Attachment 4 - Plan to Place Proposal_submitted 06-28-2024 — South San Francisco City Council, August 28, 2024

CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
Facilitation Services for Community Discussions of
Decommissioned City Facilities
June 27, 2024
Proposal submitted by Plan to Place
ii
plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services
Proposal submitted by Plan to Place
for
City of South San Francisco
Facilitation Services for Community
Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities
June 27, 2024
iii
plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services

TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. Transmittal Letter .........................................................................................................1 B. Executive Summary, Understanding of Required Services, and Approach to Scope of Work .................................................................................................................................4 C. Description of Proposer’s Firm ..................................................................................10 D. Proposer’s Staff Team................................................................................................12 E. Fees and Charges......................................................................................................17 F. References .................................................................................................................19 G. Completed Reports and Presentations.........................................................................21 1 plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services
A. TRANSMITTAL LETTER
June 27, 2024
Megan Wooley-Ousdahl, AICP, Principal Planner
Economic and Community Development Department
City of South San Francisco
400 Grand Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94080
RE: Request for Proposals for Facilitation Services for Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities
Megan,
Plan to Place is pleased to submit our proposal to facilitate community discussions about the future of the Municipal Services Building (MSB) and the West Orange Library. This effort exemplifies South San Francisco’s forward-thinking and inclusive governance as it prioritizes adaptation and community ownership in its ever-evolving urban landscape.

Shared civic spaces are more important than ever in forging and sustaining community integrity and cohesion. Setting a course for how the MSB and West Orange Library can respond to the General Plan’s zoning (high-density, multi-family, mixed-use) and status as a Housing Element opportunity site, while upholding equitable community access is critical. The thoughtful inclusion of all segments of the community (including Spanish, Mandarin, Cantonese, and Tagalog speakers, students, and residents of varying needs and abilities) will be essential to generate unique and actionable insights for the City reflective of the diversity that characterizes South San Francisco. Transparency and equity are central to all our outreach and engagement efforts, with an aim to reduce barriers to participation, and include voices that aren’t typically part of the planning processes. Strategies include creating eye-catching and accessible graphics; designing engagement events to be fun, family-friendly and located where target populations gather and feel comfortable; translating project materials; and offering live interpretation to encourage all members of the community to engage. Throughout the process we will collaborate with City staff to recalibrate and course correct our outreach approach as needed.

Plan to Place has worked on projects throughout the Bay Area and has extensive experience in South San Francisco, working most recently on the City’s General Plan Update and Lindenville Specific Plan. We are familiar with the City’s diverse sub-populations and have connected with community-based organizations (CBOs) that represent various interests (e.g., Padres en Accion, SSF Asian Alliance, SSF Youth Commission, Community Learning Center, Everything South City).

We are encouraged that the City is prioritizing gathering comprehensive community feedback before embarking on redevelopment for these City-owned facilities. 2 plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services
“I’m located, therefore I am.” This aboriginal saying captures the intrinsic connection between identity and place. A successful vision for the MSB and West Orange Library is rooted in current community need and prior community experience-- it must tell a specific and compelling story. We are uniquely situated to facilitate the emergence of this story such that the City staff and elected officials can move forward with actionable and visionary principles to help guide future decisionmaking.

We look forward to the opportunity to speak with you further about this effort, and trust the enclosed information is complete and adequate for your evaluation. Should you require any additional information or have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact us at 415.889.0580 or via email. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Dave Javid, AICP, LEED AP
Founder + Principal, PLAN to PLACE
[email protected]
3 plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services
B. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY,

UNDERSTANDING OF

REQUIRED SERVICES,

AND APPROACH TO SCOPE OF
WORK
4 plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services
B. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, UNDERSTANDING OF REQUIRED

SERVICES, & APPROACH TO SCOPE OF WORK
With our engagement ethos rooted in equity and deep listening, and our experience in South San Francisco, Plan to Place is uniquely positioned to facilitate this effort. From our work with the City on the General Plan Update, we have a broad understanding of the planning context that informs this engagement effort. Situated on either side of El Camino Real, the MSB and West Orange Library have the potential to establish a community heart that can accommodate a variety of services that would benefit from being co-located. As both the facilities are located within zoning districts that encourage high-density and civic uses respectively, they are part of the City’s vision to improve access and cohesion. Their location at the intersection of several neighborhoods (e.g. El Camino, Sunshine Gardens, Orange Park, Southwood, Avalon) should be leveraged to inform intentions for future community use.

