February 21, 2024 Environmental Planning Commission

Video

Transcript

Segment 1

[00:04:51] EPC Clerk: Are you ready to begin?

[00:04:57] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Okay.

[00:05:11] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Good evening everyone. Welcome to the environmental planning commission meeting of February 21st, 2024. I call the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. For those joining us in person, please note that due to our hybrid environment audio and video presentations can no longer be shared from the lectern. Requests to show an audio or video presentation during a meeting should be directed to EPC@mountainview.gov by 4:30 p.m. on the meeting date.

[00:05:35] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Additionally, due to our hybrid environment, we will no longer have speakers line up to speak. Anyone wishing to address the EPC in person must complete a yellow speaker card. Please indicate the name you would like to be called and the item number on which you wish to speak. Please complete one yellow speaker card for each item and turn them into the EPC clerk as soon as possible, but no later than the call for public comment on the item you are speaking on.

[00:05:59] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Instructions for addressing the commission virtually may be found on the posted agenda. Recently, regional and local elected and appointed bodies have been subjected to disruptive, racist, verbal attacks by anonymous callers during virtual public comments. The City of Mountain View is fully committed to racial, religious, and cultural equity and justice as we strive to create a welcoming, safe, and inclusive community for all. This commission welcomes respectful and non-threatening public comments regarding matters over which the EPC has jurisdiction.

[00:06:29] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Comments deemed otherwise pursuant to the council code of conduct and the government code may be grounds for immediately terminating a speaker's comment period. Now I will ask the EPC clerk to proceed with roll call.

[00:06:43] EPC Clerk: Commissioner Clark.

[00:06:56] Councilmember Chris Clark: Here.

[00:06:58] EPC Clerk: Commissioner Cranston.

[00:07:00] Commissioner Bill Cranston: Here.

[00:07:02] EPC Clerk: Commissioner Donahue.

[00:07:03] Commissioner Paul Donahue: Here.

[00:07:04] EPC Clerk: Commissioner Gutierrez.

[00:07:06] Chair Jos001e001 Guti001errez: Gutierrez, present.

[00:07:08] EPC Clerk: Commissioner Nunez.

[00:07:10] Vice Chair Alex Nu001ez: Here.

[00:07:11] EPC Clerk: Vice Chair Dempsey.

[00:07:13] Commissioner Hank Dempsey: Here.

[00:07:14] EPC Clerk: Chair Yin.

[00:07:16] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Here.

[00:07:18] EPC Clerk: Thank you very much. All commissioners are present at tonight's meeting.

[00:07:23] Commissioner Joyce Yin: With roll call complete, we will move on to agenda item 3.1, the minutes approval of Environmental Planning Commission meeting minutes of August 16th, 2023. I'm going to open it up for discussion if there is any. Seeing no discussion, we'll move on to public comment.

[00:07:43] Commissioner Joyce Yin: If anyone in attendance would like to provide comments on the minutes, please fill out a yellow speaker card and provide it to the EPC clerk. If anyone on Zoom would like to provide comment on the minutes, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or press star nine on your phone. Phone users can mute and unmute themselves with star six. EPC clerk, do we have anyone on Zoom?

[00:08:06] EPC Clerk: We do not have any speakers on Zoom.

[00:08:08] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Okay, and no yellow cards for public comment I take it. Do we have a motion to approve the minutes?

[00:08:17] Councilmember Chris Clark: So moved.

[00:08:21] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Do they need to read it fully? Okay. Commissioner Gutierrez, do you mind reading the entire motion?

[00:08:32] Chair Jos001e001 Guti001errez: Motion to approve the environmental planning commission meeting minutes of August 16th, 2023.

[00:08:38] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Thank you very much. We will now take a vote.

[00:09:16] EPC Clerk: Sorry, just to clarify the record on who the motion and who the seconder was.

[00:09:22] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Sure, I see on the computer the motioner was, click, Chris Clark, I didn't see that at the time, and Commissioner Gutierrez had motioned it so.

[00:09:29] Councilmember Chris Clark: I pushed the button, I'm sorry.

[00:09:30] Commissioner Joyce Yin: That's okay. And the seconder was Vice Chair Dempsey. Correct?

[00:09:37] EPC Clerk: Thank you for the clarification. Go ahead.

[00:09:39] Commissioner Joyce Yin: The motion passes with six approved and one abstained vote. Thank you very much.

[00:09:49] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Now we'll open oral communications. Item four. This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the EPC on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are allowed to speak on any topic for up to three minutes during this section. State law prohibits the commission from acting on non-agenda items. If anyone in attendance would like to provide comments on non-agenda items, please fill out a yellow speaker card and provide it to the EPC clerk.

[00:10:15] Commissioner Joyce Yin: If anyone on Zoom would like to provide comment on non-agenda items, please click the raised hand button in Zoom or press star nine on your phone. Phone users can mute and unmute themselves with star six. EPC clerk, do we have any yellow cards or speakers online?

[00:10:36] EPC Clerk: We don't have any speaker cards for those online.

[00:10:40] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Thank you so much. We'll move to item 5.1. We'll open the public hearing. Housing element annual report and emergency shelters amendment. We have a commissioner who needs to recuse himself from participation for a portion of this agenda item due to a conflict of interest. Thank you for the lights.

[00:11:03] Commissioner Joyce Yin: And we'll proceed in a slightly different manner. We will first have a staff presentation, followed by public comment for the entire agenda item. At the close of public comment, the commission will ask questions, deliberate and vote on the matters that the commissioner needed to recuse himself for. And then the commission will ask questions, deliberate and vote on the remaining items after the commissioner returns. And I will clarify more on which portions at the close of public comment. So if we could have the staff presentation from Senior Planner Krisha Penollar and Advanced Planning Manager Eric Anderson, we'd appreciate it. Thank you.

[00:11:47] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: Good evening, chair and commissioners. My name is Krisha Penollar, senior planner, and I'm joined with Eric Anderson, advanced planning manager. We're here to present the 2023 annual progress report and emergency shelter amendments.

[00:12:00] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: At today's meeting, we'll focus on two items. The first is the annual progress report to provide an update on the progress on the sixth cycle housing element program and regional housing needs assessment allocation. This is required by the state's Department of Housing and Community Development and must be completed by April 1st.

[00:12:19] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: The report tracks all phases of development including application submittal, entitlement, building permit issuance, and certificate of occupancy. It also tracks policy and program implementation for the 2023 period. Please note key changes to the report include reporting on number of units for RHNA allocation.

[00:12:40] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: Per AB 1783, cities report on all new units as part of their RHNA allocation instead of net new units, which is new units minus demoed units. The second item before EPC are the code and precise plan amendments for emergency shelters, which was identified as a housing element implementation program. State law AB 2339 requires cities to designate one zoning district in which emergency shelters are permitted by right.

[00:13:08] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: State law also requires cities to do a site analysis to ensure there are sufficient sites in the zoning district that permit emergency shelters by right to house the city's unhoused populations. Furthermore, the housing element program identified the El Camino Real precise plan as the zoning district to permit emergency shelters.

[00:13:29] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: So the regional housing needs assessment or RHNA for short is a requirement by state law in which local jurisdictions are required to provide their share of new housing units through zoning of adequate land to build these units and to implement other housing element requirements to facilitate housing production. The table here shows the city of Mountain View's RHNA allocation of 11,135 units, a substantial increase from the fifth cycle's requirement of 2,926 units.

[00:13:59] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: This table shows the first year progress towards meeting the RHNA goal with the building permits issued from January 31st, 2023 to December 31st, 2023. Projects receiving building permits after June 30th, 2022 to January 31st, 2023 known as the projection period also contribute to the sixth cycle RHNA.

[00:14:25] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: Please note staff is working with HCD to revise the projection period unit count as the projection period accounts net new units when it should account for all new units per per state law. Staff will have this table updated prior to council.

[00:14:40] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: So several housing element programs have been completed or are ongoing. These include updates to the zoning ordinance to facilitate different residential land uses. Gatekeeper applications are now being accepted between March 1st, 2024 and June 28th, 2024 with a council authorization hearing in the fall which will satisfy the program deadline in the housing element.

[00:15:03] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: Ongoing monitoring for no net loss to ensure there's adequate land available to meet the city's RHNA allocation. Ongoing outreach to tenants and property owners regarding tenant rights are also occurring. And a displacement and a tenant displacement response strategy study session was held to discuss local replacement requirements.

[00:15:25] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: Additional housing element program successes include the following items. The city has funded 199 permanent supportive housing and rapid rehousing units, and 100 interim housing units. The city has also received multiple grants and funding to support subsidized housing, and additional funds have been provided to support other agencies such as CSA with homelessness prevention and outreach.

[00:15:50] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: As background, state law requires cities to identify one or more zoning district where emergency shelters are permitted by right without a discretionary permit. Non-discretionary permits are not subject to CEQA. Emergency shelters are only required to meet the development standards listed in the government code. And lastly, state law requires that cities must identify potential sites in the zoning district in which emergency shelters are permitted by right to meet the city's projected demand of unhoused populations.

[00:16:23] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: Per state law, Mountain View is required to provide at least 6,400 square feet of land area to accommodate 32 beds. Therefore, the city must identify a zoning district to permit emergency shelters by right and conduct a site analysis to ensure there are viable sites to meet these requirements. In response to these requirements, the city's adopted housing element program includes an implementation item that directs staff to amend a zoning designation to be consistent with AB 2339 by March 31st, 2024.

[00:16:57] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: And also identifies El Camino Real precise plan as the zoning for emergency shelters. This program goes beyond the minimum requirements of AB 2339. Staff has conducted a review of the entirety of El Camino Real precise plan using ABAG site analysis methodology, which is based on site vacancy, location of goods and services, and likelihood of the site turning over in the future.

[00:17:24] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: The map here shows the El Camino Real precise plan and the number of potentially viable sites for an an emergency shelter by sub area. Staff has identified a total of four viable sites along the El Camino Real corridor with two in the Castro Miramonte sub area one, one in the Castro Miramonte sub area two, and one in the medium intensity corridor.

[00:17:48] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: As indicated prior, staff has identified two sites in the Castro Miramonte sub area one that have sufficient land area to meet the requirements of state law. These sites include 836 West El Camino Real and 1098 West El Camino Real. Both sites exceed the 6,400 square feet lot area requirement of AB 2339 and have characteristics that demonstrate a higher likelihood of redevelopment in the housing element planning period.

[00:18:18] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: Such as existing use, age, structure size, and vacancy levels. Please note these identified sites are not proposed emergency shelter sites. No project is proposed at this time. The city did reach out to the property owners to notify them of these proposed amendments and that their properties were used as part of the required emergency shelter site analysis.

[00:18:44] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: After the adoption of the housing element, staff conducted a reconnaissance survey of potential historic resources as part of the council priority work to update the historic preservation ordinance and register. During this process, eight sites on the El Camino Real were identified as potential historic sites. One site is a known historic site at the state and national level with an active development project under review.

[00:19:09] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: However, additional analysis must be conducted over the next month to determine if the others meet the historic resource criteria. If the entire El Camino Real precise plan was modified to allow emergency shelters by right, state law would not allow discretionary discretionary permits including consideration of potentially historic resources.

[00:19:33] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: Therefore, a potential competing interest between the council priority surrounding protection of historic resources and the housing element program to allow emergency shelters by right within the El Camino Real precise plan now exists. In response, staff is proposing a phased approach that could help meet the housing element deadline, meet the minimum requirements of AB 2339, and allow time to complete the historic analysis so council is fully informed before making further zoning changes.

[00:20:07] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: This phased approach that staff recommends is to rezone the Castro Miramonte sub area one to allow emergency shelters by right, complete the historic resource analysis, and then return to council after the analysis is complete so council may make a fully informed decision about whether to zone other sub areas within the El Camino Real precise plan or the entire El Camino Real precise plan to permit emergency shelters by right.

[00:20:35] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: Given there are sufficient sites in the Castro Miramonte sub area one to meet the minimum land requirement per state law, and the fact there are no historic sites in this sub area, staff proposes amending the Castro Miramonte sub area one to permit emergency shelters, and the other areas would be provisionally permitted.

[00:20:54] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: However, EPC can recommend for council to amend all of El Camino Real precise plan to permit emergency shelters by right now, but additional research is needed to understand the CEQA path. Please note it may require CEQA or could be an exemption, but this is something staff needs to study further. If EPC wishes to recommend that council amend all of El Camino Real precise plan to permit emergency shelters by right now, staff will take this recommendation to city council and work with the city attorney's office to resolve the CEQA question prior to this matter being considered by city council, so council may decide at that time whether to proceed with a full amendment.

