San Jose City Council
February 14, 2023

You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important [External Email]
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

FW: Agenda Item 23-195: Burbank 47 Annexation, C22-040 & ER22-042 Public Comment City Clerk <[email protected]>
Tue 2/14/2023 7:36 AM
To:Agendadesk <[email protected]>

From: Jeremy Scheerer
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2023 8:20 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda Item 23-195: Burbank 47 Annexaon, C22-040 & ER22-042 Public Comment

I wish to point out to the current council members that there have been discussions going back more than 15 years on annexing the remaining pockets of county land that are located near the City of San Jose. These discussions have repeatedly pointed out that the City itself does
not have adequate services to meet the needs of the city, let alone, the new residents, business owners, and visitors of these pockets on a long-term basis. The City is currently short on police officers, code enforcement, fire personnel, and other crical areas.

The current agreements with the County of Santa Clara have been sufficient to address the needs of those in the County pockets and this aempt to add more land underneath the San Jose City banner negavely impacts th s parcel and its surrounding neighborhood.

Thank you

--
Jeremy Scheerer
Concerned County Resident

2/3/23, 3:48 PM Mail - McNaughton, Kora - Outlook
burbank 47, C22-040 & ER22-192
Rivera Rivera @QldjAianaeaeememenetan
Thu 2/2/2023 11:01 PM
To: PlanningSupportStaff <[email protected]>;McNaughton, Kora <[email protected]> Some people who received this message don't often get email on ARO RNES Ret. Learn why this is important
[External Email]
In regards to the city wanting to annex the two parcels in the Burbank area, including the Burbank theater. The city should impose restrictions on whatever is built at this future location must have adequate parking for tenants/customers. People who have visited these businesses in the past when the businesses were open often parked in the unincorporated neighborhood next door.

The city of San Jose has a General Plan where they are promoting high rise buildings along Bascom & San Carlos without any regard to existing neighborhoods in the area. They're allowing developers to build 100+ units and letting them get away without having to provide parking for each unit! They've removed parking quotas and expect people to use public transportation and bicycles. What ends up happening after these projects are completed though is hundreds of more cars parked on city/county streets.This has led to people fighting over parking spaces, leaving furniture, cones, and other items on the street to claim a parking spot due to the city's lack of "planning".

Visit San Carlos St & Meridian and you will see that tenants from the 4 story building there park on city streets and not in the FULL parking garage. Better yet visit East San Jose behind Story & White on Farringdon Drive to see just how crazy the parking situation is getting in San Jose. When the city allows more people to cram into spaces they will bring their cars, eventually overrunning beautiful neighborhoods.

I'm against the annexation because | know that the city will mess this up. Bring back parking quotas where one unit/bedroom equals one parking stall. If not drop off some city cones and some old city hall furniture for all the nearby residents so we can start "planning" our parking spaces in front of our homes.

This message.is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAMkADU1NGM5MmJhLTZhY TMtNGQwOC1hNZUOLTdiIZGZINGJKNTIWY gBGAAAAAABg7000JE4ZQL6... 1/1