[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Melissa Got-Lopez 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:01:09 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 1:32 PM
Subject: Melissa Got-Lopez 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5- 1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Melissa Got-Lopez
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Strve Robles 95116 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:01:18 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 2:55 PM
Subject: Strve Robles 95116 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Respect the Eastside!
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Strve Robles
95116
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Tammie Diaz 95148 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:01:33 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 3:19 PM
Subject: Tammie Diaz 95148 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Leave the general plan alone! San Jose is overdeveloped. Been here for 60 years and I am ashamed and saddened by what this city has become. Dirty, crowded, crime filled….can’t even take a walk without worrying about safety. We are tired of traffic and overcrowding.
Leave alone the few open spaces we have left!
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Tammie Diaz
95148
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: oscar rodriguez 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:01:25 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 3:06 PM
Subject: oscar rodriguez 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
DO NOT TAKE ANY DECISIONS WITHOUT TAKING US INTO CONSIDERATION Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives. oscar rodriguez
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Kep Taimani 95116 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:01:48 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 3:29 PM
Subject: Kep Taimani 95116 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Kep Taimani
95116
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Josef Osterneck 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:01:38 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 3:27 PM
Subject: Josef Osterneck 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Josef Osterneck
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Jill Bohn 951271445 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:01:54 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 3:29 PM
Subject: Jill Bohn 951271445 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Use the process! No special deals for developers–like not requiring adequate parking for condo projects.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Jill Bohn
951271445
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Angelo gonzaga 95148 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:02:03 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 3:30 PM
Subject: Angelo gonzaga 95148 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Angelo gonzaga
95148
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Leah Rondeau 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:02:11 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 3:37 PM
Subject: Leah Rondeau 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
No development without community input!
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Leah Rondeau
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: debbie garcia 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:02:25 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 4:27 PM
Subject: debbie garcia 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Please do not build without community input. This is a place where people are still here from back in the day. There are hardly any more landmarks left.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives. debbie garcia
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Bonilla 95122 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:02:16 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 3:43 PM
Subject: Bonilla 95122 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Bonilla
95122
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Brenda Esther Almazan 94127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:02:36 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 4:40 PM
Subject: Brenda Esther Almazan 94127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Brenda Esther Almazan
94127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Rebecca Delgado 95148 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:02:42 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 4:44 PM
Subject: Rebecca Delgado 95148 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5- 1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Money and corruption are ruining the land, crooked politicians betray the working man, pocketing the profits and treating us like sheep, and we're tired of hearing promises that we know they'll never keep. Please do not develop this land without community input. We do not need more traffic, crime and crowded schools.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Rebecca Delgado
95148
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Megan King 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:02:48 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 4:44 PM
Subject: Megan King 95127 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
It is obvious that the Eastside of San Jose has less input and less representation than the Westside. I know for a fact we receive poor city services. Examples:
Frequent roadshows. The road show markinging are in every neighborhood. Our property values are being diminished. I don't see the same on the Westside. Most homeless camps and higher crime rates. And less law enforcement. We need better representation and help immediately.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Megan King
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Amaranto Vitorino 95148 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:02:59 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 4:55 PM
Subject: Amaranto Vitorino 95148 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5- 1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Amaranto Vitorino
95148
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Elena Vitorino 95148 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:02:52 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 4:54 PM
Subject: Elena Vitorino 95148 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Elena Vitorino
95148
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Cole Cameron 95125 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:03:08 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 5:20 PM
Subject: Cole Cameron 95125 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Cole Cameron
95125
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Rosie jacobo 95116 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:03:15 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 5:28 PM
Subject: Rosie jacobo 95116 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Rosie jacobo
95116
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Romelia Lopez 95148 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:03:27 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 5:29 PM
Subject: Romelia Lopez 95148 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Romelia Lopez
95148
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org
[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: Robert Spychala 95148 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don"t Take Open Space w/o community visioning
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 8:03:37 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: District 5 United <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 5:29 PM
Subject: Robert Spychala 95148 - Agenda Item (d)1, CC 22-167, 8/29/22, Council Policy 5-1, Don't Take Open Space w/o community visioning
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Dear Transportation and Environment Committee,
As a community member, I reject the proposed significant policy change that would allow a developer to convert the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site with no clear process or plan for meaningful engagement by the community in visioning the future uses of the land.
My wife and I worked with council member Pat Saucedo on the development of the Evergreen Specific Plan. Many recommendations from that plan became models for other developments within the city. The development of the plan should also have become a model for future developments within the city. That plan showed how community members, city staff, elected officials and developers could work together to develop a plan that met the needs of all.
Do not implement a policy change to accommodate a single property and the corresponding developers. If you decide to allow development of a 114 acre property, do so via a city-driven and very robust community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size.
1. I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
2. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. If it is, that should be disclosed for transparency.
3. The policy change would have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
4. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
for public open space.
5. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out. The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.
The city is already doing visioning for other locations, including a 15-acre site, throughout other council districts and our community demands the same due process, community engagement, and requirements that are already in place to ensure our neighborhood growth and development align with the city's general plan and the community open space initiatives.
Robert Spychala
95148
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
--
Sincerely,
District 5 United
www.district5united.org