[00:22:16] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: Lastly, staff has received comments from members of the public expressing concerns that the recommendation to require a CUP for emergency shelters in the general industrial MM zoning district is illegal and/or inconsistent with the city's adopted housing element. These concerns have been brought to the attention of the city attorney's office, and CD staff is working with legal council to determine if the addition of a CUP requirement would be illegal or inconsistent with the housing element.

[00:22:46] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: Given the public's concern and the need to confer with legal council, staff is withdrawing its recommendation to require a CUP for emergency shelters in the general industrial MM zoning district at this time. For purpose of this evening's discussion, the withdrawal of this recommendation does not mean that the commission cannot discuss and provide a recommendation with regard to this matter.

[00:23:08] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: You may by majority vote provide a recommendation on whether to include a CUP requirement for emergency shelters in the MM zoning district and staff will share that recommendation with city council when this matter goes to council in March. If the commission by majority vote recommends including a CUP requirement for emergency shelters in the MM zoning district, city staff and legal council would endeavor to resolve the legal concerns prior to the city council meeting in March, so that council may make a fully informed decision on whether to include a CUP requirement for emergency shelters in the MM zoning district.

[00:23:48] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: AB 2339 also prohibits the city from imposing standards that are not prescribed by state law. These standards are shown on the screen and proposed code amendments would ensure compliance with state law. These include removal or updates of existing standards. For example, we cannot impose underlying development standards or common facilities. The city must also modify the parking standard to only require up to one parking space per employee.

[00:24:15] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: Staff also proposes clearer standards to the size of waiting and intake areas, minimum lighting requirements, and the hours and location of on-site security. In terms of next steps, the code and precise plan amendments are tentatively scheduled for the Airport Land Use Commission on February 28th, as a new residential land use is proposed in the Moffett Airfield comprehensive land use plan.

[00:24:38] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: The city council will review the code and precise plan amendments for consideration of adoption, and the 2023 annual housing report which will be forwarded to the Department of Housing Community Development and OPR before April 1st.

[00:24:53] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: Overall, staff recommends the EPC recommend a finding that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA if the staff recommendation is supported, and recommends that EPC recommend approval of the code and precise plan amendments with one modification to exhibit two.

[00:25:10] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: Staff recommends that EPC remove the proposed amendments to section 36.220.05. This new recommendation would preserve the current permitting process in the MM zoning district, allowing emergency shelters and low barrier navigation centers by right, instead of the published draft which would have required a conditional use permit.

[00:25:31] Senior Planner Krisha Penollar: Staff also recommends that EPC forward the APR to city council consideration. Um, thank you for your time, and please note staff is available for any questions.

[00:25:43] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Thank you very much. Um, at this point we're going to move to public comment. If anyone in attendance would like to provide comments on this item, please fill out a yellow speaker card and provide it to the EPC clerk. If anyone on Zoom would like to provide comment on this item, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or press star nine on your phone. Phone users can mute and unmute themselves with star six. I see we have.

[00:26:12] EPC Clerk: Yeah, so the next speaker is Alex, and Jackie will be the following speaker.

[00:26:28] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Oh, um, okay. So, the next speaker is Jackie, and the following speaker will be Ann. In how much time? Three minutes.

[00:26:40] Jackie Cashen: Okay. Um, my name is Jackie Cashen. I'm a long-term resident of Mountain View. Several years ago I was displaced from the apartment building I was living in and now I have ended up living in the LifeMoves shelter at Leghorn, an indirect result of that displacement because of the increase in rent I faced when I was forced out.

[00:27:14] Jackie Cashen: Um, one of the things I would like council as well as EPC to keep in mind when determining locations for these emergency shelters, Leghorn is very isolated from everything. We're in the far edge of an industrial area. Uh, we have no, no access to grocery stores, no access to parks.

[00:27:34] Jackie Cashen: The nearest VTA station is a two-block walk away, which is really difficult for a lot of our residents who are over 60 and have walkers and everything else. As of now, although this is something I'm working on with um some of the council members, even the city shuttle doesn't come there. I mean, we're literally just in the middle of nowhere.

[00:27:53] Jackie Cashen: Some of us have cars, we try to help out the ones who don't. When you are picking an area or evaluating the areas, these are things that really need to be kept in mind. That even in a temporary type setting, people need access to a means to get to the store, to get to the pharmacy, to get to the doctor's office, to get to a job interview and everything else.

[00:28:16] Jackie Cashen: Place I I have seen on Nextdoor the uprising over the prospect of these shelters being placed in the Castro Miramonte area. There are already people who are ready to vote city council out of office and they haven't even even seen any of this yet. So, you're going to have a hard time no matter what you do.

[00:28:34] Jackie Cashen: But I do ask that you keep in mind that we all feel so isolated because of where we are. And you can't keep isolating people. There are homeless people in Mountain View and they are not going to go away. And most of us would prefer not to be homeless, but if we don't have access to the things we need, we're going to stay that way.

[00:28:54] Jackie Cashen: So, just when you're selecting, just remember that putting us out in an industrial area doesn't do any good. You can hide people but you can't make them go away. So I'd appreciate just that being kept in mind. Thank you.

[00:29:11] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Thank you.

[00:29:16] EPC Clerk: The next speaker is Ann and the following speaker will be Salim.

[00:29:31] Ann McLoughlin: Hi, my name is Ann McLoughlin, I'm also a long-term uh resident of Mountain View. Um so this was a really interesting pre-presentation. There's a lot that goes into making these decisions. Um as a resident I felt like it raised a lot of questions about the process that I didn't feel were really addressed in the presentation. Like what other zones might have been considered.

[00:29:57] Ann McLoughlin: It sounds like we only looked at this particular zone. And it sounds like there's a requirement from the state that we identify one. Um I certainly as a long-time resident have concerns about how about things that don't require CEQA. So something that's by right, and I may be using this term incorrectly, is of some concern who lives in the neighborhood.

[00:30:25] Ann McLoughlin: Because I know that when other issues have come in front of council, um looking at impact on parking and traffic, and I don't see any of that raised in these reports as to how this might be impacted. But if I understand what you just presented, the minute it's approved, these are not questions we can ask, and I don't think that those kinds of questions have been answered in in this particular um presentation.

[00:30:56] Ann McLoughlin: So those are my those are my first comments. I I'm I'm not sure how well the neighborhoods are aware of kind of this process. I know that you've done outreach, but I don't think that we've seen the kind of reporting on it or really notification of neighbors. I mean the minute you fall out of 750 feet, you aren't notified, which is of some concern to me. Um but thank you.

[00:31:31] EPC Clerk: The next speaker is Salim and the following is Alex.

[00:31:36] Public Speaker Salim: It's good? Okay. Uh, hi commissioners. I first want to thank you for the opportunity to speak. And also I want to thank you for all the work that you put into the housing element, um, which was incredible, because you knew it was a binding document at the time. Uh, it's not so clear now whether it's a binding document.

[00:31:59] Public Speaker Salim: Uh, this is clearly a reneging. A bad faith reneging of program 1.1.f. I'll read you the text of the housing element. This was a housing element that HCD views as a contract with the state. The housing element reads program 1.1 will amend the El Camino Real precise plan allowing emergency shelters without a conditional use permit.

[00:32:22] Public Speaker Salim: That text says nothing about a sub-area of a sub-zone of the precise plan. This proposal reduces the scope of by-right emergency shelters by 95.4%. If this wasn't illegal, um, it would obviously be plainly immoral and worth rejecting on policy grounds.

[00:32:45] Public Speaker Salim: How are we even asking the question whether it should be legal to build shelters for the homeless? How are we asking that question? All of you know how bad homelessness is. You only have to walk on Castro to see that people are still sleeping on the streets, and instead of thinking that that's a priority, we're saying that what's actually a priority are dubiously historical buildings on El Camino Real that are so dubiously historical we haven't even identified them yet.

[00:33:15] Public Speaker Salim: I think we need to get our priorities straight. We need to prioritize homelessness and actually allow shelters for the homeless to be legal to build. Instead of saying well maybe they're they're something that we're okay with, you know, if you're willing to put up with six months of delay, an EIR that'll cost you hundreds of thousands of dollars, potentially give neighbors a litigation route to stop a shelter from being built.

[00:33:41] Public Speaker Salim: What kind of city is this? I I'm very disappointed by the staff report. I don't understand what the point of the housing element update was, if we're not going to think that the programs in it are binding. If we're going to rewrite history and rewrite programs that are in dry ink.

[00:34:01] Public Speaker Salim: I know that HCD will be informed about this as well as other attempts to renege on housing element programs. This is not just a liability for our housing element compliance, but it's also a liability for whether we retain a pro-housing designation, which is something that the state can take away if it thinks that the city has been dishonest about its commitments on homelessness.

[00:34:22] Public Speaker Salim: I appreciate the update on the MM zone. I hope there'll be an equivalent update on the rest of the staff recommendation. Thank you.

[00:34:30] EPC Clerk: Thank you. The next speaker is Alex and the following is a virtual speaker.

[00:34:38] Public Speaker Alex: Yeah, Salim is a tough act to follow. Hi friends, welcome Paul. Uh, how's it going? Okay, so, uh glad to hear that staff is consulting council, so I'm just going to give my comments that I had before that anyway, uh because it's more fun and I already have them written down.

[00:34:56] Public Speaker Alex: So imagine that you're lucky enough to have a nice little cabin somewhere and you tell a friend that they can uh use it to get away for the weekend. But then when they get there, you say you're concerned about the furniture and you know the plumbing. So they can stay in the closet downstairs, uh but if they ask really nicely they can use some some other rooms in that house.

[00:35:13] Public Speaker Alex: Uh, the proposed interpretation of program 1.1.f jeopardizes the housing element as a whole and feels like a bad faith post-hoc renegotiation with both the community and HCD. Uh, making it right would be very easy. Uh, it's as simple as removing the other land use requirements addition, uh, and the PUPs from table one. So pretty easy fix that you guys I think could still probably recommend tonight as commissioners given that it is something that pending before it goes to council.

[00:35:40] Public Speaker Alex: Uh, this also fixed the issue with 860 Base Street not qualifying for site analysis. Uh, I personally would like to see the analysis performed on all four of the possible sites before it gets brought to council just so they have the full breadth of options given to them for their analysis instead of just the two that were in the staff report. Uh, thanks.

[00:35:59] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Thank you. On to the virtual public speakers.

[00:36:03] EPC Clerk: The next speaker is Louise.

[00:36:44] EPC Clerk: Give us a moment as we uh figure out how to unmute the speaker.

[00:37:00] Louise Katz: Thank you very much. Am I in audio now?

[00:37:06] EPC Clerk: We can hear you.

[00:37:07] Louise Katz: Yes, thank you very much. So, first of all, I wanted to agree with the prior speaker about the 750 foot notice. We've said many times how inadequate and ridiculous it is. 750 feet, for example, from the Jiffy Lube site, I think what would that be like Baskin Robbins, um, and McKelvey baseball field.

[00:37:26] Louise Katz: So, um, again, this is not the way the city should be run on these kinds of important and permanent choices that all the residents need to know about. And I would urge the city, the EPC, to advise the council that it needs to be changed. Um, I'm very concerned about do we really know what it is we're voting for.

[00:37:47] Louise Katz: The emergency shelters obviously are of great necessity for our city and our society. But the efforts by Sacramento to strip away local control leaves us with questions that we have no transparency to with to obtain answers. Such as exactly who is going to be in these shelters? Who's making the referrals? How long will they stay? If there's supposed to be limitations up to say six months, can there be repeat um, um, usage such that it becomes permanent? An emergency can get you in but what gets you out?

[00:38:24] Louise Katz: And who exactly will be there? What will the rules be? When we have zoning for liquor stores or bars or restaurants, car repairs, the neighbors know exactly what they're going to have. There'll be noise. There'll be place ways open till 2 in the morning. There'll be trucks delivering food. But we know nothing about what how these shelters will be run, who the contractors will be.

[00:38:51] Louise Katz: And the primary question I think is, since Sacramento doesn't want us to have any local control, they only want us to count beds, how are we going to prioritize families? No children should be sleeping in cars. But can we make families a top priority?

