June 2, 2025
San Jose City Council
200 E. Santa Clara St.
San Jose, CA
Via email
Re: 6/3/2025 Council Agenda, Item 8.5
Proposed Scope of Work for the General Plan Four-Year Review
Dear Mayor Mahan and Councilmembers,
The undersigned organizations support staff’s recommendations for both the scope of the Four-Year Review, and for the Planning Commission to be designated as the Four-Year Review Task Force for the third Review Cycle.
In particular, we support excluding areas with immitigable Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) impacts from any potential new growth areas. The city’s VMT maps clearly illustrate the negative environmental impacts that would result from increasing growth in the outlying areas of the city, such as Coyote Valley, Alviso, and the Evergreen and Almaden Valley neighborhoods. Any potential expanded growth areas must be in San Jose’s infill areas, close to existing transit and other amenities, in order to avoid significant increases in greenhouse gas emissions and potential impacts to open space and wildlife.
We also support the recommendations in the Memorandum from Mayor Mahan, Vice Mayor Foley, and Councilmembers Campos, Cohen, and Casey with regard to the importance of providing meaningful opportunities for residents and community stakeholders to share input throughout the Four-Year Review process. We agree with the concerns expressed by other nonprofit organizations regarding the need for meaningful public engagement that goes beyond merely informing community members of public hearings. Such engagement efforts must include elements such as community workshops, engagement with neighborhood associations, and public surveys. We recommend that staff utilize the resources of community-based organizations in public outreach and engagement efforts.
In addition, while designating the Planning Commission as the Task Force for purposes of this Four-Year Review cycle makes sense given the limited scope of this review and economic
conditions, we wish to emphasize that the model of a diverse 40-member Task Force representing a broad array of perspectives should not be abandoned going forward. The staff memo states that a General Plan amendment will be brought to Council in Fall 2025 to effectuate this change in the nature of the Task Force; this General Plan amendment should specifically state that it is limited to this Four-Year Review cycle due to its limited scope and the current budgetary constraints, and should not be considered precedential for future Four-Year Review cycles.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments.
Sincerely,
Alice Kaufman
Policy and Advocacy Director
Green Foothills
Shani Kleinhaus
Environmental Advocate
Santa Clara Valley Bird Alliance
June 2, 2025
San José City Council
200 E. Santa Clara St.
San José, CA 95113
[email protected]
RE: June 3, 2025 Agenda Item 8.5: Proposed Scope of Work for the Four-Year Review of the Envision San José 2040 General Plan
Dear Members of the San José City Council,
SPUR is an urban policy research and advocacy organization dedicated to making the Bay Area more equitable, prosperous, and sustainable. We were honored to serve on the task force for the last four-year review of the Envision San José 2040 General Plan. We are pleased that the proposed scope of work for the next four-year review is structured to address significant barriers to the development of housing. We applaud the foresight of staff in using this opportunity to prepare for a timely and compliant seventh-cycle housing element that can meaningfully meet the housing needs of all the city’s residents.
SPUR supports staff’s recommendations for both the scope of the Four-Year Review, and for the Planning Commission to be designated as the Four-Year Review Task Force for the third Review Cycle. We believe that the Planning Commission is the appropriate body for this effort, and that this approach allows the work to be disciplined, focused, and timely, while conserving limited staff time and financial resources.
We also commend Mayor Mahan, Vice Mayor Foley, and Councilmembers Campos, Cohen, and Casey for their Memo calling for a comprehensive public outreach program, co-led by the Office of Racial and Social Equity and the Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department, to provide meaningful opportunities for residents and community stakeholders to share input throughout the Four-Year Review process. We urge the Council to adopt these recommendations as well. We do want to emphasize the need for real opportunities for public input in the Four-Year Review process, especially from underrepresented communities of color, individuals with disabilities, and other important stakeholders who may need language access, special accommodations, or be less likely to participate in the public process.
To this end, we urge the City to proactively involve its existing bench of engagement specialists—including nonprofit organizations and professional consultants—in designing and
facilitating a robust outreach process. This should include interactive methods such as focus groups, surveys, and community town halls to ensure that diverse voices across San José are authentically heard and reflected in the General Plan update.
