Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important [External Email]
FW: [6/6/2023 City Council agenda item 8.5] Objection to build RV site in 1300 Berryessa Road City Clerk <[email protected]>
Thu 6/1/2023 7:40 AM
To:Agendadesk <[email protected]>
From: Zheyuan Chen < >
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2023 10:36 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Cc: District4 <[email protected]>; The Office of Mayor Ma Mahan <[email protected]> Subject: [6/6/2023 City Council agenda item 8.5] Objec on to build RV site in 1300 Berryessa Road
Dear Members of the San Jose City Council,
I would like to express my strong objec on to the proposed construc on of an RV site at 1300 Berryessa Road (Agenda Item 8.5 in [1]).
While I understand the importance of addressing the homelessness issue in our city, I believe that establishing an RV site in this par cular loca on would have a significantly nega ve impact on the neighborhood and its residents.
One of the primary concerns is the exis ng security issues that have been plaguing the neighborhoods in this area. The presence of homeless individuals in the vicinity has already contributed to an increase in criminal ac vi es and safety concerns for the residents. (Mayor Mahan visited our neighborhood last year. He should already be aware of this issue.) Introducing an RV site may a ract even more homeless popula on to this area, exacerba ng the current security challenges faced by the neighborhood.
Furthermore, it is important to note that there is already an emergency housing site on Mabury Road, which is within a mile from the proposed loca on. Since the establishment of the emergency housing site, the quality of life metrics in the neighborhood have been in decline. As quan fied evidence, the slides presented in Nov 29 2022's city council [2] show that both Police and Fire Calls for Service had increased significantly a er the opening of the Mabury Road site. The addi on of another homeless service facility, such as an RV site, could further deteriorate the situa on and nega vely impact the well-being and livability of the neighborhood.
It is also worth considering the fairness of burdening this par cular neighborhood with addi onal homeless services. With the presence of the nearby emergency housing site, the neighborhood has already taken on its fair share of responsibility in providing support to the homeless popula on. It would be unjust to further concentrate homeless services in this area, while other neighborhoods in our city do not shoulder a similar burden.
Instead of focusing solely on localized solu ons, I urge the City Council to pursue a more balanced and equitable approach to addressing homelessness in our city. It is crucial to distribute resources and support services across various neighborhoods, ensuring that the responsibili es are shared among all communi es. This approach would foster a sense of fairness and prevent the undue concentra on of homeless services in a single area.
I appreciate the City Council's dedica on to finding solu ons for homelessness, and I strongly encourage exploring alterna ve loca ons for the RV site that take into account the concerns and well-being of the affected neighborhood. By adop ng a comprehensive and fair approach, we can work towards addressing the homelessness issue while preserving the livability and security of all neighborhoods in our great city.
Reference:
[1] h ps://sanjose.legistar.com/Mee ngDetail.aspx?ID=1088258&GUID=C96B2883-CB44-49B1-8B13- 1D5F4E39C366&Op ons=info|&Search=
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. [2] Slides at 3:02:14 in h ps://www.youtube.com/live/ZCUUJg2Khv8?feature=share&t=10934
Zheyuan Chen
You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important [External Email]
FW: Agenda item number#8.4 .5 _ Meeting date6/6/2023 City Clerk <[email protected]>
Thu 6/1/2023 7:40 AM
To:Agendadesk <[email protected]>
From: Jia Cao
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2023 8:57 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item number#8.4 .5 _ Mee ng date6/6/2023
Dear City Council Members,
I am wri ng this email to express my strong opposi on to the proposed construc on of an RV safe parking site for the homeless near my house. The safety and security of my family are of utmost concern, and I believe that this project may jeopardize their well-being. I urge you to reconsider this decision for the following reasons.