[00:39:04] Louise Katz: We were told when they were working on the housing for the 812, um, the parking, the parking lot that will be housing by the library, we cannot prioritize even local residents that have been displaced. So I urge the EPC to not go forward with this process until we are allowed to have as a city to plan for how the shelter will benefit those most in need.

[00:39:33] Louise Katz: And who we will have living near our schools and our parks. Um, will it be drug-free? Are there ways for people to be evicted? Or are they immune from from many of the laws and rules that govern all sorts of other businesses? So again, the lack of transparency, lack of information. Zoning for a shelter is just not the same as zoning for a restaurant or a school or a town house. Thank you.

[00:40:06] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Thank you. Are there any more speakers, EPC clerk?

[00:40:13] EPC Clerk: There are no other speakers.

[00:40:17] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Okay, thanks. Um, I will now bring the item back for the commission questions and deliberation on staff recommendations two and three regarding zoning ordinance amendments to develop standards and permitting process for emergency shelters and amendments of the El Camino Real precise plan to add emergency shelters as a permitted use.

[00:40:39] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Um, we'll have the commissioner who needs to recuse themselves go ahead and do some, uh go ahead and do so, and then we will uh continue participation on discussion after.

[00:40:52] Councilmember Chris Clark: Okay. Um, so I'm recusing myself from discussion of recommendation numbers two and three uh of this item regarding the zoning ordinance amendments to develop standards and permitting process for emergency shelters and amendments of the El Camino Real precise plan to add emergency shelters as a permitted use due to the proximity of my personal residence to El Camino Real precise plan.

[00:41:16] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Okay, thank you very much. And uh, after Commissioner Clark exits, we will then um move on to EPC questions on these two items and then deliberation and then we'll take a vote on this portion of the agenda item. So, does I'm going to open up the question session.

[00:41:37] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Go ahead, Commissioner Nunez.

[00:41:40] Vice Chair Alex Nu001ez: Um, I guess I'll go for it now. Uh, so, uh quick questions. Um, so when we were going through the housing element process, um, I just wanted to make sure uh I confirmed uh my understanding of the view that HCD and the state and state law has with regards to the document that we've produced.

[00:42:11] Vice Chair Alex Nu001ez: I just want to confirm uh to the extent possible uh what was shared with us again as far as my understanding through that process. Uh, yes or no, uh does HCD and/or the state of California uh by way of HCD uh view the housing element uh as a legally binding document uh from the City of Mountain View?

[00:42:41] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um, I would say that from a uh kind of an analogy perspective, it is a something of a contract with the city. Um, I would not say that it is um in all ways the same as a legally binding document uh the way um other contracts might be legally binding document. It is a policy document, it's intended to be high level, and there because it's a policy document that's intended to be high level, there has to be some decision making that happens as you implement the policy document.

[00:43:27] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um, HCD recognizes that, and um, you know we I think the um the of course it is a uh um you know with HCD's new new kind of enforcement programs, we are kind of in a new new world. Uh, and so we don't know right now the extent to which uh they are going to enforce uh different interpretations of the document. Um, but it is a um uh it is a policy document that we have to adhere to.

[00:44:13] Vice Chair Alex Nu001ez: That we have to adhere to. Cool. So, just based on that uh response and, um, I'm pretty sure our awareness with regards to the, um, higher degree of attention and uh, desire of enforcement from HCD, that's closer to a yes than a no, correct?

[00:44:29] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: What, I'm not... yeah, that would be closer to yes than to no.

[00:44:34] Vice Chair Alex Nu001ez: Because I asked a yes or no question and it sounds like a yes or no question is not necessarily possible but just based on what I heard it's a closer to a yes than a no.

[00:44:47] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um, I would say there are a lot of aspects of your question that are correct. Okay. Um, that that we need we are expected by HCD to uh adhere to our policy document.

Segment 2

[00:45:00] Commissioner Bill Cranston: Something that was already reviewed require another CEQA review?

Segment 1

[00:45:06] Vice Chair Alex Nu001ez: Okay. Thank you very much.

Segment 2

[00:45:07] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Uh so, oh, I'll I'll let the Assistant Community Development Director respond to this.

Segment 1

[00:45:10] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Any other questions? Um, Commissioner Cranston.

[00:45:14] Commissioner Bill Cranston: I have a bunch. Um, so the staff report on the slides on slides and page 11, it says that if we were to recommend proceeding with all of El Camino Real that we would need to determine CEQA. The housing element included an EIR including a CEQA review. So why would doing...

Segment 2

[00:45:17] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Good? Is it good? Hi, good evening. Amber Blisinski, Assistant Community Development Director. So um the the EIR for the housing element, it did it does analyze cultural resources, but it doesn't actually analyze specific sites or specific cultural resources. Instead, it offers mitigation measures that then cover those when you do subsequent review. So what it says is that this EIR for this project, the housing element, is not contemplating removing any cultural resources. And so therefore, there's no impact to cultural resources.

[00:46:01] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: And then one of the mitigation measures in the housing element goes into detail in that if you if we do discover by analysis that there is a historic resource on one of the sites, that it would be the housing element mitigation measure states that you would not disturb or, you know, demolish that resource. So if then you knew that you were going to demolish or remove that resource, you would ultimately do further like a subsequent supplemental EIR to then analyze that resource fully.

[00:46:41] Commissioner Bill Cranston: And at this point, nothing along El Camino Real at this point has been designated as a historic resource?

[00:46:46] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Yeah, there is one site, uh 749 West El Camino Real. It is a development project site. We're currently doing a supplemental EIR for that site.

[00:46:57] Commissioner Bill Cranston: And you said cultural resources, I think of cultural resources as Indian burial grounds, not old buildings.

[00:47:04] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: It's all, that's what it falls under in an EIR, that's the the name of the section.

[00:47:11] Commissioner Bill Cranston: Okay. Um, second question. The why no matter what we do, why is the proposal in there to remove the permitted use in the MM zone? What what's the basis for doing that? That was that was never discussed in the housing element, and I don't understand why that's even included.

[00:47:34] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um, it was included because the uh so the MM zone um update, so when 12 years ago when we adopted the MM zone um as a um as a zoning district for the El Camino Real precise- or for the uh for emergency shelters. Um the let's see. I guess the best way to say this is that um we are we are adding broader language in the excuse me, let me let me let me collect my thoughts here.

[00:48:28] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um I guess I'll just say that it it was a uh conservative approach to ensure that uh historic resources are protected, uh all historic resources that are have been um identified uh are have the opportunity to be protected. Um there are um you know given that the um uh excuse me given that the the only known historic resource in the MM zoning district currently has a development proposal uh adjacent to it that's currently under review, um that site may be of less concern.

[00:49:38] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um and so if the if the commission wants to uh still have that uh additional check on uh on protecting that historic resource for in in case um you know an emergency shelter is proposed there, uh then the the commission can can leave that CUP requirement in. Uh but otherwise the um uh otherwise it it since it's the only historic resource uh that one property, it may not be necessary to leave it as a CUP.

[00:50:21] Commissioner Bill Cranston: And the removal of the change of use in other sub-areas from permitted to requiring a provisional use permit? Why is that included?

[00:50:32] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: That's included because well there there's two reasons. One is uh as the staff report mentioned, the um there's a conflict with other council priorities. Uh as well as needing to determine the proper CEQA path. So we um you know our our initial analysis was that if there is the potential for this project to uh for this zoning action to impact historic resources, that requires a particular CEQA path. We're looking at other options now where it might not.

[00:51:16] Commissioner Bill Cranston: I think you misunderstood my question. So the LifeMoves site is in an area that the site was a permitted use. The other changes in the other areas would now make this requiring a provisional use permit. That's what I'm talking about, I'm not talking about historic at this point. There there are a emergency shelters are permitted in other areas of the city beyond El Camino today, and you're proposing removing, changing that from a permitted use to a conditional use. Why?

[00:51:48] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: The only area where where we had initially proposed that was MM.

[00:51:54] Commissioner Bill Cranston: Okay, so no other areas are affected.

[00:51:56] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: No other areas. Yeah.

[00:51:59] Commissioner Bill Cranston: If another LifeMoves came on it could go into that same location, whether it's a good location or not.

[00:52:03] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Well, so there there are lots of other areas in the city where emergency shelters are conditional, um and the um there are lots of other areas in the city where emergency shelters are conditional, and we are not proposing to change that.

[00:52:24] Commissioner Bill Cranston: The 1.1.whatever it is, um that was dis- disclosed as part of the housing element process and made public so anybody in the community could review that during the housing element process? Yes? This isn't that was not a new requirement that's been snuck in here at the last minute.

[00:52:43] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: No, uh that was so that was um it was certainly public during the review of the uh, I'm sorry, I think I have to let...

[00:52:56] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Yeah, um, sorry about that. So just a clarification, we'll have we will need another commissioner might have to recuse uh from this item. Um...

[00:53:09] Principal Planner Diana Pancholi: Sorry for the interruption.

[00:53:14] Commissioner Joyce Yin: That's okay.

[00:53:21] Vice Chair Alex Nuñez: And just so that everyone knows, I brought this up to the attention of our team um because of where I live. Um and I mentioned to them, hey I'm on El Camino. I don't think I should be here. Uh I am recusing myself from discussion and recommendation numbers two and three regarding the zoning ordinance amendments to development standards and permitting process for emergency shelters, and amendments of the El Camino Real precise plan to add emergency shelters as a permitted use due to proximity of my personal residence to El Camino Real precise plan.

[00:53:52] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Okay, thank you. We will see you later.

[00:53:55] Commissioner Bill Cranston: So I'm just what I'm attempting to make sure that I understand is it's been suggested by members of the public that this has not been something that was out there for people to review and understand. And to my knowledge this was included in every phase of the housing element review process, it was publicly noticed and made available for people to see. It stated right up front that El Camino precise plan would be part of this, and therefore I'm it's my my belief that this is not something new, that the community has had an opportunity to review this through the housing element process. Is that correct?

[00:54:31] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um, I believe that this language was put in probably in the last um six months or so of the housing element process.

[00:54:42] Commissioner Bill Cranston: Okay. But it was out there, it was available for people to see.

[00:54:46] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Yes.

[00:54:48] Commissioner Bill Cranston: When the council was reviewing the historical ordinance, was there any discussion whatsoever about going back and how that might affect already put in place agreements with the state? Did they state that they wanted to go back and look at, would they want to change something in the housing element?

[00:55:07] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: No, that did not come up during the historic discussion.

[00:55:13] Commissioner Bill Cranston: Okay. So this is a requirement that came up after the housing element was approved through the historical review process.

[00:55:21] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: So the we conducted this reconnaissance survey after the housing element was approved.

[00:55:28] Commissioner Bill Cranston: Okay. Next question. Um and this is kind of a question, I don't know whether this is... I had some questions about the the the objective standards for the emergency shelters. Um ECR has a relatively level of density and one of the comments in the staff report was that emergency shelters would be limited to one to two stories. ECR is not limited to one to two stories. I thought SB 330 prohibited anything that would act- actually potentially result in the reduction in density in an area, or are emergency shelters different from other items in the in the precise plans?

[00:56:06] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: No, we we would not apply that as a development standard to emergency shelters. I think the comment was based on our experience with these types of state-funded projects. There's limited funding. And so um generally these types of publicly funded projects are done with portables, are done with um other other types of very low cost uh improvements, not tall buildings that need to be engineered uh and are very expensive to build. Um that is just a a disclosure of our experience, it is not a development standard, it is not something that we are allowed by the state to regulate. We cannot regulate the height of emergency shelters.

[00:57:04] Commissioner Bill Cranston: So it would be no less than the existing El Camino precise plan densities.

[00:57:09] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: We cannot even limit the El Camino Real, based on the El Camino Real heights.

[00:57:16] Commissioner Bill Cranston: Okay. Uh I think that's all my questions for the moment.

[00:57:23] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Are there any other questions from other commissioners? Vice Chair Dempsey.

[00:57:31] Commissioner Hank Dempsey: Thank you Madam Chair. So uh I have some basic structural questions um that I wanted to ask and I think maybe it would be helpful uh for some folks and of course definitely for me, um to start with a sort of basic characterization of what 2339 asks for. And so maybe I believe we have the City Attorney on, um perhaps if she would be willing to give us and the public a a quick recap of what it is that bill is asking for and the extent to which it um takes, you know, um what control it it allows to remain with the cities and what control it takes away, because I think I've heard some things I think there's some confusion about what we can and cannot control here uh because we got to follow state law. So perhaps if the City Attorney could give us all a very quick primer of what's in what's required of us in 2339.