At its core, the engagement campaign must effectively communicate the opportunities and constraints of these City-Owned properties so that community feedback can be most meaningfully integrated into actionable redevelopment guidelines. We will craft materials that contextualize this planning effort and solicit specific feedback that captures community hopes, concerns, and desires. We’ve had success using interactive online mapping tools and participatory visioning activities that highlight collective story-telling oriented toward a shared future. As this effort considers the adaptive reuse of both sites, the hosted site tours are an excellent opportunity to document in real time and place residents’ memories and desires for the potential transformation of the MSB and West Orange Library. We will use graphic note-taking to incorporate these ideas into community open houses following the tours. This sequencing of tour and workshop will maintain momentum and demonstrate transparency in a communitydriven process.

By carefully tracking feedback received during the tour and workshop, we will use additional meetings with subpopulations and community advocacy groups that weren’t represented at the community open houses, to ensure all perspectives are represented.

APPROACH TO SCOPE OF WORK
Plan to Place will collaborate with City staff to prepare and facilitate a community engagement effort that is far-reaching, accessible, and compelling. The following objectives will guide our effort:

1. Build trust with residents, stakeholders and CBOs that is consistent and approachable;

2. Promote a culture of dialogue between residents, stakeholders CBOs, consultants, and City staff;

3. Ensure engagement materials are visually compelling and easy-to-understand for diverse, multilingual residents;

4. Systematically analyze input throughout the process to course correct our approach as needed; and
5 plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services

5. Prepare a comprehensive summary report that captures the range input and desired diirection gathered throughout this effort.

The following scope of work items represent the proposed method of engagement and outreach, building off of the approach in the RFP. Plan to Place will collaborate with City staff to refine this strategy.

TASK 1 - PROJECT KICK-OFF AND MANAGEMENT
This task will include an initial kick-off meeting with the project team and regular team check-ins throughout the duration of the project to assess the efficacy of our outreach and course correct as needed. Rachael Sharkland will be the point of contact and conduit between the Plan to Place team and the City, to review strategy, timeline and deliverables. The Plan to Place team will participate in a kick-off meeting to::
• Discuss the project goals, key issues, and project milestones; • Confirm expectations for work products and refine the scope of work and budget as necessary; and
• Discuss project roles and responsibilities.

TASK 2 - COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT WORKPLAN
Plan to Place will collaborate with City staff to prepare a dynamic engagement strategy to be refined throughout the course of the project. This will be a living, shared resource that all members of the team will have access to update throughout the project. The engagement strategy will be designed to:
• Outline goals and objectives for facilitating community conversations; • Confirm schedule, format, and resources for all engagement activities through the shared resource;
• Identify target demographic and interest groups, methods of multilingual communication (including Spanish, Tagalog, and Simplified Chinese) and engagement with hard-to-reach groups and special needs populations, and metrics to analyze progress and effectiveness; • Articulate a range of communication strategies to effectively reach target segments of the community;
• Confirm messaging and and collateral for the promotion of events and online questionnaires; • Specify outreach tools including social media outlets to reach specific audiences in addition to traditional mailing and survey tools;
• Complete engagement analytics throughout the process to assess whether our engagement approach is reaching target communities; and
• Confirm coordination, facilitation and roles and responsibilities.

TASK 3 - DEVELOP OUTREACH MATERIALS
Plan to Place will co-produce messaging with the City to effectively communicate the background and intention of the effort to re-purpose the decommissioned MSB and West Orange Library. It will be important to articulate that this is a discrete effort and unique opportunity for residents to create a shared vision for enhancing valuable community resources. 6 plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services
Consistent and identifiable messaging will be used across promotional and outreach materials for in-person and online engagement, including:
• Style Guide – The first step to creating branding materials will be to prepare a Style Guide that identifies the fonts, color schemes, and graphic design elements. The proposed Style Guide will build off existing branding resources.
• Outreach templates – Once the Style Guide is approved, Plan to Place will draft a project logo if desired and related icons, outreach templates (e.g., digital / physical postcard, City newsletter, social media posts), document templates and graphic style guidelines. • Promotional collateral – Plan to Place will provide language and graphics for electronic formats (media release, e-blast notice, City newsletter, and social media postings). • Online feedback forms (see task 4.4) – Plan to Place will collaborate with the City to craft online feedback forms and questionnaires to supplement the community conversations and site tours and create parity for residents and community members unable to attend inperson events.

TASK 4 - ORGANIZE AND FACILITATE COMMUNITY CONVERSATIONS TASK 4.1 COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSES (2)
Plan to Place will collaborate with City staff to hold up to two in-person communitywide open houses to provide community members and decision makers a forum to learn about and share input on the future of the MSB and West Orange Library, and related planning process. It is anticipated that live polling and interactive exercises that encourage storytelling and participatory decision-making will be used to garner feedback. We will coordinate simultaneous interpretation for both open houses. For each open house, Plan to Place will prepare outreach materials and coordinate with City staff to co-produce content and engagement activities.