The close proximity of the proposed RV safe parking site to my residence raises significant concerns regarding the safety of my family members. Introducing a high concentra on of unfamiliar individuals in the vicinity may lead to an increase in crime rates and poten al threats to our personal security. As a responsible parent and homeowner, I cannot disregard the poten al risks this may pose to the well-being of my loved ones.
While I empathize with the challenges faced by the homeless community, it is vital to find alterna ve loca ons that strike a balance between addressing their needs and ensuring the safety of surrounding neighborhoods. I kindly request that you consider more suitable loca ons, which are away from residen al areas and can provide the necessary support without compromising the security of families like mine.
As residents, we have invested our me, efforts, and resources into crea ng a safe and nurturing environment for our families. The presence of an RV safe parking site nearby may significantly impact property values and disrupt the harmony of the community. I implore you to consider the poten al nega ve consequences on property prices and the stability of our neighborhood.
I understand the importance of addressing homelessness and providing support to those in need. However, it is crucial to priori ze the safety and well-being of residents while determining the loca on of such facili es. I respec ully urge the City Council to reconsider this decision and engage in a comprehensive dialogue with the community to find a more suitable solu on that upholds both compassion and the safety of our families.
Thank you for your a en on to this ma er. I trust that you will carefully consider the concerns raised by residents, and I eagerly await your response and any updates on alterna ve plans or developments regarding the proposed RV safe parking site.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Cao
Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important [External Email]
FW: [6/6 City Council agenda item 8.5] Issues with the RV site proposal at 1300 Berryessa City Clerk <[email protected]>
Mon 6/5/2023 8:12 AM
To:Agendadesk <[email protected]>
From: Po-Chun Hsu >
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2023 12:05 AM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Cc: District4 <[email protected]>; The Office of Mayor Ma Mahan <[email protected]> Subject: [6/6 City Council agenda item 8.5] Issues with the RV site proposal at 1300 Berryessa
Dear Members of the San Jose City Council,
I am wri ng to express my deep concern regarding agenda items 8.4 and 8.5, which have a significant impact on the community surrounding 1300 Berryessa Rd. I respec ully urge the council to delay the vote on these items un l comprehensive hearings have been conducted with the affected community.
My primary concern stems from the lack of informa on provided to the community regarding this proposal. It has come to my a en on that the city officials have been advancing this proposal without adequately informing the community. It was not un l news broke out in June that the existence of this proposal became known to the people in the area, myself included.
Addi onally, community engagement has been notably absent in this process. The mayor and the District 4 council member have not made efforts to interact with the residents of our neighborhood. If they were to hold hearings and engage with the community, they would witness the overwhelming frustra on and anger that the proposal has generated.
Furthermore, no environmental report has been provided to assess the poten al impact of this proposal on our community. It is essen al that appropriate measures are implemented to minimize any adverse effects on the neighborhood.
Given these significant deficiencies in procedural jus ce, I implore the city council to halt the vote on the 1300 Berryessa RV site and ini ate a fresh process that upholds transparency and community involvement. It is crucial that the residents in our community are well-informed and given sufficient me to discuss and voice their concerns. Elected officials should host hearings to ac vely listen to the community and provide a pla orm for their voices to be heard. Moreover, a detailed environmental report conducted by an impar al third party should be made available for stakeholders to review.
I must emphasize that proceeding with this proposal without addressing these procedural jus ce concerns carries the risk of legal ac on against the city and the responsible officials.
I kindly request that you carefully consider these points and take appropriate ac on to ensure a fair and inclusive decision-making process. The well-being and trust of our community are of utmost importance, and I believe that by postponing the vote and implemen ng these necessary steps, we can arrive at a more equitable outcome.
Thank you for your a en on to this ma er. I trust in your commitment to serving our community's best interests.
