Letters from the Public - 9 of 10 — San Jose City Council, December 6, 2022

[External Email]
Fw: Betty Lawler 95051 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 3:59 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 7:39 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Bey Lawler 95051 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.

4. 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.

Betty Lawler
95051
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[E ternal Email]
Fw: Stan Ketchum 95127 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 3:59 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: District 5 United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 7:24 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Stan Ketchum 95127 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. 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. 4 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
Stan Ketchum
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together

[E ternal Email]
Fw: Maria G Reyes 95122 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 3:59 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: District 5 United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 6:31 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Maria G Reyes 95122 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important

No one developer should have the day so as to what happens in our communities. As an elected official, your responsibility is to the community who elected you not to any one person.

Also,has the city done an environmental study to see what any future developments will do to this community?
Stop the abuse to our communities. Listen to the community.

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.

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. 1 A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space

4. 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.

Maria G Reyes
95122
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https //www district5united org
Community Working Together

[E ternal Email]
Fw: RICHARD TARVER 95127 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 3:59 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: District 5 United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 6:18 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: RICHARD TARVER 95127 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important

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.

A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

The policy change could 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 public open space.

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

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 Richard Tarver
95127
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 A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space

4. 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.

RICHARD TARVER
95127
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https //www district5united org
Community Working Together

[E ternal Email]
Fw: Sharon Schuetze 95127 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 3:59 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: District 5 United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 7:46 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Sharon Schuetze 95127 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important

Do not allow a developer to take land for their profit. This is not acceptable. We, the people, need to have a say in the matter. especially when it goes against environmental standards.

This will set a dangerous precedent.

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. applied down the road to other types of zoning

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space

4. 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.

Sharon Schuetze
95127
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https //www district5united org
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Camillia Brennan 95135 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 3:59 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Sunday, December 4, 2022 9:42 PM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Camillia Brennan 95135 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.

4. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. led community based process instead of developing a policy to lay that out The city and community should drive that process, not a developer.

Camillia Brennan
95135
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Shannon Tuttle 95127 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 3:59 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 5:32 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Shannon Tule 95127 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.

4. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-

Shannon Tuttle
95127
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Thomas Haney 95127 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 3:58 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Sunday, December 4, 2022 11:13 PM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Thomas Haney 95127 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

Please do the right thing by citizens and not special interest of developer 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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.

4. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-

Thomas Haney
95127
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Doris Livezey 95129 3138 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 3:58 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Sunday, December 4, 2022 11:09 PM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Doris Livezey 95129-3138 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

Save our Open Space – when it's gone, it's gone!
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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.

4. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-

Doris Livezey
95129-3138
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Myra Nava 95148 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 3:58 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Sunday, December 4, 2022 9:34 PM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Myra Nava 95148 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. 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.

Myra Nava
95148
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[E ternal Email]
Fw: JULIE NUNES 95127 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 3:58 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: District 5 United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 2:41 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: JULIE NUNES 95127 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important

DON’T TAKE OUR OPEN SPACE WITHOUT COMMUNITY VISIONING!
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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.

JULIE NUNES
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Susan L Price 95128 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 3:58 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Sunday, December 4, 2022 8:58 PM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Susan L Price 95128 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

There must be public discuss and a vote when public land is considered for private use. Don't make exceptions for an individual developer. This pertains to the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. How to use this land must be discussed and decided IN PUBLIC by City Council.!!! 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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. open space

4. 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.

Susan L Price
95128
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Jennifer Rutherford 95136 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 3:58 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Sunday, December 4, 2022 10:16 PM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Jennifer Rutherford 95136 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

No additional comments
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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.

4. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-

Jennifer Rutherford
95136
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

Fw: 12/6/22 Agenda Item 8.4 Council Policy 5 1: Reject the Alternative Recommendation City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:57 PM
To:Agendadesk
Oﬃce of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main 408 535 1260
Fax: 408-292-6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: tamsanchez < > on behalf of Tamara
Sanchez < >
Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2022 9:50 PM
T
o: City Clerk <
Subject: 12/6/22 Agenda Item 8.4 Council Policy 5-1: Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

[You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
[External Email]
Dear City Clerk City Clerk,
I ask that you join hundreds of community members and the Planning Commission by following the Planning Department staff recommendation for updating Transportation Analysis Policy 5-1 while rejecting the Alternative Recommendation that would facilitate development on Private Recreation and Open Space land. Send a clear message that one developer’s interest in one potential redevelopment project should not drive the direction of Citywide policy.

I object to the proposed Alternative Recommendation because it is inconsistent with the city’s General Plan and would facilitate development of huge parcels of open space without a community visioning process, such as is currently being provided for multiple other large parcels in San Jose.