[00:58:30] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: Uh thank you, this is the City Attorney Jennifer Logue. Um can everybody hear me okay? ... Excellent. Um it would be a lot easier for me if maybe you could be a little more specific in your question. I I can't give an entire primer of AB 2339. If if you are talking about in in relation to emergency shelters, I could maybe give you know a little bit of discussion, but I think it would be a lot easier for me just to ask specific questions. I mean it does have requirements in there with regard to you know the development um restrictions or or lack thereof on on emergency shelters, but a big picture uh explanation of what AB 2339 does, I I can't I'm not prepared to give that tonight, but I'm happy to answer specific questions related to it.

[00:59:33] Commissioner Hank Dempsey: Very fair, wasn't I didn't mean to suggest you had to give a book report on it. Go ahead Eric.

[00:59:39] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Uh well I can just you know recap what was in the staff report and and what was what was in the presentation. Um AB 2339 requires the city through their housing element to identify sites in the city that are able to accommodate a uh one or more emergency shelters that are that can adequately serve the city's unhoused population. Further, those sites need to already allow residential uses, and the city has to rezone those sites to allow emergency shelters by right. Lastly, the city cannot um or not lastly, there's more, the city cannot require any discretionary permits, so we can't require historic preservation permits, we can't require development review permits, um for emergency shelters, unless it's in a district where it's allowed with a conditional use permit. So the conditional use permit is the only permit or provisional use permit in the in the precise plan, is the only permit that can be, discretionary permit that can be applied to emergency shelters in the city. Um the lastly, it lays out a list of objective standards that are the only objective standards that the city can apply to emergency shelters.

[01:01:24] Commissioner Hank Dempsey: That was perfect, thank you. Um, some more basic questions, then I want to come back to 2339 in a second because I have a definitional question that's important. But uh baseline, I know this is a dumb question, do we have emergency shelters operating in the City of Mountain View right now?

[01:01:44] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um, I'm going to defer to Wayne, I'm not sure how the um you know the sites that we have operating are categorized as that land use. I know um our Housing Director Wayne Chen is here.

[01:02:05] Housing Director Wayne Chen: Hi, good evening everyone. Can can y'all hear me? ... Great. So uh just starting with the uh LifeMoves Mountain View uh project, that that is considered interim housing, and uh not operated as emergency shelters. Um one of the defining uh distinctions between interim housing is versus emergency shelters is just the length of stay. And uh emergency emergency shelters have a maximum of a 90-day uh duration for any anyone who who is there. And so um the interim housing at at LifeMoves Mountain View um does not have that restriction although the intent is to um folks transition to to permanent housing, but there is there is flexibility in that. And so uh that is the that's the primary one that the housing department um you know works with and and coordinates on.

[01:03:00] Commissioner Hank Dempsey: Okay, so we have some of those sort of medium-term housing options available, clearly not enough, but it's this is about the short-term emergency housing options and we do not have anything like that operating currently in Mountain View. Right? Right. I'll assume that I'll assume that's correct, there was a question mark in there. Okay. Um have there been any proposals for them? It seems like they are conditionally permitted in other parts of the city. Has anyone asked to build one in any other part of the city in the last, I don't know, 5, 10 years?

[01:03:40] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Not that I'm aware of, I think the nearest thing that we have is the cold weather shelter on Hope Street.

[01:03:46] Commissioner Hank Dempsey: Okay. How many beds is that?

[01:03:48] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: I don't know off the top of my head, but I can look it up.

[01:03:51] Commissioner Hank Dempsey: But not huge, I assume. Okay, so but one of the things that I think is important here is if even if this would be permitted, these types of shelters would be permitted in other parts of the city, but no one's been coming and asking. That's my understanding from what you're nodding your head, yes, so that's we're not it's not as if these are being asked for and they're being turned away by the city. Okay. All right, that's important. Um, okay coming back to to 2339, I think for you know, for me as a lawyer, I care a lot about definitions. And so I've asked this question before and I think it's really really important to hear the answer so everybody can hear it. So in 2339 the term of art that they use is 'identified zoning designation'. That's am I am I correct, right? Okay. So, I didn't go through the housing code to check this, uh and I'm sure you can you you would know better than me, is a precise plan subzone, of the type that's identified in the staff report, does that meet the definition of an identified zoning designation? And how do we know it does?

[01:05:02] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Uh I do not know off the top of my head if the term 'zoning designation' is formally defined in any of this legislation. It does not appear to it did not appear to be in the um in the legislation.

[01:05:23] Commissioner Hank Dempsey: So this is this is not a term of art, this is just a...

[01:05:26] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: It is a term of art. Uh oh, I think uh the City Attorney would like to say something.

[01:05:36] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: Thank you. Yes. Um, Jennifer Logue, City Attorney. So I had the very same question, and I spent a large part of my day trying to find a definition to 'zoning designations'. I can say with reasonable confidence that it is not defined anywhere near the sections um that we are talking about. I ha I had the identical question. So what I what I have come to is I you know I'm assuming it's a term of art, I Googled it as a term of art, and all I could find was examples of what zoning designations are, and the most common being residential, industrial, and commercial. And so I can allow you know Mr. Anderson can can correct me, but I do think that there is mm lack of clarity because my very the thing I was trying to resolve as I was trying to figure out what zoning designation means is does that mean an entire zoning district? Does that mean a portion of it? Does that mean it- and I don't have an answer to that question. But I did spend several hours trying to get an answer, so I'm assuming you're going where I was going. And I I'm sorry I can't answer it for you.

[01:06:53] Commissioner Hank Dempsey: No that's okay. I I think that that's actually really helpful because that I think gets to why there's some confusion over whether this is good faith bad faith, um it sounds like there's some legitimate legal question and this was you know probably poor drafting um for Sacramento to come up with a a new term that nobody knew what it meant. Given that it isn't entirely clear, that tells me that some level of caution is very much called for here. And and um you know I'm not counsel for the city or anything, but I guess I would humbly suggest that we reach out to HCD and see do how do they understand this um because we want to be in a in a good cooperative relationship with them. That's what the whole housing element is for and that's we want to stay on the right side of those guys. So my my humble suggestion would be we should get on the phone with HCD tomorrow and say look we don't know what this word means and this word is real important to understanding what we're supposed to be doing here. Um because otherwise there's going to be a lot of confusion and um there's just going to be a lot of confusion about it and we need to get that answered. Um and I think it's fine for it to not be clear here, but I think by the time it gets to Council there should be a good answer for that because otherwise we're just sort of charging into the great unknown. Um maybe I'll just I'll stop there for a second.

[01:08:13] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Thank you. Um I see Commissioner Donahue, you have some questions as well.

[01:08:16] Commissioner Paul Donahue: Yeah, um. Well one of the first things I did was went and looked at the existing emergency shelter uh ordinance and I went on the city's website and I noticed that the text in the uh the redline version in our uh packet doesn't match what's currently published on the city's website. So it appears as though there are some updates previously that haven't been um uh reflected on on the the ordinance that's that's shown on the website. And then I also for some reason, when when I got sworn in I went to the City Clerk's office and I noticed that they actually have a copy a physical copy of the uh zoning ordinance in a binder there. I went there this morning and it looks like that's like 20 years out of date. So something needs to be done about that I think.

[01:09:07] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Yeah, and I can provide clarity as to the mismatch. So we actually did make a set of code amendments in January 23rd, 2024 that are effective February 22. So it just takes some time for the city website to be up to date.

[01:09:23] Commissioner Paul Donahue: Okay, great. Um things move fast around here. Okay. Great, thanks. Um the other questions I have are kind of dovetailing on some of the previous questions. Um the the Hope Hope and Mercy um cold weather shelter is is not considered an emergency shelter, even though it it does seem like it's at least for the portions of the time when it's open it's that kind of the emergency status not for uh longer stays?

[01:10:03] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Um, it's not a year-round emergency shelter, which is I believe specifically mentioned in AB 2339.

[01:10:09] Commissioner Paul Donahue: Okay, good. Okay, good to know. Um, the other thing is on this the 1.1F um concerns that have been raised. Um is is the intention, I I think I heard earlier that there is an intention to to do this now and then to continue to to look into the the rest of the precise plan and to actually uh so it's more of a phased approach. Is that is that the idea?

[01:10:50] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Yeah, that that's exactly the idea. Um we are bringing forward what we know can be approved now. Um we are going to do more analysis uh and if as the presenter said, um the uh um the commission wants to recommend just rezoning all of El Camino right now, we will look into the CEQA process of that. We have some questions about this about the CEQA process, we'll see if there are any exemptions, um but the um but our phased approach will continue the analysis of the historic sites that have been flagged, uh and then bring back uh options for updating the whole precise plan later on uh that considers these in a way that can consider these uh these any historic sites that are deemed actually historic.

[01:11:53] Commissioner Paul Donahue: What's the deadline for um under this this law to to uh to take action to to have the 6400 sqft that we need to have?

[01:12:08] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: So AB 2339 gives a one-year deadline from adoption of the housing element. Um however, uh our uh we are actually carrying this out pursuant to our housing element language itself, which which has a a deadline of March 31st.

[01:12:29] Commissioner Paul Donahue: Okay, so so basically we have to do something by March 31st. We can't, it sounds like we don't have enough information or something to to do the full thing that eventually we want to do, so we're we're doing this thing to meet a deadline but then it'll be phased. Yes. Okay. Um okay, that that's my questions.

[01:12:57] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Okay thank you. Um I'm going to just jump in there with a question, thank you, because it's tying into what you just asked, and that was the timing. So if if we say that in our housing element that El Camino precise plan will be looked at for emergency shelters, the timing of that is also by the end of the cycle. It should be done by March 31st, this year.

[01:13:23] Commissioner Joyce Yin: So when you mention the phasing and looking at it, then once once we go into this phasing process, uh it would be up to City Council when they want us to bring it back. And and the amount of analysis that might be necessary. So, you know, if it requires for example us to do a subsequent EIR, then that has a certain timeline and a certain cost. Um if for example, um Council just wants us to look at these uh historic sites in more detail and weed them out a little bit more and then make a decision, uh and we don't need to do the CEQA, that has a certain timeline and a certain cost. So it all depends on the council direction.

[01:14:11] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Okay, thank you. Before I finish, oh, sorry, um I'm going to go ahead and, Bill Cranston, sorry Commissioner Cranston, you had um additional questions.

[01:14:21] Commissioner Bill Cranston: So for for us non-lawyers, what does this term of art mean? Is it is it something I need to be worried about? Just means something that's got a definition. Okay, if it's art it doesn't have a definition?

[01:14:37] Commissioner Hank Dempsey: It's all art, artless.

[01:14:41] Commissioner Bill Cranston: So I guess the language in the precise plan says at minimum, this will include the El Camino precise plan. In addition identify at least one additional area consistent with AB 2339. That doesn't feel like art to me. Um do you feel that that is vague in any way?

[01:15:18] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Oh yeah, I'll defer to uh the City Attorney.

[01:15:26] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: Um, so I'm going to avoid getting into a debate about whether or not it's vague or what the intent was when that language was drafted, but I'm going to try to help you understand how a court would look at it, because really where were going here is is the city at risk of being pulled into court and sued and for violating its housing element or some other law. And I I will tell you that reading that language just cold, there is it is not clear from that language to me that that means the entire El Camino Real precise plan will be rezoned. It can certainly be read that way, but there is an argument that it could be read to mean that the precise plan will be amended in some way to allow emergency shelters by right. And there is a chance that a court could say, and typically courts do not read words into contracts or statutes or any other document that is not there in order to give it a particular meaning, to give it the meaning that you know we are that that I think you know the public feels that it says or whatever you it would have been clearer to say this will include rezoning the El Camino precise plan to allow emergency shelters by right in the entire precise plan. That's how you get absolute clarity. And and we don't have that here. I I'm I like I said I am not getting into the debate about what the original intent was, it may have been the intent of the city to do more and and and if that is you know the recommendation of this body we will take that recommendation to Council and Council will make you know be able to make that decision. I just want to let you know that in a court of law, it may not be read that way because there is imprecision in the language. So if that helps you just understand how a court might look at it. Um but I again I am not trying to opine which is right or which is wrong. If if that's helpful.

[01:17:51] Commissioner Bill Cranston: Helpful for you? I heard what you're saying. Thanks.