Sincerely,
Po-Chun Hsu
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: June 6 2023 Council Meeting, RE: Items 8.4 and 8.5
City Clerk <[email protected]>
Mon 6/5/2023 10:24 AM
To:Agendadesk <[email protected]>
From: CAROLYN ACCETURO
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2023 10:14 AM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Cc: CAROLYN ACCETURO
Subject: June 6 2023 Council Mee ng, RE: Items 8.4 and 8.5
I have lived on Bernal Rd. for 29 years. I am a Senior Citizen. Here in this District, there are already 500 alternative housing units. Namely, the one at Bernal Road and Monterey Rd.
Now, you are proposing possibly housing people at ON_RAMPS TO FREEWAYS? This is #1. concentrating too many unhoused people all in my District. Spread the population out. What about other Districts? This is unacceptable. #2. Unsafe: especially at the south bound 101 proposed site. Cars come zooming onto Bernal Rd. (from Monterey Rd. North), and would be speeding right where your proposed site is. Housing at an on ramp? There are also no crossing lights for pedestrians, as it is NOT a pedestrian area!!! I am vehemently opposed. Pick another site.
It is ridiculous and unacceptable to me, a TAX PAYING voter, to have all of these housing alternatives concentrated here near Bernal Road, SJ. Look at your maps.
Find an alternative.
Thank you.
Carolyn F. Acceturo
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 8.4 and 8.5
City Clerk <[email protected]>
Mon 6/5/2023 11:38 AM
To:Agendadesk <[email protected]>
From: Karen Friedrichs
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2023 11:28 AM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 8.4 and 8.5
Dear City Council,
Please look at other areas of San Jose for recrea on vehicle communi es and emergency interim housing other than in South San Jose and District 2. The en re city should be sharing in helping with this situa on.
Sincerely,
Karen Friedrichs
District 2
FW: Regarding EIHC Item 8.5
City Clerk <[email protected]>
Tue 6/6/2023 7:37 AM
To:Agendadesk <[email protected]>
-----Original Message-----
From: DIANE GREEN
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2023 9:06 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Regarding EIHC Item 8.5
[You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
[External Email]
I Diane Green-Riffel a Taxpayer, oppose and deny the building of Tiny homes in my community.
We already have some EIHC homes and are having problems with destruction, loitering, littering among other problems.
No more, Please.
Please hear the cry for us poor home owners that are struggling to survive here and to preserve the upkeep of our community.
Thank you
Diane Riffel
Sent from my iPhone
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
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: ITEM 8.5
City Clerk <[email protected]>
Tue 6/6/2023 7:39 AM
To:Agendadesk <[email protected]>
From: ERIC LOWE
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2023 12:44 AM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: ITEM 8.5
District 2 has already been asked to provide housing for a large number of the unhoused people and it is extremely unfair and very unreasonable to burden this neighborhood by adding even more Emergency Interim Housing. I live around the corner from the Branham and Monterey Road site that is currently under construction to house over 200 unhoused persons. In addition to the neighborhood being impacted by the ongoing construction we are also seeing an increase of homeless people setting up unsightly encampments in the residential neighborhoods, shoplifting from the local stores, stealing groceries and the grocery carts, panhandling on the street corners, harassing the school children on their way to and from school and the increase of crimes (per SpotCrime report). The amount of garbage dumping has increased, even with the city's code enforcement being used. Our neighborhood has become a place where security is on drastic decline.
Why has the burden of housing the growing unhoused population been thrust upon District 2 and South San Jose? We pay property taxes, we are registered voters, we take pride in our homes and our neighborhood! We, District 2 residents, were not given the choice to provide housing for the unhoused and all of the other City of San Jose districts should not be given the choice either. District 2 has answered the call. ENOUGH!
Our former District 2 councilman, Matt Mahan, seems to have quickly forgotten who supported him during his very recent campaign for mayor. The fact that the Monterey Road/ Branham housing complex was forced on District 2 after we, the residents of District 2, were specifically being told that EVERY DISTRICT would be expected to provide housing for the unhoused. DISTRICT 2 HAS MORE THAN MET THEIR RESONSIBILITIES. What are the other district's responsibility for housing the unhoused?