The most immediate and obvious beneficiary of this harmful policy would be the owners of the 114 acre former Pleasant Hills Golf Course site, which presents an unparalleled opportunity to gain publicly accessible open space for local communities as part of a community-centered visioning process for future development of the site. If the Council would like to consider allowing this site to redevelop, the city should lead a transparent community engagement process to determine how the development of

the site could meet the needs of its future residents, the larger community, and the city.

Sincerely,
T
amara Sanchez
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

[E ternal Email]
Fw: Ralph Portillo 95148 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:57 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: District 5 United <
Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2022 7:42 PM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Ralph Porllo 95148 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important

Live next to Pleasant Hills Golf Course. I do not think it’s appropriate for developers to decide what happens to the.open space that was designated to be a city recreational area.

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. 3 Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
4 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
Ralph Portillo
95148
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Maria Hennessy 95112 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:57 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 10:11 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Maria Hennessy 95112 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

Our city needs to maintain open space. The towering apartment buildings being built by rapacious developers will add to our population without the parkland and recreational areas needed to support this influx. People need to live healthy lives in our city.

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. open space

4. 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.

Maria Hennessy
95112
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Dina Vaz 95008 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:57 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 8:49 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Dina Vaz 95008 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. 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.

Dina Vaz
95008
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Mary Umstattd 95130 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:57 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 4:09 PM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Mary Umstad 95130 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.

4. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-

Mary Umstattd
95130
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Sophia Dodson 95117 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:56 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 9:57 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Sophia Dodson 95117 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.

4. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-

Sophia Dodson
95117
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Linda Ladwig 95148 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:56 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 12:12 PM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Linda Ladwig 95148 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

Please do not destroy our neighborhood without community vision and input. This is one of the last large piece of property in Evergreen area and can be used to benefit our immediate Evergreen neighborhood with a 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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. 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. 4 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
Linda Ladwig
95148
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s) --
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https://www.sanjoseunited.net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Susan Orth 95126 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:56 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2022 2:05 PM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Susan Orth 95126 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

Please do not a developer take away any more potential open space in SJ.

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.

4. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-

Susan Orth
95126
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Joseph kochanski 95120 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:56 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 11:11 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Joseph kochanski 95120 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

People’s voice needs to be heard before the developers.

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.

4. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-

Joseph kochanski
95120
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

Fw: 12/6/22 Agenda Item 8.4 Council Policy 5 1: Reject the Alternative Recommendation City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:56 PM
To:Agendadesk
Oﬃce of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main 408 535 1260
Fax: 408-292-6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: rjaime24 > on behalf of Rosemary Ramirez
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 4:07 PM
T
o: City Clerk <
Subject: 12/6/22 Agenda Item 8.4 Council Policy 5-1: Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

the site could meet the needs of its future residents, the larger community, and the city.

Sincerely,
R
osemary Ramirez
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

[E ternal Email]
Fw: ANA M GAMBELIN 95127 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:56 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: District 5 United <
Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2022 9:34 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: ANA M GAMBELIN 95127 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.

ANA M GAMBELIN
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Sorin Florea 95138 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:56 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 7:52 PM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Sorin Florea 95138 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. 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.

Sorin Florea
95138
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Hella Bluhm Stieber 95129 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:55 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 3:47 PM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Hella Bluhm-Seber 95129 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

Open space is very important for me. I am a trail patrol volunteer and have seen how the usage of our local parks has increased over the last few years. It is really important that we all have input when open space is planned to be developed.

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. open space

4. 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.

Hella Bluhm Stieber
95129
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

Fw: 12/6/22 Agenda Item 8.4 Council Policy 5 1: Reject the Alternative Recommendation City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:55 PM
To:Agendadesk
Oﬃce of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main 408 535 1260
Fax: 408-292-6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: dan.haiﬂey > on behalf of Dan Haiﬂey
>
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 10:54 AM
T
o: City Clerk <
Subject: 12/6/22 Agenda Item 8.4 Council Policy 5-1: Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

the site could meet the needs of its future residents, the larger community, and the city.

Sincerely,
Dan Haifley
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

[External Email]
Fw: Haroon khan 95148 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:55 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Wednesday, December 7, 2022 5:52 PM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Haroon khan 95148 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

We must have input on developing this piece of 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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.

4. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-

Haroon khan
95148
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

Fw: 12/6/22 Agenda Item 8.4 Council Policy 5 1: Reject the Alternative Recommendation City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:48 PM
To:Agendadesk
Oﬃce of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main 408 535 1260
Fax: 408-292-6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: neleonard < on behalf of Nancy Leonard
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 3:05 PM
T
o: City Clerk <
Subject: 12/6/22 Agenda Item 8.4 Council Policy 5-1: Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

the site could meet the needs of its future residents, the larger community, and the city.

Sincerely,
Nancy Leonar
d
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

[External Email]
Fw: Stephanie Brooks 95117 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:48 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 8:22 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Stephanie Brooks 95117 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

With population and housing increasing, we cannot afford to lose ANY open space 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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.

4. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-

Stephanie Brooks
95117
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: james Carter 95125 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:47 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 10:45 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: james Carter 95125 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. 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.