[01:18:00] Commissioner Hank Dempsey: Thank you Madam Chair, I promise this is not a legal question. Um, did we look at any other areas of Mountain View when we were trying to decide, I think somebody uh raised this question earlier from one of the one of the speakers said um, where else did we look, and why did we choose El Camino uh precise plan?

[01:18:21] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: So the way that AB 2339 is set up, it really is set up to say start with the sites, right? Start with sites that you know can be um are where the existing use is not an impediment to the future location of an emergency shelter. I will say that we turned over lots and lots of rocks in our housing element sites inventory for sites where residential is allowed, that where the existing use is not an impediment to uh future housing, just to just to satisfy our sites inventory, our our housing sites inventory.

[01:19:02] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Then on top of this we have this emergency shelter. Uh fortunately the emergency shelter requirement was only 6,400 square feet, so there were a few sites in the city that were not considered big enough to be viable residential sites for new housing developments or to give us very many housing units in our housing sites inventory. Um and in the housing element we identified uh a vacant site, 860 Base Street, uh as um a site that met our obligations under AB 2339, was vacant, so we didn't have to make any um you know any determination around whether existing uses impede the creation of emergency shelter there, and all of the other characteristics that we were looking for, good access to transit, good access to services, good you know all of these other uh expectations from AB 2339.

[01:20:10] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: So that site which was effectively the um uh the the um the best site in the city for meeting the requirements of AB 2339 was why we identified the El Camino Real precise plan uh in the housing element. Uh subsequently after we adopted the housing element and started this work, we looked under more stones, we found other sites in the El Camino Real precise plan that could meet the um uh the the criteria of existing use not being an impediment. Um and we found um enough sites on El Camino Real that uh we felt we could bring forward El Camino Real alone, um and if council wanted us to look at other areas they could direct us to look at other areas.

[01:21:03] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Uh and of course, as we went through the process we discovered all of these potential issues around historic resources and and CEQA and and we ha had a lot of these discussions about what is the um uh the the most uh defensible path moving forward, uh and that's why we narrowed down the uh to the subarea to to bring forward to to adopt by March 31st. Um so that that was our process. Um and if the EPC wants to recommend that Council direct us to look at more areas, we will look at more areas and bring back more opportunities. Uh but we are we are doing the what the El Camino Real precise what the housing element prescribed uh with the you know the additional finding of all of these complications around CEQA and historic resources and and things like that that came up late late in the process.

[01:22:21] Commissioner Hank Dempsey: Okay, so right now the best candidate sites we have for building an emergency shelter are permitted, um is right where you've got them in the staff report. It's the ones we've identified. That's that's that's where we're most likely to actually be able to build something. Is where you pointed out out here. Yes. Okay. Thank you.

[01:22:42] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Thank you. That was very helpful. Um I had just a couple of general questions and this is for clarity. I think um there's a lot of unknown for people in the public. I had to do this research myself to figure it out. Um it would be great if we could just have a very, very brief overview of the various types of shelters, because we talked about LifeMoves, the cold weather shelter, um the interim shelter, emergency shelter, and I know uh Mr. Wayne had given a really brief definition of the difference between the interim and the emergency, but is is there someone who could just like go through really quickly the process of moving through sort of various types of housing for the unhoused?

[01:23:31] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: Uh yeah, I'm I'm going to see if our housing director can start on that and then we can um jump in if necessary.

[01:23:41] Housing Director Wayne Chen: Uh thank you. So yes, I I can start very briefly and I think just to note that the housing department is is really focused on the spectrum of housing and we're currently in the process of working with the city manager's office with the Human Services division to um develop a homeless response strategy, and so there will be um study sessions to be held with council to talk about exactly these these sorts of things and how can have an integrated intentional um overall homeless response strategy.

[01:24:20] Housing Director Wayne Chen: But the the housing department is really focused on uh interim housing, and a lot of this is definitional, but uh interim housing that could be more more flexibly programmed to allow um clients and residents of different needs to have the services and different lengths of stay to help them stabilize, get supported and transition onto other forms of housing, um ideally permanent housing, and that permanent housing could be uh inclusive of of services, um usually uh we refer to those units as rapid rehousing or permanent supportive housing, or they could um be in a situation where they don't need those services and that would just be um more generally uh affordable housing.

[01:25:11] Housing Director Wayne Chen: Um we we don't touch too much on emergency shelters, um but the the length of stay is is one of those items and I believe there are different different ways to operate emergency shelters, uh the ones that I'm more familiar with um in in other parts of the county um have operations where you know folks can um you know check in as evening approaches and they they will have a place to stay during the night and um in the mornings they they may have to leave the premises and be somewhere else not not at that location and then spend their time you know elsewhere, whether it's looking for a job or or whatever it may may may be, um um and then and then they would return they would return at the end of the day to to check back in.

[01:26:03] Housing Director Wayne Chen: And so that's one example of uh a type of emergency shelter that you know we we hear about, it's the it's the restrictions on the overall length of stay, and then what happens during the day and and how do folks sort of check in and check out. Um I'll turn it back over to to Eric and Krisha in case they have any other sort of awareness of other kind of key operational um um considerations.

[01:26:26] Housing Director Wayne Chen: I will also just note that uh we we do provide some regional support to um um uh other projects and you know I I kind of took a look at it, um I've heard them talked about in the context of emergency shelters but they also appear to maybe be self-described as interim housing as well, and so some of this could be um a little bit vague and and at the end of the day it's sort of like how each development is being operated, but uh we we have supported um Casell House, um I believe that's a Bill Wilson uh Center, and there is one more here, let me just double check, oh, um the Graduate House which is another LifeMoves project, and that um does appear to be described in a couple of different ways that is more in the interim side but I've also seen it talked about more on the emergency shelter side.

[01:27:25] Housing Director Wayne Chen: So I don't want to opine too much about what is that LifeMoves project, but I have seen it described a couple of different ways, and I think that does lend itself to a little bit of ambiguity in terms of what we call these things. In the homeless response strategy, part of where we would like to incorporate in the strategy is some clear definitions, clear buckets of what the spectrum of housing uh uh should include or or council may want to want us to think about including. Um part of it is to uh clarify the approach and have a very clear intentional strategy for what should the continuum of housing, what should the spectrum include.

[01:28:10] Housing Director Wayne Chen: So that was a little bit more long-winded, apologies for that, but that gives a little bit of hopefully some color in terms of the things that we are thinking about and how there is a little bit of ambiguity sort of on on this end of the spectrum where emergency shelters begins to overlap with concepts of transitional housing and begins to bleed into interim housing and then on the path to permanent housing.

[01:28:32] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Thank you. No, I think it's helpful just understand to lay out the framework. I think it's it's very helpful to the the general public. Um I'm curious, when is the next time the council will see the homeless homeless response strategy?

[01:28:47] Housing Director Wayne Chen: It will be the first time the council will be seeing it and discussing it uh in a public setting. It's um a study session is being targeted for uh May 14th.

[01:28:58] Commissioner Joyce Yin: Okay, thank you very much. And very quickly, a lot of just to confirm, a lot of the uh funding for these emergency shelters comes from county and state, is that correct?

[01:29:11] Housing Director Wayne Chen: That that's correct, the the city at least currently does not have a uh a funding source to contribute to the operations of of of shelters. Um we we have provided capital funding, for example for Hope's Corner, that included um fire sprinklers, um ADA accessibility components such as uh curb cuts, um and the city has provided um in-kind resources such as uh parking to enable folks to um you know drive to and and and park at the location, but there has been no um funding for operations uh for for for shelters in Mountain View. Or uh similar types of operations, um there was a one-time funding...

Segment 3

[01:30:00] Housing Director Wayne Chen: our uh LifeMoves Mountain View interim housing and that that came from uh you know funding from another uh project through community benefits but it was a it was a one-time funding source and the purpose of that of that uh community benefit was targeted towards homeless response.

[01:30:17] Chair Joyce Yin: Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. Chen. Um I think uh if no one has any other questions, we'll just jump right right into deliberation and then take action. Would anyone like to start?

[01:30:41] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: Thanks uh Chair Yin. Um yeah uh this this to me uh reads pretty clearly. Um what doesn't seem as clear is um the impetus behind uh this uh proposed change and I'm speaking uh with reference to the uh El Camino Precise Plan change. Um I'm not gonna get into you know trying to um understand that part um good faith, bad faith, noticing. Um we did have the housing element public outreach process um you know every member in the community had a an opportunity to participate um and I did see uh our staff uh work very diligently to ensure that um they not only met the uh noticing requirements for uh the housing element uh but honestly just went above and beyond and I think did it in a way that is a model for for other cities in our area to follow in terms of inclusivity and openness and bringing people into the housing element process.

[01:32:00] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: Um and so having said that um it's yeah it's it's interesting to me um in terms of the the term of art uh conversation and um I think that being in uh paragraph A section 4 of AB 2339 around the zoning designation um I think that uh you know whether or not uh and it sounds like uh we're still trying to figure that out, it sounds like there's still an open question around what that means and um whether Google has been helpful or not um it sounds like it's just an unsettled um question uh in terms of our legal brain trust right now.

[01:32:48] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: Um and so for me the more instructive uh and and I don't know that you could call this a term of art but the the most instructive part of um AB 2339 uh is the part that comes uh pretty much right after it says the people of the state of California do enact as follows, it says the housing element shall consist of. That's what it says. It says the housing element shall consist of. And in the housing element that we submitted to HCD it says right there, it says amend the ordinance to allow emergency shelters by right consistent with AB 2339. That's in reference to that paragraph right there uh section four of uh section four of paragraph A.

[01:33:42] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: And it says at minimum this will include the El Camino Real Precise Plan. And that's in all caps. So that's that's a noun. That's a thing. We're referring to a thing. Uh if you go to the website, our city's website, there's a page for the thing called the El Camino Precise Plan. There's a document titled the El Camino Precise Plan, which is the proper noun being used right here uh in our housing element um that we submitted to HCD which is something that as we were informed by staff earlier um is something that we need to be adhering to.

[01:34:28] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: Um and so for me there is um it seems pretty clear that for the reasons that A, our own uh attorneys, our city attorneys, our city legal brain trust still has an open open question around this uh concern regarding legality of us uh you know implementing this change uh and given that uh B um it seems like in this case whatever the zoning designation is uh seems to be what HCD has accepted in terms of the constituent parts of our housing element aligning with that first sentence that the housing element shall consist of this. It seems like it it doesn't just seem like, it reads right there um that this is what we've committed to.

[01:35:19] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: Um not only did the members of the public have the opportunity to come out and uh engage in the housing element process, but we ourselves as commissioners um bear a lot more responsibility in terms of what this document says because we were appointed by the city council as the eyes, ears and you know the ear to the ground of the public, we were appointed to review these documents, to raise these concerns, to put our names to this document. So if that is what the document says, and if this is what AB 2339 calls for, and if my name is on it, if our names are on it, uh you know Commissioner Donahue, I know that you're new, but hey continuity right? Stare decisis, terms of art.

[01:36:26] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: Um another term of art that you know honestly this kind of reminds me of is uh officer of the United States. It says right here the El Camino Precise Plan. The housing element shall consist of. We don't need to get into this zoning designation situation um and try to parse those weeds as a commission. Um that's why it's an open question that our city attorneys are figuring out. The city council is going to be more informed than we are. So it seems that uh it would not be a responsible move for us to make both from a committing to what we put our names to, um not having the information to make the call, it is not appropriate in my view for us to move forward with recommending or um accepting the staff recommendation regarding the El Camino Precise Plan and uh I do not plan to vote for that recommendation and I encourage my fellow commissioners to uh join me for those reasons.

[01:37:35] Chair Joyce Yin: Thank you. Uh Vice Chair Dempsey, you're next, oh sorry no uh sorry. Commissioner Cranston is next.

[01:37:43] Commissioner Bill Cranston: So a couple of things. Um some of you know that I have a business up in San Francisco. I come in in the morning and it's not unusual for someone to be have spent the night in front of my business. Um most of the time I say hey we're opening up, can you start your day and they're like cool, they get up and they move on. There's a navigation center within a block of my business. There are below market rate housing areas you know within you know there's probably a couple thousand within a couple blocks of my business. And I don't have trouble with people who are in transition.

