Buddha talk about 2,000 feet. For me, I recommend we just follow the minimum requirement from state or, you know, just, yeah, you see 2,000, I see 5,000. What can we do? Yeah, so I prefer we give the owner maximum flexibility and at least restriction. Thank you.

Yeah, I think I'd like to see it as more than just a percentage of the space because if someone rents a very large space and devotes 30% to it, they're creating epic-sized smoke shops like 30% of a Costco would be a ridiculous size. I mean, I make a joke of it, but it's true.

You always think of the worst case, don't you?

Yeah, it's more a more reasonable limit than a percentage.

My concern about that is the 30% of the products sold at the retail establishment are smoking and tobacco products. which means I can have smoking products that are not tobacco, and that could be 29%, and I have 1% tobacco. So I think, I like, the reason that I'm getting nitpicky on that is because there, to me, is a very different thing, like saying somebody has a cigar shop, for example, it's tobacco, versus some of the other wonderful things that are now being sold as things you can smoke. So I would definitely want to kind of look at how to better define that so we can distinguish between what I would call a shop selling non-tobacco items, but all sorts of other wonderful paraphernalia and things that can be smoked. I think that makes a distinction.

Yeah, that's what I was trying to assume, because most smoke shops sell paraphernalia that could be used for... And they sell other crap there that people can smoke.

Pipes and bonds and all that stuff.

Things that you can...

I think it's covered there. The thing that you can actually smoke versus tobacco. Got it.

I think the definition is, again, subjective, but it's covered and other products that are inhalation or ingestion of any substance.

Yes, but the 30% or more products sold to the retail establishment are smoking and tobacco products.

I can sit there and say, I'm going to sell Marlboro cigarettes as the one item that's tobacco, but everything else is a bunch of other kinds of stuff that add up to the 30%. And I think I want to distinguish somebody that's, let's say, I'm just selling tobacco products per se, because when I look at some of these smoke shops, you can't buy a pack of cigarettes. You can buy a bunch of other stuff.

Why don't we just say what it is?

Well, I think the intent here is it doesn't matter what combination of products it is. If it's all tobacco, great. If it's all weed, that's still, I mean, we don't allow, but yeah, if it's all devices.

We're not talking about weed.

No.

No, I shouldn't have used that as an example. If it's all vape pens, if it's all cartridges you put into a vape pen, I've never vaped. Or other chemicals, which I've seen. I think the point is any combination of those, if you hit 30%, you're a smoke shop. So I think, frankly, we shouldn't have used and, we should have used or. 30% of the products sold at the retail establishment are smoking. smoking and tobacco products or accessories or other products, devices, and components reasonably assumed to be used for smoking and or the inhalation or ingestion of any substance.

Considered, you want to give that the more, you know, of any substances. It's still very vague, challengeable, I guess. I don't know. You're the lawyer. But the idea that we're just trying to hone down, one, you hit two marks, 30%, clearly ratify the definition of what is considered substance.

So I would suggest we change a couple of those ands to ors and then add maybe the clause or any combination thereof.

Yeah. There you go.

So let me ask staff, do you want to take this one back and take a look at it a little more and bring it back to here or... or just recommend?

Well, I would suggest for tonight we make the changes we just described. We proceed with this, but if you all direct us, as I expect you will, to come back to look at smoke shop radiuses, we will also reexamine this section. I'm saying don't stop this from going forward, but we also will look at it one more time with you if we bring back the radius issue.

Tighten it up.

So then I guess we're all in agreement about agendizing The question is let's say we talk about it agendize it and we have an hour new Code or policy or print whatever is that now a recommendation to City Council to go back to code That we meant then we need to unpack again if you just approved if City Council approves it next City Council meeting because Planning Commission made the recommendation it gets agendized the next planning commission, I'm being very generous, and then we have a recommendation, will that then actually unravel again the approval from city? Or can this stand alone by itself to any of our recommendations in the future?

Yeah, like does it become a recommendation they can ignore?

Yeah. You can amend an ordinance as many times as you want. This doesn't tie your hands from amending it again next meeting. You can amend it at every single meeting. I'm just saying I just didn't want to stop this from going forward because suppose we get a smoke shop application in tomorrow and this isn't in the definition. I just wanted to get this going now.

Then I wanna make sure that when I said agendize the distance between, that it's more than just agendizing the distance between a smoke shop and what I'm calling a youth sensitive use, okay? That it's also a complete conversation about smoke shop definitions and the distances between smoke shops and youth sensitive use. In other words, not just the distance, we can have a, Fuller discussion, is that a word, Fuller?

Just made it up if it is.

Okay, yeah, it's a word. About the issue of Smoke Shop that seems to have a lot of interest.

And just for reference, the Santa Clara County Public Health defines what the product types and examples are under the retailer laws in, of course, unincorporated county. But there is 2022 tobacco retailer laws, County of Santa Clara, that you can use as a reference. And it basically says tobacco retailer permit, but also defines tobacco products and the age group that it can be sold. Of course, that's something that state law also requires. But I think it defines what type are considered illegal.