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.
james Carter
95125
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Rosemary Kulpa 95148 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:47 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 2:21 PM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Rosemary Kulpa 95148 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.

4. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-

Rosemary Kulpa
95148
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: William Wong 95135 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:47 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 8:19 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: William Wong 95135 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.

4. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-

William Wong
95135
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Lam Ngo 95148 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:47 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 7:15 PM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Lam Ngo 95148 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

Don’t take our open space without community visioning
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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.

4. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-

Lam Ngo
95148
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[E ternal Email]
Fw: peggy cabrera 95127 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:46 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: District 5 United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 10:45 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: peggy cabrera 95127 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important

Dear City Council,
I join ~1,000 community members in asking you to reject the "Alternative Recommendation", that is opposed by staff and was rejected by the Planning Commission, for the update to Council Policy 5-1. It 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. One developer’s interest in one potential redevelopment project should not drive the direction of Citywide policy.
i may not live in this area, but i've always appreciated the open space area with the trees when i drive past this property. i have read a lot of community input opposed to the development of this property without having gathered community input first. this is one of the last areas in our area that has some semblance of nature in our environment. please be cautious about developing this land without getting input from the people who live around this property. it's only fair. the developer will populate this space with lots of buildings and roads, but will not have to live with the consequences of this growth.

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

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. community engagement and visioning process like you are doing for sites a fraction of the size

1. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course. 2 The policy change could have implications for other areas It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.
3 Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
4 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
peggy cabrera
95127
--
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Rosalie jackson 95129 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:46 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 8:18 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Rosalie jackson 95129 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.

4. If the city would like to explore what should happen with this 114 acre site, it should be through a city-

Rosalie jackson
95129
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Henry Myers 95148 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:46 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 6:48 PM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Henry Myers 95148 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

Keep the old Pleasant Hills Golf course recreational space for the community. Use it to expand Cunningham park and reopen it as the golf course that it was intended for. Building housing on the 114 acres will increase traffic and cause great increases in toxic pollutions due to increased autos fumes, This will also exacerbate climate warming.

PLEASE PROTECT THE PUBLIC!!!
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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. 3 Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
4 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
Henry Myers
95148
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s) --
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https://www.sanjoseunited.net
Community Working Together

PLEASE PROTECT THE PUBLIC!!!
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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. 3 Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space.
4 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
Henry Myers
95148
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s) --
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https://www.sanjoseunited.net
Community Working Together

[E ternal Email]
Fw: Lawrence J Cargnoni 95135 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:45 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: District 5 United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 8:55 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Lawrence J Cargnoni 95135 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important

All development must include community and neighborhoodhoods' input and feedback 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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public

This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. open space

4. 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.

Lawrence J Cargnoni
95135
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https //www district5united org
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Yolanda 95148 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:45 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 5:49 PM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Yolanda 95148 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

Members of the City Council, join the city Planning Commission in overwhelmingly rejecting the proposal of one developer's special interest in developing the former Pleasant Hills Golf Course. What ever happened to the concept of Preservation of Open Space in area that is already impacted.

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. 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. 4 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
Yolanda
95148
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s) --
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https://www.sanjoseunited.net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Ramesh Gunna 95129 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject thaAlternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:45 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 8:04 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Ramesh Gunna 95129 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

I am strongly opposed to short cutting any processes or allowing special provisions without citizens input.

Please allow the citizens to participate, work with them & have a meaningful engagement with the citizens.

We are not living in an autocracy, this is democracy and DO NOT FORGET that. – thank you
Ramesh’
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.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning

3. Any future plans for this site must include dedication of a significant percentage of the site for public open space

4. 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.

Ramesh Gunna
95129
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

[External Email]
Fw: Jay Kenshin 95116 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportation Policy 5 1, Reject the Alternative Recommendation
City Clerk <
Thu 12/8/2022 2:44 PM
To:Agendadesk <
Office of the City Clerk | City of San José
200 E. Santa Clara St., Tower 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Main: 408-535-1260
Fax 408 292 6207
How is our service? Please take our short survey.

From: San Jose United <
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 7:58 AM
To: < District2 < District3
< District4 < District5 < District 6
< District7 < District8 < District9
< District 10 < District1 < The
Oﬃce of Mayor Sam Liccardo <TheOﬃ City Clerk
<
Subject: Jay Kenshin 95116 - 12/6/22 Item 8.4 Transportaon Policy 5-1, Reject the Alternave Recommendaon

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. A policy change should not be driven by a single property, in this case the Pleasant Hills Golf Course.

2. The policy change could have implications for other areas. It could be used as a model that could be applied down the road to other types of zoning.

3. 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.

Jay Kenshin
95116
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).

This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via San Jose United https //www sanjoseunited net
Community Working Together

San Jose City CouncilDecember 6, 2022

San Jose City Council
December 6, 2022