[01:38:22] Commissioner Bill Cranston: I've come in in the morning in the past, a guy would get out of his tent with a coat and tie and he was going off to work because he'd lost his job, lost lost his housing and he found a different job and when he found his job I was like go dude, okay? I'm I'm troubled and and the police departments out there, they're not allowing these places to turn into drug dens, okay? They're cared for, the people that run these places know what they're doing and they take care of them. And so I'm I don't have the concern about oh it's an emergency center and so it's going to be all these horrible things.

[01:38:59] Commissioner Bill Cranston: Um when I first moved to Mountain View they wanted to put a below market rate housing development within a block of of the crossings. It is one of the nicest buildings in the San Antonio area and it continues to be today. So I don't have a I am not worried about the the way these things are run, okay number one. I think it's it's a it's an alarmist view quite frankly and these are many many of these people are good people who for whatever reason they they can't afford a place to live and they need a place to live. And this is a first stop as um Mr. Chen said into transitioning and ultimately getting into housing.

[01:39:38] Commissioner Bill Cranston: So that's number one, I'm I'm not I'm not open to this idea of of of fear mongering on this. Um I don't know state judge legal challenges to to the laws, but but in my experience as more a business law and one of the things you always used was what would a reasonable person understand? And as Commissioner Nu
ez said, the precise plan says in capital letters the El Camino Precise Plan. That means something in Mountain View. It's it's clearly defined. It's not vague.

[01:40:20] Commissioner Bill Cranston: Um you can if you want to go after micro dissecting it, that's great, but I my sense is the city council is not interested in in spending a lot of legal hours going after nits and if I were a judge and look at this say okay you said the El Camino Precise Plan, we have this document called the El Camino Precise Plan, that's what you signed up to do. You may may not view the housing element as a contract but we talked with hundreds and hundreds of people across the city as to what we wanted to be able to put in this and it included people from all the neighbor areas and I maybe not everybody else views it as a contract but I view the housing element as something we signed up as a city to do.

[01:40:59] Commissioner Bill Cranston: And so I am perfectly okay with um the alternative recommendation of permitting by right and doing the CEQA analysis. Okay, do the analysis. If it's something that goes past what you the one of the things we talked about was what does this CEQA EIR mean and you know it's it was a very different EIR than every other almost every other EIR we've seen. So if it's this falls into that category of something different we need something specific, okay go do it. But we signed up to this in my view and I'm not I'm not worried about the locations. Um I think that's what we signed up to do and that's what we need to stay with. I'm I'm not really receptive to the this micro area that's been proposed. So I will be supporting the alternative recommendation from staff.

[01:41:58] Chair Joyce Yin: Thank you. I think Vice Chair Dempsey is now up.

[01:42:02] Vice Chair Hank Dempsey: So I think it's it is beyond question that we probably do need a little bit more definitional clarity. Um and I think HCD's understanding of what the terms mean are going to be really important. Um it, you know, it's not our job to, you know, maybe we second guess a little time. I don't want to third guess the city attorney. I'm sure they'll reach out to HCD or staff here will and figure out what HCD thinks, right? But I I think for me personally the position that the city has taken this far is reasonable given the lack of clarity over what exactly some of these terms mean.

[01:42:48] Vice Chair Hank Dempsey: And again I very much hope we're going to move with great speed to get real clear on what we think we've agreed to. Um because I value very much a collaborative uh working relationship with HCD and uh I don't want to be on the wrong side of those guys. Having said that, um what I care most about is practicality. And my understanding of what staff has told me tonight is that the best options we have for actually building something, not just creating zones where there's like theoretically we could do it but there's no nothing really that's going to happen. If the best options we actually have in real world to build these things as Sacramento has told us to do is right where we've put them now in this sub-zone, I'm okay with that.

[01:43:33] Vice Chair Hank Dempsey: Because that gets us kind of where we needed to be, right? If there were let me be very clear, if there were some other really good options in other places that we have foreclosed because we've left them out of this, I would be very concerned. But practically speaking if our best shot is exactly what you've told us it is, then I'm okay with going with with what we have for now with the caveat that we're going to look at we're going to look at other parts of El Camino Precise Plan if there is viable options viable sites in there as well.

[01:44:08] Vice Chair Hank Dempsey: So I don't see I think this should I'm fine with this as sort of a starter but I do think we should seriously look at letting it continue to expand as we find places where it's actually maybe we could actually get something out of it. So I'm okay with going with the permutation of uh of the way that staff has written it now um with sort of the the caveats and the advice that I've asked for and I'll stop there.

[01:44:36] Chair Joyce Yin: Thank you. Commissioner Donahue.

[01:44:40] Commissioner Paul Donahue: I agree with much of what has already been said but not all of it of course because they're conflicting uh in in some ways. But uh but I I do agree that that the emergency shelters are not uh going to turn into drug dens or anything like that. I mean I'm I'm really not concerned about that. Um and obviously yes people get uh kind of down on their luck and they absolutely uh need housing. I mean it's it's just a fundamental human right.

[01:45:19] Commissioner Paul Donahue: Um that being said, I I I agree with uh Commissioner Dempsey that uh the um as as it's current So reading through you know 1.1F it says amend the ordinance and or applicable precise plans to allow emergency shelters by right consistent with AB 2339 which is seemingly somewhat vague. Um and this will include the El Camino Real Precise Plan. And tonight exhibit 3 has us amending the El Camino Real Precise Plan.

[01:45:58] Commissioner Paul Donahue: So I think that uh first of all that technically satisfies the the the thing, but we don't just want to technically satisfy things, we want to go beyond that and I think that the phased approach that was discussed earlier is a way to to not just technically meet it but to to to provide uh more uh emergency shelter, potential emergency shelter sites. Of course not every site will be will be developed into one. But um and uh will meet not just the letter of the law but the but really the spirit of the law uh but with the March 31st deadline I think we need to we don't have time for CEQA analysis and things like that. So I I am in favor of moving forward with this first phase and then um having subsequent phases, I'm I'm still very interested in that.

[01:47:03] Chair Joyce Yin: Okay, thank you very much. Um it's my turn now. Um thank you for all of you commissioners, uh your thoughts, it's it's really, I've taken it um in and my own personal take, I agree with a lot of what you had said. I don't believe that this site is going to be an issue, uh like a potential black mark on the population in the area. I don't I don't think it's going to turn into some seedy place on El Camino. Um in fact I think it is is great that this area that's been pointed out is near a lot of services. I think that's just like everyone else who lives in Mountain View, we all want walkability. We all want you know to be able to get to places and services easily.

[01:47:58] Chair Joyce Yin: Um the legal technicality, I'm not gonna get into. I'm not a lawyer, I don't know, I can I can read it both ways. Uh I do hope as Vice Chair Dempsey had said that we can maybe reach out, get some clarification because I too want to work well with HCD. I think in the spirit of what we've approved, that's part of it. We want to find out what their intentions are. Um I personally would like to see that we as a community and I think we are responding to the homeless issues, prevention, and taking steps towards getting people who are unhoused and for various reasons into housing eventually with services and help.

[01:49:01] Chair Joyce Yin: I also feel like as a commissioner looking at land use planning for things outside of housing, that is important too and it's a factor. And so if we were getting applicants saying we want to build emergency shelters and we're turning them away, I would have a big issue. We're not, we don't have that. Where in fact with uh the staff recommendation saying that we have more than what is required for the land area needed with this particular site.

[01:49:40] Chair Joyce Yin: Um so practically speaking I feel like we have what we need. I do think that if we were to do the historic ordinance, take a look at that, you've already flagged eight, it's only eight. El Camino Real Precise Plan has a lot more structures. So I don't feel like you know there's this flood of properties and lots that are going to be out of the question um given that staff has done due diligence looking at what properties are available for emergency shelters and that this is it, then practically speaking we've located the areas.

[01:50:27] Chair Joyce Yin: And so I am comfortable moving forward with staff's recommendation with the caveat that we reach out to HCD and also that we recommend to council that we do continue turning rocks over because in the spirit of trying to deal with the homeless issues the homelessness issues, emergency shelters is the first step towards having people have a safe place, it's truly important. Uh but because there's no wave knocking at our door right now I think taking a slightly more cautious route is okay because we have enough space for an emergency shelter should we need it immediately. That's where I am. So um if anyone else has anything to continue, Commissioner Nu
ez.

[01:51:22] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: Thanks Chair Yin. Um yeah I mean it sounds like um you know there is some agreement around uh this uh kind of more narrowing uh around the uh by right uh locations. Um yeah I mean that aside from how disappointing it feels uh to to know that we have real words on a document that mean something that that are objectively there um putting that aside I am just I'm trying to you know process uh the the kind of points being made around um almost like increasing the viability or um you know it sounds like there is uh thought around hey uh staff has located some sites and we feel that this is gonna be the uh the areas where we're gonna be able to actually have some of these emergency shelters.

[01:52:27] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: It sounds like that's some of the thinking. Um I'm trying to square that line of thought as well. Um one question that's coming to my head is is um if there aren't people banging the door down here saying hey I want to have this emergency shelter here, I want to have it um and yet we're narrowing the availability of uh area in that precise plan presumably also and probably substantially more narrowing the actual number of people with a controlling stake in that land area who would have the ability to say I want to uh have an emergency shelter in this area of the El Camino Precise Plan that I have control over.

[01:53:39] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: Um I'm trying to understand how does shrinking um and narrowing uh the availability of uh parcels, land plots, whatever you want to call it um on the one hand like how does that increase the likelihood that we're going to have uh what I'm hearing everyone acknowledge is a critical need uh for people who for one reason or another um have no shelter. Um and also when it is a responsibility that we have towards our fellow people. Um I'm not able to square that. Maybe maybe something's escaping me.

[01:54:27] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: Um but it also sounds like um I do want to you know also uh bring back that the impetus from my understanding around some of this as well at least from what I heard is that uh some of this is around a conflict with uh council priorities around the historic ordinance and register. It doesn't sound like the impetus for this is or at least I don't see a slide here where it says hey um we identified these narrow targeted plots of land and these are the ones that are actually super viable so we're proposing it here we're narrowing the scope of what we've said, we're proposing that we do that. I don't see that slide. I don't see the slide that says that that's what it it's about. I see the slide that says competing council priorities historic ordinance.

[01:55:24] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: Um so if if it makes if it's the case that our conflict our city council conflict is uh driving some of this reanalysis or at least the stated reasons for why we're looking at this reanalysis, I mean everyone reports to someone right? Like we report to the state. When we conflict with the state, it's not up to us to say well we're gonna go back on something that we committed to you and also that we put our names to, that's not how that's not how hierarchy works, that's not how federalism works.

[01:56:04] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: It's up to us to say oh man we committed to that already, we're going to have to go figure out what we're going to do with our council priorities, we're going to have to figure it out and readjust on our end. Not go back on something that we objectively wrote in real words in documents that we all put our names to that everyone in the community had an opportunity to participate in, to solve for. And I will take issue with what Ms. Cashen said earlier when she said hey I was displaced and and now indirectly in LifeMoves, no, it was directly. It is a direct cause.

[01:56:46] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: I've spoken to Ms. Cashen. I know that if it wasn't for our displacement policy or lack thereof that now SB 330 is solving for, she would have been able to continue paying her rent steadily and still been housed today. So it is the cause of our failure to develop housing, to build it, and when we put our names to something saying hey this is what we're committing to, and now we're going back on it and we're saying that we're doing it in a way that is narrowing the scope because we're actually going to be able to have more viable paths to these shelters, when the impetus for that is our own internal conflict around council priorities, how how do we square that? How can we actually say hey housing is a human right, housing is XYZ, but also let's just kind of like have that be a right here. How are we doing that? I'm not necessarily saying you guys have to explain it to me. Um I can you know process it on my own but I think that's an open question that at least the public ought to to consider as well.

[01:58:10] Chair Joyce Yin: I'll just give my two cents I suppose. Um I guess what I was thinking was we're I feel like we are doing what the housing element has asked, practically speaking. We have enough room and enough space for what they're asking us to provide for emergency shelters. I think that you know in an ideal world everything happens in the city in perfect timing but it doesn't always occur that way given that just one aspect, given that okay we'll just take the historic portion, if we're doing the historic ordinance, we're working on it, they've already flagged eight, if we were to go ahead and no one's knocking on the door saying let's build it right now somewhere else on El Camino because nothing else seems to be viable in an imaginary world, if it what if it were, then an emergency shelter would be able to be put on there by right correct?