I hope that the CITY of SAN JOSE can and will benefit from the horrendous errors made by some of the major BayArea cities. San Jose is attracting people from San Francisco, Oakland, Berkeley, Vallejo and even Sacramento because the word is out. SAN JOSE, if you self- declare being unhoused, will allow you to do anything you want with no repercussions, shopping without paying, trespassing on private property and taking whatever you want with no worries of police intervention. When the police are called regarding a situation involving an unhoused person, it is categorized as low priority and the person calling for police intervention is instructed to call the non emergency number.
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 items 8.4 and 8.5 City council meeting June 6, 2023 City Clerk <[email protected]>
Mon 6/5/2023 3:55 PM
To:Agendadesk <[email protected]>
From: Carol Montalvo
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2023 3:27 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda items 8.4 and 8.5 City council mee ng June 6, 2023
Mayor Mahan and city council members:
I strongly agree with Councilman Sergio Jimenez:
I firmly oppose over-concentrating emergency housing in South San Jose. I believe our unhoused residents would be better served by EIHC’s across the City, particularly in neighborhoods that currently do not provide any shelter for the unhoused. I urge City staff to prioritize emergency interim housing in the many locations that have been evaluated outside of South San Jose and District 2. In a City of over 150 square miles, I am certain that we can find more hospitable locations for these units than freeway on-ramps.
Every district needs to be responsible to take on this crisis. I would like to see each district in San Jose provide a map of where they have currently participated in this effort before any more units being build in District 2. Each District needs to accept at least the 500 that District 2 already have.
My husband and I have lived in District 2 since 1974 and feel that by making these decisions without holding a meeting in our district where people can come out and voice our concerns is treating us with disregard and disrespect.
Carol Montalvo
San Jose, CA
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: 8.4 and 8.5 Housing
City Clerk <[email protected]>
Tue 6/6/2023 7:36 AM
To:Agendadesk <[email protected]>
From: Mona Jenkins >
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2023 5:16 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: 8.4 and 8.5 Housing
I am adding my voice that no more interim housing be allowed at Bernal Rd.
There is already 500 units built, planned, or under construction in District 2.
I urge City staff to prioritize emergency interim housing in the many locations that have been evaluated outside of South San Jose and District 2.
Thank you
Mona Jenkins
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 Numbers #8.4 and #8.5
City Clerk <[email protected]>
Tue 6/6/2023 7:36 AM
To:Agendadesk <[email protected]>
From: Melanie Nhem >
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2023 6:13 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda Item Numbers #8.4 and #8.5
Dear City Council Members,
I am wri ng this email to voice my objec on to the proposed construc on of an RV site at 1300 Berryessa Road. While I understand that homelessness is an issue that should be addressed in our city, I urge the Council to reconsider this decision due to the following reasons:
1) The RV site is within close proximity to residen al areas and schools, which can pose a safety concern for families in the area. There will be a lot of new individuals within the vicinity with unknown backgrounds. 2) There is already an emergency housing site at Mabury. Since the introduc on of this site, crime in the area has been on the rise. This RV park is a short distance away and may further escalate the issue.
I understand the importance of addressing homelessness and helping those in need; however, it is also important to take the safety and well-being of residents into considera on when determining where an RV site should be built. I implore the City Council to reconsider and evaluate other loca ons or alterna ve solu ons to reduce the homelessness issue, while also ensuring the safety of the residents.
Thank you for your considera on.
Melanie Nhem
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 Numbers #8.4 and #8.5
City Clerk <[email protected]>
Tue 6/6/2023 7:37 AM
To:Agendadesk <[email protected]>
From: Cuong Tang
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2023 7:59 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda Item Numbers #8.4 and #8.5
Dear City Council Members,
I am writing this email to voice my objection to the proposed construction of an RV site at 1300 Berryessa Road. While I understand that homelessness is an issue that should be addressed in our city, I urge the Council to reconsider this decision due to the following reasons:
1) The RV site is within close proximity to residential areas and schools, which can pose a safety concern for families in the area. There will be a lot of new individuals within the vicinity with unknown backgrounds. 2) There is already an emergency housing site at Mabury. Since the introduction of this site, crime in the area has been on the rise. This RV park is a short distance away and may further escalate the issue.
