[External Email]
From: District 5 United
To: Espejo, Gina
Subject: Fwd: DANIEL DE LA ROSA 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 8:07:25 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 7:52 PM
Subject: DANIEL DE LA ROSA 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.
DANIEL DE LA ROSA
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: Evangelina 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 8:03:43 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 5:32 PM
Subject: Evangelina 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.
Evangelina
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: Gloria Quiroz 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 8:07:09 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 7:31 PM
Subject: Gloria Quiroz 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.
My name is Gloria Quiroz, resident of Mount Pleasant District #5. SEIU Local 1000 member.
My community deserves the right to engage and be heard about the future development of Pleasant Hills Golf Course.
I want to know who's the developer. What's the agenda. Has the environmental impact report publicly disclosed to the community.
Thank you,
Ms. Gloria Quiroz
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 This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
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 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.
Gloria Quiroz
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: Janet 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 8:03:55 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 6:09 PM
Subject: Janet 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.
The city needs to follow the envision 2040 General Planning document just approved a few months ago.
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.
Janet
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: Jim Frizzell 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 8:07:15 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 7:41 PM
Subject: Jim Frizzell 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.
Members of the Mt Pleasant community and surrounding areas need to have input in any development of Pleasant Hills Golf Course.
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.
Jim Frizzell
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: John Goldstein 95121 - 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 8:04:03 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 6:20 PM
Subject: John Goldstein 95121 - 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 sidestep and bypass the established process. We have the right and the desire to comment and make creative suggestions concerning an action that will have major impact on Evergreen and East San Jose.
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 This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
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.
John Goldstein
95121
--
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: Joseph Wilson 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 8:06:58 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 7:29 PM
Subject: Joseph Wilson 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.
San Jose clearly needs more housing, but this proposed development should include a process for community input, so the community’s needs and concerns are heard, fairly considered and addressed.
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 This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
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.
Joseph Wilson
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: Juanita Cabada-Morales 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 8:05:22 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 6:54 PM
Subject: Juanita Cabada-Morales 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.
Juanita Cabada-Morales
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: Judy Kennedy 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 8:05:51 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 7:12 PM
Subject: Judy Kennedy 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.
Judy Kennedy
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: Karina Liao 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 8:06:11 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 7:28 PM
Subject: Karina Liao 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.
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.
I understand that staff are not recommending this policy change.
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.
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.
Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
public open space.
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.
Karina Liao
95148
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 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.
Karina Liao
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: Katja Irvin 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 8:06:45 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 7:28 PM
Subject: Katja Irvin 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.
I remember the Evergreen Specific Plan and how much effort and outreach was put into that effort to keep the area livable. We deserve a say when a large development comes into the area. Such efforts are not just for Cambrian Plaza and El Paseo de Saratoga. Please treat us with respect and conduct a full master planning process for the conversion of Pleasant Hills Golf Course to other uses.
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.
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
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.
Katja Irvin
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: Kim Crary 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 8:05:58 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 7:24 PM
Subject: Kim Crary 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.
Kim Crary
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: Mary Redigan 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 8:04:47 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 6:33 PM
Subject: Mary Redigan 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.
Development on the East Side of San Jose should not happen without input from those who live on the East Side. Why are you changing the rules 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.
Mary Redigan
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: Robert Reese 95135 - 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 8:03:48 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 5:38 PM
Subject: Robert Reese 95135 - 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.
Robert Reese
95135
--
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: Robin Hahn 95135 - 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 8:05:29 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 6:55 PM
Subject: Robin Hahn 95135 - 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.
Robin Hahn
95135
--
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: Sally Castellanos 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 8:04:54 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 6:42 PM
Subject: Sally Castellanos 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.
Quit giving these developers the ok to build n build all over Our City. This is Our City not the Developers. Sam stop!!!! We could pull the City inspectors. Every person has a relative….
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 This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
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.
Sally Castellanos
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: Sandy Guevara 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 8:07:31 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 8:04 PM
Subject: Sandy Guevara 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.
I’ve lived in Eastside for over 45 years and have seen many changes without community input. From the dairy on White Road/Ocala to the Mercedes dealership that was supposed to have a restaurant added to this location. The restaurant never happened. It just seems that the Eastside gets the short end of the stick. Most recently, the library on Aborn was turned into a homeless shelter at night without informing the community. Shame on you City of San Jose.
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.
Sandy Guevara
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: Sandy Guevara 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 8:07:31 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 8:04 PM
Subject: Sandy Guevara 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.
I’ve lived in Eastside for over 45 years and have seen many changes without community input. From the dairy on White Road/Ocala to the Mercedes dealership that was supposed to have a restaurant added to this location. The restaurant never happened. It just seems that the Eastside gets the short end of the stick. Most recently, the library on Aborn was turned into a homeless shelter at night without informing the community. Shame on you City of San Jose.
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.
Sandy Guevara
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: Scott Godfrey 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 8:04:43 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 6:21 PM
Subject: Scott Godfrey 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.
Scott Godfrey
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: Sherrie Escamilla we 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 8:06:38 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 7:28 PM
Subject: Sherrie Escamilla we 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.
Sherrie Escamilla we
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