There you go.

One last comment is to be careful about how generic the definitions are because you could border into incense and plug-in air fresheners because they're inhalant and they're sold in stores. I'm not suggesting they would become restricted, but we don't want challenges that say, oh, yeah, I sell air fresheners. And I'm being told I'm a smoke shop because it's evaporated, it's in the air, and I inhale it. I'm sorry, I come up with the weirdest examples, but you get the point of pushing the envelope.

All right, but keep in mind we're a complaint-based code enforcement system, so somebody would have to complain, hey, they're selling a lot of air fresheners. A code enforcement officer would have to go to that store, determine, yes, they are selling a lot of air fresheners, and then they would say, why are you wasting my time? Nobody's going to be cited for selling air fresheners. So I appreciate the thinking outside the box, but that's not a thing.

We can amend it again.

Incense is not an addictive. All right. All right. All right.

Okay.

Are we ready for motions?

Do you want to do a motion, Commissioner Bajet?

A public hearing. I don't know if you want.

Well, first of all, let me make sure I ask about that. Is there anybody online? Because there's obviously no one in

We do not have any hands raised for online or in the chambers either.

All right, so. Close public hearing. Close public hearing.

Second.

There's a motion to close and second.

The motion was made by Chair Crutchlow. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Oh, sorry, didn't sound like it. Seconded by Commissioner Biagini. Commissioner Biagini? Yes. Commissioner Chiaracuru? Yes. Commissioner Wang?

Yes.

Commissioner Buza? Commissioner Saleem? Yes. Chair Kretschelow? Yes. Very good. Public hearing is closed. Thank you.

I have one question before I do a motion because I want to be sure. Please. So through the chair to Zander. So if we, for example, approve the two recommendations, that does not preclude Anything we might want to talk on a future agenda, even if that future agenda we determine we want to amend the language here?

The exact section that you amended tonight. You can amend it again. I'm just suggesting why not go forward.

Go forward.

What we already have, but then definitely revisit.

Amend now or amend later, right?

Or both. I'm suggesting both. If I understand where you're going, I would suggest you have the two recommendations on the agenda and then if it's what you want, also make a motion to ask staff to come back and revisit the smoke shop issue. with more specifics.

Okay, got it. I'll make the first two. Motion that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt the Zoning Code Cleanup Ordinance.

And, sorry, forgot to mention.

Do I want to make two motions or one?

You need two motions, but I forgot to ask for clarification. Do you want to include in Section 56 the two minor changes that I mentioned, which means... In the last sentence of Section 56, it will say, for purposes of this definition only, primarily engaged means when 30% or more of the products sold at the retail establishment are smoking and tobacco products or accessories or other products, devices, and components reasonably assumed to be used for smoking and or the inhalation or ingestion of any substance or any combination thereof.

Okay, throw that up on the screen, but I think what you're saying is where the word and is used, we change that to or.

As he just said, yes. I would suggest you look at that. That is what I basically did. I left in two ands where I thought they were appropriate, but I changed all the others to ors, and then I added or any other combination thereof, or any combination thereof. I trust you. Okay, so let's make sure Elizabeth has the right wording.

Well, I will be getting it from Xander just so you know.

Staff recommendation one with the requested changes to section 56 that the attorney just spelled out.

To section, did you say 56?

56 is the one that has the smoke shop.

Well, that's why I was looking to throw it back. Okay, all right. Can I try this again? Sure. All right. That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt the Zoning Code cleanup ordinance with the requested Section 56 changes that were suggested by Zander. I need a second.

Second. Second.

Through the chair, are we all including the web posting? Yes.

The motion was made by Commissioner Biagini, seconded by Commissioner Boza, to approve Staff Recommendation 1 with requested changes to Section 56. Commissioner Biagini? Yes. Commissioner Chericuru? Yes. Commissioner Wang? Yes. Commissioner Boza? Yes. Commissioner Slame? Yes. Chair Crutchlow? Yes. Very good. The motion passed. Thank you.

Okay, I'll make a second motion. You wanna make the third motion? The second motion being that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council apply the R6 Transit Neighborhood District to the properties currently zoned TN on the zoning map, consistent with the general plan. And if somebody wanted to amend that, I'm okay with it.

I think that the R6 is still the same, right? Yeah, we're not recommending any changes to that. It has nothing to do with the public notification. So that's standalone.

That's just a simple rezone of... As stated in recommendation number two.

Do we have a second?

Second. Three seconds. I'll give it to...

Okay. So... The motion was made by Commissioner Biagini. The second, I heard Commissioner Cherukuru. Both are... Approve... There were three of you. So you tell me. You tell me.

You're right. We're going to go ahead. Let the ladies have it.