I understand the importance of addressing homelessness and helping those in need; however, it is also important to take the safety and well-being of residents into consideration when determining where an RV site should be built. I implore the City Council to reconsider and evaluate other locations or alternative solutions to reduce the homelessness issue, while also ensuring the safety of the residents.
Thank you for your consideration.
Cuong Tang
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: Items 8.4/8.5 on 6/6/23 City Council Agenda
City Clerk <[email protected]>
Tue 6/6/2023 8:33 AM
To:Agendadesk <[email protected]>
From: Jacquie Heffner
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2023 8:25 AM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Items 8.4/8.5 on 6/6/23 City Council Agenda
I am writing today in support of Councilmember Jimenez's memo on the proposed EIH sites in South San Jose.
Thank you.
Jacquie Heffner
You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important [External Email]
FW: 8.4 and 8.5
City Clerk <[email protected]>
Tue 6/6/2023 10:13 AM
To:Agendadesk <[email protected]>
From: Lynne Steele
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2023 10:03 AM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: 8.4 and 8.5
Dear Councilmembers and City Staff,
I am writing today to express support of several points in multiple memorandums submitted by Councilmembers.
First, supporting Councilmember Jimenez’ Memorandum to remove the two Bernal Road sites from immediate consideration as backup sites for the Governor’s State Small Home Initiative. With the inclusion of the new Via Del Oro moveable cabin site and the already approved expansion of Rue Ferrari, there will be a total 400 interim units less than 5000 feet apart (as the crow flies, 1.63 miles walking distance). Let the area absorb and acclimate to those additions before planning additional sites in the immediate area. This concentration of interim units in such a small area of the South San Jose is contrary to the original intent by the City to spread these sites throughout San Jose and is not a recipe for overall success of the program long-term. It is also important to note that when the Council focuses so much on District lines, it obscures the fact that just because a site is in a different District across the District line, it still can have impacts in both Districts. There should be a buffer of time and space before introducing additional EIH’s in an area, not based solely on district lines.
Second, supporting the Mahan, Kamei, Cohen, Foley Memorandum as it pertains to “Prioritizing calls in the immediate vicinity of interim housing and safe parking sites to provide enhanced neighborhood services through BeautifySJ.
” I strongly believe that these sites should be examples to the rest of the City to show how they can thrive in neighborhoods and over time, be more acceptable in all areas of the City. Allowing the surrounding areas to fall into blight tarnishes the reputation of the interim communities, whether the blight is related or not. The average resident driving by will not understand whether blight is a direct result of the EIH or not, but the reputation will still be tarnished and they will associate the two. Don’t give them the opportunity to associate blight with the interim solutions by keeping areas around the interim sites blight-free.
Third, supporting Councilmember Batra’s Memorandum as it pertains to including an analysis of the costs for providing enhanced cleanup services in a one-mile radius of the perimeter of the site with the goal to make the EIH sites more welcome by the local residents rather than being rejected by the neighboring communities
. Also, to explore innovative solutions to provide individual bathrooms in each movable cabin.
Studies have shown that units with individual bathrooms have led to more successful outcomes than those without bathrooms.
Finally, in the Staff Memorandum, I support (a) Pursue the 1300 Berryessa Road site for a new Recreational Vehicles Communities Supportive Parking Program; and (c) Pursue the Valley Water Cherry Avenue site for Emergency Interim Housing for the Governor’s State Small Home Initiative.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Lynne Steele
Resident of Los Paseos, South San Jose