Anticipated roles and responsibilities for staff include:
• City staff will lead meeting logistics to confirm meeting space and A/V capabilities. • Plan to Place will work with City staff to identify the overall purpose, approach, objective, target audience and anticipated outcome of each open house. • Plan to Place will assist with preparation of outreach materials including messaging for email blasts and social media posts, and preparation of postcards or flyers building using the templates prepared in previous tasks.
• Plan to Place will prepare public-facing agendas, and internally annotated agendas as a resource to get to and through each event.
• Plan to Place and City staff will co-produce the content for each workshop. • Plan to Place will lead facilitation at each open house and prepare and manage interactive inmeeting activities to foster input, and ensure meetings are engaging and accessible. • Plan to Place will assist the City with refreshments, child care and translation and live interpretation services as needed, up to the amount allocated in the expense budget. • Plan to Place will provide meeting summaries after each open house. 7 plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services
TASK 4.2 HOSTED TOURS OF MSB AND WEST ORANGE LIBRARY (2) Plan to Place will assist City staff as needed to prepare for tours of the Municipal Services Building and the West Orange Library. Plan to Place will staff and coordinate the timing of these meetings, which are anticipated to occur the same day as the Community Open Houses for efficiency and to complement the in-person activities.

Anticipated roles and responsibilities:
• City staff to plan and facilitate two walking tours on the day of each of the two Community Open Houses.
• Plan to Place to attend the walking tours to observe conversations, and co-facilite and/or take notes as needed, to be incorporated into the Summary Report.

TASK 4.3 ADDITIONAL MEETINGS (4)
Plan to Place will help coordinate and facilitate up to four additional meetings as needed, including one-on-one or larger focus group meetings designed to meet with key stakeholders. Plan to Place will work with City staff to identify stakeholders and to prepare agendas, discussion prompts, and activities for each meeting. It is anticipated that these meetings will be facilitated through virtual meeting platforms and will be up to

1.5 hours. The stakeholders should include community ambassadors that represent disadvantaged segments of the population that are not always equitably included in the public planning process.

Anticipated roles and responsibilities:
• Plan to Place will team with City staff to identify stakeholders, draft meeting agendas and content, and coordinate and schedule the meetings. This will include drafting an email to participants and tracking RSVPs.
• City staff will lead meeting logistics (physical location set up) and Plan to Place will assist with meeting logistics as needed, including virtual platform settings. • Plan to Place will co-facilitate meetings.
• Plan to Place will assist the City with translation and live interpretation services as needed, up to the amount allocated in the expense budget.
• Plan to Place will summarize the key takeaways from each meeting.

TASK 4.4: ONLINE FEEDBACK FORM (RECOMMENDED TASK)
As noted in the RFP, we fully agree with the City’s vision to include an online questionnaire or feedback form to expand the reach of this effort. We are including this as a separate task from Task 3: Outreach Materials. Plan to Place will collaborate with City staff to co-produce content for an online feedback form that will capture demographic information and responses to prompts similar to those asked in the in-person community open houses to provide an equitable opportunity for input. The online feedback form will be concise and accessible on a computer or mobile device and translated in Spanish, Tagalog and simplified Chinese as needed. Plan to Place will summarize the results into a 8 plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services
the results into a key themes memo supported by summary graphics and direct quotes. The feedback forms are anticipated to be administered and analyzed through Google Forms, or an equivalent software. Access to the feedback forms can be advertised at events, social media platforms, City newsletter and other resources with survey link and QR code for ease of access.

TASK 5 - COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY REPORT
Plan to Place will prepare a final summary report to analyze and synthesize community input received to provide the foundation for future decision making about the potential redevelopment of the MSB and West Orange Library. We will also prepare a short presentation of the results to share at a City Council meeting. The summary report will be visually compelling and include graphics about recommended next steps for redevelopment. 9 plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services
C. DESCRIPTION OF
PROPOSER’S FIRM
10 plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services
C. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSER’S FIRM
Plan to Place is a four person community engagement and communication firm founded in 2016 and based in Marin County. At Plan to Place we value highly collaborative and inclusive community-based, neighborhood and urban planning efforts. As a full-service engagement firm, we are continually exploring and innovating new outreach tools that are tailored to meet the needs of our clients and the communities we work with. We implement an array of communication, facilitation and engagement in-person and digital platforms designed to provide access to a wide range of participants. We specialize in:
• Comprehensive community engagement strategies
• Customized outreach tools that spark imagination and intrigue • Interactive and approachable visioning exercises
• Inclusive processes that prioritize equitable integration of all voices and aspirations • Genuine and active listening to and empowering of stakeholders • Creative community-facing design and branding
• Thoughtful translation of complex planning challenges into collaborative community-supported

OUR APPROACH TO COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
We take a holistic approach to community engagement that integrates client and stakeholder input throughout the process. We design context-sensitive and inclusive engagement plans that reach broad and representative audiences using the following strategies:
• Designing compelling outreach campaigns via virtual technologies and in-person events; • Bringing engagement opportunities to the places where people already are - be that at the park or on their smartphone;
• Building consensus among diverse groups by establishing strong relationships of trust; and • Cultivating community partnerships with local CBOs, and (whenever possible) employing locals to assist with project execution (e.g., event promotion, advisory groups, translation/ interpretation).