Whatever you put in there is good. Approved staff recommendation two. Let's see here. Commissioner Biagini. Yes. Commissioner Chiaracuru. Yes. Commissioner Wang. Yes. Commissioner Bosa. Yes. Commissioner Slame. Yes. Chair Crutchlow. Yes. Very good. The motion passed. Thank you.

Priya. Adding a recommendation. Third, recommendation to the city council to consider language alternate to web posting to be appropriately still relevant and accessible to public on the web somewhere. Okay. Does that work, Leslie?

Second. Don't make me guess here. Okay. The motion was made by Commissioner Chair Cruz, seconded by?

Biagini.

Thank you. Oh, shoot. It is, hold on. The motion is to add a recommendation to council regarding posting on the website. We'll add all your additional language, but that generally is what it is.

Okay, very good. Public notice of hearings.

Very good, thank you.

Public hearing notices.

Right. Commissioner Biagini? Yes. Commissioner Cherkuru? Yes. Commissioner Wang? Yes. Commissioner Boza?

Commissioner Boza? Yes.

Commissioner Saleem? Yes. Chair Crutchlow?

Yes.

Very good. The motion passed. Thank you.

All right. We will take a five-minute break. Thank you. Okay.

I believe you still wanted to make a motion to ask staff to agendize at a future meeting a further regulation of smoke shops based on the topics raised tonight. That has to be done by formal motion.

I'd like to make a motion that says what Xander said, that we agendize further discussion on smoke shop issues and regulations and ordinances.

The motion was made by Commissioner Biagini, seconded by Commissioner Boza to have staff agendize another meeting to discuss smoke shop issues. And regulations. Okay. Commissioner Biagini? Yes. Commissioner Chiaracuru? Yes. Commissioner Wang?

No.

Commissioner Boza? Yes. Commissioner Saleem?

Yes.

Commissioner Crutchlow?

Yes.

Very good. Thank you. The motion passed. Five to one, thank you.

I'd like to ask that the minutes reflect some of the conversations we were having about the concerns about the website navigation and the fact that we would like staff to maybe provide some statistics about how much the link in question is being used or not used.

Okay, very good. Yes, got it.

Let's take a five-minute break.

Thank you.

Oh, is staff here? That still works on the computer program? Okay, so what happened is I found out it's saying that there is an update available for IELTS legislation. So on here.

So what I did is I restarted everything.

Wow, that's a leap. That's awesome. Yeah.

Yes, devoted to it, devoted.

He's giving you his two-year notice.

It works that I won't be here in two years to lament it. Wow.

So he plays all the low brass.

French horn and trumpet are high. Not that he can't play, but the orchestra... Yeah. The jazz musician's thing, you can jump from any... Yeah, but French horn's really not in...

It's a pretty hard instrument to play.

I know, but it's also not in the jazz band.

I know, but you said orchestra.

The orchestra, yes. I know what you were trying to do. I see your point, but what we're trying to do is try to set up, not restricting businesses, but putting a new law in effect to have a guideline right now that's over the place. And a lot of people really don't want that.

You're still my friend, even if we don't vote the same.

I agree with that.

I know what he's thinking.

I agree with him.

If it would have been anything else. Who?

Yeah. Yeah.

And you know what? I did.

Okay, the meeting has reconvened.

So the next item. Ooh, my favorite part. Election of Planning Commission Chair, Vice Chair, and Secretary. The year has come and gone. Time flies.

You want to make a vice?

I'll just make a nomination.

Perhaps I could jump in and provide some guidance.

Please do.

Now is the time for nominations for chair, vice chair, and secretary. Traditionally, we do it in that order. We do nominations for chair and then vice chair and then secretary. Any member of the commission can nominate any other member of the commission. They can nominate themselves. You can also make multiple nominations. No second is required for any nomination. At this time, I will declare the nominations for the position of chair to be open are there any nominations i would like to nominate nancy biagini could you speak in your microphone please nancy biagini the one down there anyone else for chair i nominated mr puza okay anybody else

Okay, so we have Nancy and we have Commissioner Booza. Anyone else?

Are there any other nominations? No, she didn't.

Well, that was just two nominations.

There was nominations on there, no voting. I think I have to ask three times, are there any other nominations? And one more time, are there any other nominations?

Nominations closed now?

Nominations are closed. At this time, we will take votes for, let's do it alphabetically. Try to be as equitable as possible. If you would like to appoint Commissioner Biagini to be chair.

I would like to withdraw my name because I support Nancy also. Thank you.

Very well. Commissioner Buza has withdrawn as a nominee. Does Commissioner Biagini accept her nomination?

Yes.

Very well.

There you go.

OK. And by acclamation, congratulations to the new chair.

When there's only one, that's it, right? Thank you.

Thank you.

Good. I think we did it right. All right.

At this time, I will declare the position of vice chair to be open. Are there any nominations for vice chair?

Lance?

OK.

We can start at that end if you want, but I'd like to nominate Eric Crutchlow as a departing chair to become vice chair. He knows what he's doing and he needs to step in.

Commissioner Crutchlow is nominated. Are there any other nominations?