Sincerely,
Sujata Srivastava
Chief Policy Officer
SPUR
June 2, 2025
RE: June 3, 2025 Agenda Item 8.5: Proposed Scope of Work for the Four-Year Review of the Envision San José 2040 General Plan
350 W. Julian Street, Building 5, San José, CA 95110
www.svathome.org • [email protected]
Silicon Valley @ Home is a nonprofit advocacy organization that works with a broad coalition of strategic partners to support housing solutions for low income families and individuals throughout Santa Clara County’s communities. We advocate for solutions including increasing production of homes at all income levels, especially affordable housing; preserving existing affordable housing; and protecting our community’s most vulnerable residents from displacement.
First name Last name Email City Zip code Comments City Council District 1 Carol Owendro San Jose 95125
2 Karolina Buchner San Jose 95125
3 Luke Spicer San Jose 95112 3
4 Patrick Owendro San Jose 95125 District 6
5 Matt Savage San Jose 95125
Please support housing for middle
income families and workforce housing! 6
6 Abigail Hart San Jose 95126
7 Tate Tunstall San Jose 95119 Need more housing in District 10 10 8 Sam Privett San Jose 95134 4
9 Rodrigo Zeledon San Jose 95126
10 Mitchell Evans San Jose 95129
We need more missing middle across the
whole city! 1
11 Savita Nataraj San Jose 95118
12 Andrew Siegler San Jose 95112 3
13 Daniel Sada San Jose 95117
14 Evelyn Price San Jose 95126 6
15 Diana Foss San Jose 95128
16 Gregory Murphy San Jose 95126 6
17 Robinson Kuo San Jose 95133
18 Richard Wong San Jose 95126 D6
19 Laurie Alaimo San Jose 95112
20 Melissa Sheklian San Jose 95112 District 3
21 Brent Pearse San Jose 95125
I strongly support missing middle housing
on all R1 and R2 zoned lots. Pre war
neighborhoods with mixed housing are
the most interesting and diverse. These
places support growth and a multitude of
housing types allowing people and
families to thrive for future generations. District 9
22 Kelvin Yeoh San Jose 95134
Add more housing opportunities in San
Jose now!!!
23 Samuel Tang San Jose 95112 3
24 Jordan Moldow San Jose 95112 3
25 Carmen Brammer San Jose 95121 D8
26 Kathie Pham San Jose 95148
27 Alison Smaalders San Jose 95136
I have an apartment complex against my
back yard, and it's fine. We have plenty of
street parking in my neighborhood
(Thousand Oaks) and we could easily
accommodate a significant number of
missing middle housing. In many cases,
with adult children living at home, many
houses already have the same number of
cars and adults that would come with a
duplex or fourplex, and making the
zoning more flexible would be good for
everyone.
28 Lisa Fabish San Jose 95125
29 Erica Walters San Jose 95130
30 Kaye-Ailsa Rowan San Jose 95112
I support middle housing with off-street
parking as part of the plan. Adding or
converting multi-family units without
adding parking is poor planning. San Jose
31 Viet-Hung Nguyen San Jose 95148
32 Lesley Alison Collins San Jose 95112 3
33 Bruce Nguyen San Jose 95133 5
34 Elisa Page San Jose 95125
People in my neighborhood like to
complain about duplexes, fourplexes etc.
"changing the character" of our
admittedly very beautiful neighborhood.
You know what else changes the
character? The tear-downs of all the early-
to-mid-century cottages and other one-
story homes in order to build
McMansions that reach to the very ends
of each property line and fail the test of
having any character at all.
So if people are cool with McMansions,
but not with well done duplexes and
fourplexes, I fear the think it's the
*people* who will move in to middle
housing that have the characters they
don't want. And that's classist and
probably racist too.
We can't keep complaining about the lack
of affordable housing, and then refuse to
participate in the solution in certain
neighborhood, as though we're "above
it." It's gross and the only thing I really
don't like about living in Willow
Glen...the NIMBY-ism. 6
35 Karen Andersen Latti San Jose 95139
36 Filip Buca San Jose 95124
37 Margaret Cimafranca San Jose 95112