[01:59:18] Chair Joyce Yin: Since that's not happening it's fine but it gives the city a chance to at least not have that happen. So it's being a little bit more conservative in that sort of potential. So if we have enough according to each uh the housing element and you know and we'll look at the definition of the zoning designation, it's not necessarily a narrowing practically speaking right now. It gives the city time and council enough information hopefully to then make a determination about the historic aspect maybe those eight can be saved um but it doesn't take away practically from the ability for emergency shelters to be built. So to me it's just kind of like a timing issue and also a definition issue, I feel like if we're serving the definition, then council has the ability to have more information in time to do what they need to do outside of the housing issue and then make decisions based on that. Do you mind if I ask a clarifying question on one small point?

[02:00:33] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: If it is very quick and easily answered. Uh quick uh clarifying question. Uh on slide nine, the minimum 6,400 square feet required um component, uh is that part of uh AB 2339 or is that part of some other like um you know like housing element component? Like where does that number come from?

[02:01:02] Vice Chair Hank Dempsey: That's direct from AB 2339.

[02:01:05] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: Okay. Uh perfect. Um so I'll pause it here, I'll throw out uh for consideration with regards to us meeting more than is required by AB 2339. Um if we wanted to meet more than what was required by AB 2339, then as part of the housing element process and our deliberations and staff's work and all our collective orchestra of coming together as a community to produce this document, we would have said, and we will provide sites constituting more than the 6,400 XYZ number required by AB 2339. But that is not what we said. We said at minimum it will include the El Camino Precise Plan. That is what we said. That is what is in the document. And now we're changing it. That is what is happening.

[02:02:18] Chair Joyce Yin: Okay, thank you. Would anybody else like to deliberate? Should we go ahead and make a motion?

[02:02:31] Commissioner Bill Cranston: Go ahead. So as I read 2339 what it was it actually addressed what the very first public speaker said was make available emergency shelters in residential areas. Today they're not. Is this staff recommendation enough? It's the bare minimum. Is that what we stand for as a city? I I don't think that's where we are. So um I understand what my fellow commissioners have said. Um I think the intent of 2339 was the right thing and but I also think we need to do the right thing in our own conscience. And so that's that's guiding my view of this is doing the bare minimum is is not what my conscience is comfortable with.

[02:03:30] Chair Joyce Yin: Thank you. Are there no more deliberations, um would someone like to make a motion? Then I suppose I do if no one else has. Is that usually how it goes? Let's see is it up on the board. I'll recommend the City Council adopt an Ordinance of the City of Mountain View Amending Chapter 36 Zoning of... oh sorry there's a screen over my words here. Zoning of the City Code Amending the Development Standards and Permitting Process for Emergency Shelters and Finding the Amendment to be Categorically Exempt under Section 15061b3 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, to be read in title only, with a modification to remove amendments to Section 36.20.05 regarding permit processes in the MM General Industrial Zoning District, Exhibit 2 to the EPC Staff Report.

[02:04:57] Chair Joyce Yin: And also I believe there's a thank you. Number three, recommend the City Council adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Mountain View Amending the El Camino P38 Precise Plan to Add Emergency Shelters as a Permitted Use and to Include Permitting Process for Shelters, Consistent with the Housing Element Program 1.1.f, and Finding the Amendment to be Categorically Exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act CEQA, Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061b3, to be read in title only, further reading waived, Exhibit 3 to the EPC Staff Report. I believe is it we need a second if that is to move forward, does anyone want to second the motion?

[02:05:56] Commissioner Bill Cranston: Second.

[02:05:57] Chair Joyce Yin: Second by Vice Chair Dempsey? Oh, let's take it to a vote. The motion passes with three votes for yes and two votes for no and two uh recused. Thank you very much. If you don't mind um bringing back the two commissioners who were recused. Commissioners Clark and Guti
errez have rejoined the commission. And we will then now as a commission um discuss, deliberate and vote on the remainder of item 5.1 which would be staff recommendation number one. Um does anyone have any questions regarding that portion?

[02:07:37] Vice Chair Hank Dempsey: Thank you Madam Chair. Um just a couple of small questions actually um could we start with the slides? There was something on the slides I wanted to ask about. Specifically page 3. Let me see if it was the right one. I think it was we were talking about the numbers of permits. There we go. So the the question I wanted to ask and really I just want to make sure I'm I was understanding this right, when I'm looking at total RHNA allocation and we got an 8-year cycle, for very low, low and moderate, we're not on track to make 100% at the end of eight years, are we?

[02:08:34] Housing Director Wayne Chen: No we're not.

[02:08:35] Vice Chair Hank Dempsey: Okay. Um I know it's first year um but my hope my my hope is is that we track that, we what's the right way to put it, I know we're tracking it. I hope we talk about that. I think you know it's first year, it's early early returns you know we can be patient, but maybe by the end of the second year if that's not changing, my hope is is that we will have a a fulsome conversation about if we're not getting there why aren't we getting there and what else should we think about doing. Um and again early returns, but um it jumped out to me that, and we're sure as heck above uh above moderate, um so we're doing good there, no surprise, I don't think this is going to be a surprise to anybody, but my hope is that we come back, if it's not tracking towards success, I hope we have more deeper conversations about what else we could do. So that that was that was one piece. Um where is that page, other page? Oh this is a silly one, we're talking about subsidized units and a couple slides after this. We had 199. Do you remember the page, Krisha? So were are we legally required to have 200? Did I read that right? I could have sworn I saw something in the staff report that said we had to have 200 and we had 199.

[02:09:53] Planning Manager Eric Anderson: There's a, there is a target, I don't recall, I'm going to defer to the Housing Director on that because it's it's one of his programs.

[02:10:02] Vice Chair Hank Dempsey: But it's not binding, I guess is the question. I just ask because I don't want us to be caught up in technical non-compliance even though we're pretty much there.

[02:10:09] Housing Director Wayne Chen: Uh thanks for the question. Yes, the the the 200 target um units came from our uh Measure A Memorandum of Understanding with the County to fund a portfolio of projects that include includes up to 200 units of permanent supportive housing and rapid re-housing. So that was a um that was a target goal that we had um created with the county and that came out of our uh initial 5-year affordable housing strategy from from a few years ago. So that's that that was a target that we were trying to hit but it's not a a state target or anything like that.

[02:10:43] Vice Chair Hank Dempsey: So nothing bad could happen. In fact that means you you pretty much nailed it.

[02:10:48] Housing Director Wayne Chen: That's correct.

[02:10:49] Vice Chair Hank Dempsey: Boom. Okay. Um I may have a couple more, but I can stop for now.

[02:10:55] Chair Joyce Yin: I don't see any other commissioners wanting to ask questions. So you can go ahead and ask away. Oh sorry actually Chris um Commissioner Clark has a question.

[02:11:08] Commissioner Chris Clark: I was going to make a motion so I can stop.

[02:11:10] Chair Joyce Yin: Are you sure?

[02:11:13] Commissioner Chris Clark: So I'll move that we um recommend the city council consider the 2023 annual progress report 2023 through 31 housing element exhibit one to the EPC staff report as um as drafted.

[02:11:30] Chair Joyce Yin: Do we have a second? Commissioner Cranston will second that. And let's take it to a vote. This motion passes with six votes for yes and one vote for no. Okay. Thank you very much. Um we'll close agenda item five and move to new business item 6.1, the 2023 general plan annual progress report. We have a staff presentation from Assistant Planner Vinson Kwan and Principal Planner Diana Pancholi.

[02:13:41] Assistant Planner Vinson Kwan: Good evening commissioners. Vinson Kwan, Assistant Planner, and I'm joined by Principal Planner Diana Pancholi. Tonight we are presenting the annual progress report of the city's general plan action plan. In 2012, the city council adopted the 2030 general plan and the related general plan action plan. The 2030 general plan action plan is a list of action items that carry out the general plan's goals and policies. These action items include programs, plans, studies, ordinance updates, and other measures. The EPC is responsible for the annual review of the general plan action plan in the form of an annual progress report and for monitoring the progress the city is making in implementing the general plan. This year, staff has provided four tables for general plan action items for the EPC's review. Table 1 includes items which have not yet started, are currently in progress, or were completed during 2023. Table 2 includes items which were completed prior to 2023. Table 3 includes items which are achieved through day-to-day operations, practices, and policies. Table 4 includes items which have been discontinued because of state law or other city council prioritizations.

Segment 4

[02:15:00] Assistant Planner Vinson Kwan: Action item update. Six items have been completed in 2023. These include actions related to village centers. In January 2023, City Council adopted zoning and precise plan amendments to allow mixed use village centers consistent with general plan policy direction and land use designations.

[02:15:19] Assistant Planner Vinson Kwan: The next completed item was the telecommunication implementation plan. Since 2014, adopted precise plans North Bayshore, El Camino, San Antonio, and East Whisman have all identified standards to develop to provide utility easements behind the public right of way in order to accommodate various utilities.

[02:15:41] Assistant Planner Vinson Kwan: This includes telecommunication services in areas which are limited in space on streets or sidewalks. These standards are applied to all subdivisions in the city. Further, in December 2022, staff implemented a new microtrenching standards detail for fiber telecommunication lines installed at shallow depth and narrow width to minimize impacts to the public right of way and other utilities.

[02:16:07] Assistant Planner Vinson Kwan: The next item is related to residential solar photovoltaic systems. The city publishes information about incentives and rebates for a variety of home upgrades, including solar PV systems, on the city website.

[02:16:23] Assistant Planner Vinson Kwan: The two other items are for nonresidential solar photovoltaic systems. The city adopted the 2022 energy reach codes to support the installation of solar PV systems on nonresidential buildings and parking lots.

[02:16:39] Assistant Planner Vinson Kwan: Similarly, the city publishes information regarding incentives and rebates, which includes nonresidential upgrades on the city website. This includes solar PV, technical assistance, and outreach programs from other organizations such as the Silicon Valley Clean Energy and the Bay Area Regional Energy Network.

[02:17:01] Assistant Planner Vinson Kwan: Lastly, the solar PV systems on municipal buildings. The solar feasibility analysis was completed in 2018. City staff is tracking the Inflation Reduction Act and other possible funding options to identify cost-effective ways to install solar PV on municipal buildings.

[02:17:18] Assistant Planner Vinson Kwan: In addition, staff has submitted interconnection applications to PG&E for future installation of solar PV on city-owned buildings.

[02:17:28] Assistant Planner Vinson Kwan: In addition to the mentioned completed items, there are ongoing efforts by staff to help implement action items. Some key efforts included are the transportation demand management or TDM ordinance, two new precise plans, and the R3 zoning district updates.

[02:17:46] Assistant Planner Vinson Kwan: For TDM ordinance, staff continues to refine standard TDM conditions for development projects. Public Works Department continues to work with a consultant to develop a citywide TDM ordinance that will improve consistency, which includes refining the reporting requirements after the adoption of the citywide ordinance.

[02:18:08] Assistant Planner Vinson Kwan: The city is also working on the Downtown Precise Plan comprehensive update and a new precise plan for Moffett Boulevard, both started in late 2023. The Moffett Boulevard Precise Plan is intended to implement the General Plan change area policies as well as other land use policies.

[02:18:26] Assistant Planner Vinson Kwan: In addition, the city also has ongoing efforts to update the R3 zoning development standards. This includes reviewing and updating standards related to parking and TDM, neighborhood transitions, mix of uses, transit-oriented development, and other actions in the action plan.

[02:18:44] Assistant Planner Vinson Kwan: The anticipated implementation timing for the TDM ordinance, precise plans, and R3 zoning district is 1 to 3 years.

[02:18:53] Assistant Planner Vinson Kwan: Lastly, 10 action items from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Program have been discontinued due to priority changes, recent sustainability action plans, and other work plans. These have all been listed in the staff report and in Table 4.

[02:19:09] Assistant Planner Vinson Kwan: Following a recommendation from the EPC, the General Plan Annual Progress Report is scheduled to be presented to City Council on March 26, 2024, and shortly thereafter forwarded onto the California Office of Planning and Research.

[02:19:24] Assistant Planner Vinson Kwan: In conclusion, staff recommends that the EPC review and recommend City Council consider the 2023 General Plan Annual Progress Report. This concludes staff presentation, and staff is available for any commissioners' questions. Thank you.

[02:19:41] Chair Joyce Yin: Thank you very much. Are there any questions from the Commission?

[02:19:51] Chair Joyce Yin: Commissioner Cranston.

[02:19:55] Commissioner Bill Cranston: So, I guess I would... I'm okay with the report. I would... I like the discontinued items list. If I have one request, it would be that Council consider asking the City Manager to look at the items that have not yet been started and are past the 10-year window that they were listed for, and determine if those items are any longer a priority and they should move to the discontinued list.

[02:20:23] Commissioner Bill Cranston: Because if it's, certainly some of them may have been delayed as a result of COVID, but it seems to me that we're past 10 years, and it would probably make, you know, if the City Manager come back and say, you know, these don't seem to be priorities anymore, maybe we should take them off the list. I would feel better about the list rather than saying it's just, they're just hanging around and we're not going to do them. So, that would be my only side request. Okay.

[02:20:55] Vice Chair Hank Dempsey: Like Commissioner Cranston, I too have a question about, or a request really, about the discontinued list, which I'm totally fine with from a policy standpoint, but in almost all of these, you don't say why you discontinued it.

[02:21:13] Vice Chair Hank Dempsey: It just says it's no longer a priority or something like that. And I go through and I annotate these when I read them, and after every single one, I was like, why? Why? Why? And it may be obvious to folks on the inside, and maybe even obvious to Council, but I think for maybe the public when the public is reading this, it would be helpful just to have one sentence that says that technology is outdated, or Council changed the priorities, or we didn't have money for it, or whatever it happens to be.

[02:21:38] Vice Chair Hank Dempsey: I'm fine with whatever the answer is, but just one sentence for each one about why it got cut, that would be really helpful to me, and I think better for the public.

[02:21:52] Chair Joyce Yin: Any others?

[02:21:56] Chair Joyce Yin: I'll reiterate what Vice Chair Dempsey had said, yeah. And I think this is just like maybe bookkeeping stuff, I believe Table 3 didn't delete the discontinued items, Measure E-1.4 and E-1.5, they're still there.

[02:22:22] Chair Joyce Yin: So seeing no other questions, deliberations... I'm going to ask if there's a... Oh, public comment. Thank you. Public comment.

[02:22:33] EPC Clerk: There are no public comments.

[02:22:36] Chair Joyce Yin: Thank you. So seeing that, we can now move to...

[02:22:42] Chair Joyce Yin: Ah, Commissioner Gutierrez.

[02:22:43] Commissioner José Gutiérrez: Yeah, deliberations, right? So... And I think we passed that option for 5.1, we just went straight to the vote, but maybe I missed it. And if I did, no worries.

[02:22:53] Commissioner José Gutiérrez: On this front though, I agree with what Commissioner Dempsey had mentioned, along with the previous comments by the commissioners. I think one way that you can expect... One thing you should expect from me in general is that I want to move from good to great. I was accustomed to doing that with the Mountain View Whisman School District Board of Trustees, and I want to bring that attitude that I have while I'm here with the EPC.

[02:23:14] Commissioner José Gutiérrez: And I think the recommendations that you make, sir, are great because that's how we can improve. One, transparency with the community, and two, efficiency with our train of thoughts and the rationale as to why we do things at city government level.

[02:23:28] Commissioner José Gutiérrez: If we're able to dedicate our time to put in another minute or two per response to indicate why it is that we're doing things or removing things, in general, the community will appreciate that even more. The distrust will then lessen, and we'll be more effective. If we keep to what we say and we promise when we write a document that's looked at by the city, our local government, and the state capital, we need to heed those words as truth.

[02:23:52] Commissioner José Gutiérrez: If we don't, we lose credibility and then we open ourselves up to legal liability issues. That's one thing that I'd like to avoid. Thank you.

[02:24:05] Chair Joyce Yin: Okay. So, deliberations are at a close? I take it? I will ask for any movers.

[02:24:18] Chair Joyce Yin: Commissioner Cranston?

[02:24:20] Chair Joyce Yin: Any seconder?

[02:24:23] Chair Joyce Yin: Commissioner Nuñez. Thank you.

[02:24:28] Chair Joyce Yin: Does it have to be read? I think so. I believe it has to be.

[02:24:30] Commissioner Bill Cranston: So I move that the City Council consider the 2023 General Plan Annual Progress Report, Exhibit 1 to the staff report.

[02:24:39] Chair Joyce Yin: Alright. Now we'll have the EPC vote.

[02:24:52] EPC Clerk: This motion passes unanimously.

[02:24:56] Chair Joyce Yin: Thank you very much. Item 6.1 closes. And we are now at 6.2, the EPC Chair and Vice Chair Elections.

[02:25:08] Chair Joyce Yin: Um, we are going to... well I will open the session for nominations for Chair.

[02:25:20] Chair Joyce Yin: If there are none right now, I will go ahead. Oh. No. I see. Commissioner Nuñez.

[02:25:28] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: I'd like to nominate Vice Chair Dempsey to Chair. Not just as our most tenured member of the commission, but also consequently as our most experienced.

[02:25:48] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: Um, and bringing a wealth of experience in terms of, you know, his ability to work with others. And also think in a constructive manner with regards to the city's position against some of these issues, the risks involved. Um, and always seeking to bring more community engagement and involvement and make sure that people are folded into the process instead of left out. So I will nominate Vice Chair Dempsey.

[02:26:18] Chair Joyce Yin: Okay. Well I don't believe we need a second, but I will go ahead and ask if you would be willing to take upon this position of Chair.

[02:26:28] Vice Chair Hank Dempsey: I would be honored to, Madam Chair. And if I may, I just want to thank Commissioner Nuñez. That was very kind of you, sir. Thank you. It meant a lot.

[02:26:37] Chair Joyce Yin: Just a quick question. If there are any other nominations? Seeing none. No? Then we will go ahead and do a roll call vote.

[02:26:53] Chair Joyce Yin: Do we need to take public comment on this? Oh. How about that? Public comment. Thank you, Commissioner Clark.

[02:27:02] Chair Joyce Yin: Okay. Would any member of the public on the line like to provide comment on this item? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or press *9 on your phone. Phone users can mute and unmute themselves with *6.

[02:27:16] EPC Clerk: There are no public comments.

[02:27:19] Chair Joyce Yin: Thank you very much. So let's go ahead and take the vote by roll call.

[02:27:44] EPC Clerk: So. Commissioner Clark?

[02:27:49] Commissioner Chris Clark: Aye.

[02:27:51] EPC Clerk: Commissioner Cranston?

[02:27:52] Commissioner Bill Cranston: Aye.

[02:27:54] EPC Clerk: Commissioner Donahue?

[02:27:55] Commissioner Paul Donahue: Yes.

[02:27:57] EPC Clerk: Commissioner Gutierrez?

[02:27:58] Commissioner José Gutiérrez: Aye.

[02:28:00] EPC Clerk: Commissioner Nuñez?

[02:28:01] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: Aye.

[02:28:03] EPC Clerk: Vice Chair Dempsey?

[02:28:06] Vice Chair Hank Dempsey: Recuse.

[02:28:08] EPC Clerk: Chair Yin?

[02:28:10] Chair Joyce Yin: A resounding yes.

[02:28:13] EPC Clerk: The motion passes unanimously with six votes yes and one recused.

[02:28:20] Chair Joyce Yin: Thank you very much, and congratulations Chair and Vice Chair.

[02:28:22] Chair Joyce Yin: Um, we are going to do the same, we're going to open nominations for Vice Chair.

[02:28:35] Chair Joyce Yin: That is a good question. We will ask staff that as a question, that in our normal rotation of tenure, who would be up next?

[02:28:46] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: Can I jump in? I'd like to nominate Commissioner Gutierrez to the position of Vice Chair.

[02:28:55] Chair Joyce Yin: I believe that's correct.

[02:29:04] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Uh, I believe Commissioner Gutierrez and Commissioner Nuñez started at the same time.

[02:29:08] Chair Joyce Yin: Ah, okay.

[02:29:14] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Sorry. You started a month before. He was appointed before the... to complete the term of Ally's term. And then Commissioner Gutierrez joined at the... so that the most tenured member is actually... Commissioner Nuñez.

[02:29:26] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: I'm consciously making my nomination. Um...

[02:29:30] Assistant Community Development Director Lindsey Hagen: Understood.

[02:29:31] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: Yeah, I um... I mean Commissioner Gutierrez just articulated a vision of good to great. Um, you know he brings a perspective and also more experience from having served on an elected body, a deliberative body. Uh, between himself and Chair Dempsey, I think we're gonna have a collaborative commission, a strong commission. And so, um, you know, in credence to that experience, I'm consciously choosing, making my nomination for Commissioner Gutierrez, if he'd kindly accept it. Um, or if he so chooses. Um, I'm happy to make that nomination.

[02:30:13] Chair Joyce Yin: Thank you. A seconder is not necessary, but I will second. I would like to ask if you would be willing to accept the Vice Chair position.

[02:30:26] Commissioner José Gutiérrez: Uh, um, yes, but I adhere to tradition, so are you sure, Alex? Because...

[02:30:33] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: A billion percent. A hundred percent.

[02:30:35] Commissioner José Gutiérrez: Okay. Well, thank you for the kind words. And, um, I'm surprised, and I'm happy at the same time. And, and, I will do my best. So thank you.

[02:30:46] Chair Joyce Yin: If there are any other nominations for Vice Chair, please let it be known now.

[02:30:52] Chair Joyce Yin: Seeing none, we will move to a roll call vote.

[02:30:54] EPC Clerk: Commissioner Clark?

[02:30:56] Commissioner Chris Clark: Aye.

[02:30:57] Chair Joyce Yin: Just a minute. Public comment. Again. Public comment. All right. Thank you very much.

[02:31:03] Chair Joyce Yin: Would any member of the public on the line like to provide comment on this item? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or press *9 on your phone. Phone users can mute and unmute themselves with *6.

[02:31:16] EPC Clerk: There are no public comments.

[02:31:19] Chair Joyce Yin: Thank you very much. We will now take the EPC vote.

[02:31:24] EPC Clerk: Commissioner Clark?

[02:31:25] Commissioner Chris Clark: Aye.

[02:31:27] EPC Clerk: Commissioner Cranston?

[02:31:28] Commissioner Bill Cranston: Aye.

[02:31:29] EPC Clerk: Commissioner Donahue?

[02:31:32] Commissioner Paul Donahue: Yes.

[02:31:34] EPC Clerk: Commissioner Gutierrez?

[02:31:35] Commissioner José Gutiérrez: Uh, recuse.

[02:31:37] EPC Clerk: Commissioner Nuñez?

[02:31:38] Commissioner Alex Nuñez: Aye.

[02:31:40] EPC Clerk: Vice Chair Dempsey?

[02:31:41] Vice Chair Hank Dempsey: Aye.

[02:31:43] EPC Clerk: Chair Yin?

[02:31:45] Chair Joyce Yin: Yes.

[02:31:46] EPC Clerk: The motion passes unanimously with one recused.

[02:31:50] Chair Joyce Yin: Thank you very much. Congratulations, Chair and Vice Chair.

[02:31:56] Chair Joyce Yin: Um, okay. This is my last agenda item. I would like to open the Commission/Staff Announcements, Updates, Requests, and Committee Reports. No action will be taken on any questions raised by the Commission at this time. I believe Diana, you have something to update us with.

[02:32:15] Principal Planner Diana Pancholi: Thank you Chair. Diana Pancholi, Principal Planner with the Planning Division. Just a quick announcement about a special EPC meeting that is coming up on March 13th. And I know we have received a few requests about the upcoming agenda, so just wanted to inform everybody that staff will be bringing forward R3 zoning updates for that special meeting. So our next EPC meeting will be held on March 13th.

[02:32:45] Chair Joyce Yin: Are there any other commissioners who would like to chime in with updates or...

[02:32:53] Vice Chair Hank Dempsey: I'll defer to Commissioner Cranston.

[02:32:58] Commissioner Bill Cranston: I just wanted to thank former Chair Yin for her service in the last year. For trying to corral the cats here and keep us on track as best possible. So thank you for putting up with us for the last year and look forward to giving you this seat.

[02:33:18] Chair Joyce Yin: Thank you very much. Thank you guys for your patience and support and watching me climb the learning curve. It was an honor and a privilege and I look forward to being a commissioner again.

[02:33:31] Chair Joyce Yin: I would also like to welcome new Commissioner Donahue to the group. I look forward to working with you. So far I feel like you bring a lot of insight and with all your experience on the various boards, I think you'll be a great asset to the team.

[02:33:55] Chair Joyce Yin: No more from other commissioners? Then we will go ahead and adjourn this meeting at, I believe it is 9:32 PM. Thank you everyone.

• ← Previous
• Next →