OUR EXPERIENCE
We have extensive experience working with communities throughout the Bay Area on complex and dynamic urban design and planning projects at a range of site scales from City-wide General Plans, Climate Adaptation Planning, Specific Plans, and Housing Elements, to the adaptive reuse of discrete sites and Vision Plans. We regularly facilitate conversations related to housing and displacement, adaptive reuse, accessibility and mobility, vital infrastructure improvements and essential services, environmental justice and climate resilience, and community benefits including parks and community gathering spaces. Our strength lies in fostering trust and generating authentic conversations with community ambassadors and representatives of difficult to reach sub-populations throughout the jurisdictions we work within. Our objective is to ensure that all perspectives are represented in the final outcome of any project; our sole focus is on the publicfacing side of the project, crafting tailored and adaptable engagement strategies, preparing attractive outreach materials, and developing accessible engagement activities. We have included a description of relevant projects in the reference and staff sections of this proposal, and would be happy to share other examples if desired.
11 plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services
D. PROPOSER’S STAFF TEAM
12 plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services
D. PROPOSER’S STAFF TEAM

DAVE JAVID, AICP, LEED AP
Principal
Dave will provide oversight and co-manage the project to review contracts, strategy, timeline and deliverables, and co-produce messaging and facilitate meetings. Dave has over 20 years of experience leading a diverse range of award-winning community-based planning efforts.

Dave’s experience as a project manager on vision, corridor, strategic/specific plan and placemaking projects has provided invaluable insight on the opportunities and the challenges of balancing client objectives while meeting community expectations. Dave has been fortunate to work with the community of South San Francisco on impactful planning projects including the General Plan Update and Lindenville Specific Plan.

RACHAEL SHARKLAND
Sr. Community Engagement Specialist and Designer (Point of Contact) Rachael will collaborate with the project team to prepare messaging and outreach materials and facilitate meetings, and will co-manage the project as the main point of contact between Plan to Place and the City. Rachael has 10 years of experience working as a researcher, designer, and project manager on complex urban design projects including master plans for higher education and health campuses and civic design and transit guidelines. Her experience in dance, counseling, and ecology informs her reverence for a participatory design process grounded in an ethics of resilience, equity, empathy, and agency. She is skilled in various community engagement and communication technologies and methods that advance a participatory design process. Rachael recently worked closely with City staff on the Lindenvill Specific Plan project.

QUENTIN FREEMAN
Outreach Specialist and Graphic Designer
Quentin will collaborate with the project team on both outreach materials and communication templates and assist with meeting logistics and facilitation. Quentin’s multidisciplinary work spans community-based research, visual arts, and place-based analysis and design to imagine and enact futures rooted in climate resilience and equity. A recent graduate from UC Berkeley’s Urban Studies program with emphasis on landscape architecture and socio-ecological sustainability, she is working to build connections between people and place, and believes wholly in a design process grounded in authentic and empowering participation at every step. www.plantoplace.com

DAVE JAVID, AICP, LEED AP
Founder + Principal
Dave has over 20 years of experience leading a diverse range of award-winning community-based planning efforts. Dave’s experience as a project manager on vision, corridor, strategic, specific plan and resilient placemaking projects has provided invaluable insight on the opportunities and the challenges of balancing client objectives while meeting community expectations. By implementing a range of engagement and communication platforms, Dave has forged relationships with key community leaders to establish partnerships and a common dialogue that has led to successful policy outcomes.

FEATURED PROJECTS
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE + EIR | SOUTH FRANCISCO + PETALUMA, CA Leading the community engagement effort in in collaboration with Raimi + Associates in both cities, co-facilitating meetings with advisory groups/committees, faith-based organizations, the business community, and regional agencies. Prepared interactive activities for in-person meetings and workshops and sub-areas meetings. We also developed virtual platforms to provide access to the planning effort through online media, surveys and feedback forms to engage diverse perspectives.

DIRIDON STATION AREA COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT | SAN JOSE, CA Led a comprehensive engagement strategy in partnership with Raimi + Associates, through collaboration with City staff to facilitate a range of community and passionate stakeholder input related to the transformation of a transit hub in the heart of the downtown, targeted by Google for a mixed-use campus.

Outreach includes monthly meetings with a 38-person advisory group, stakeholder meetings, pop-up events, surveys, digital tools and a custom project website.

Creative solutions have been implemented to ensure all community members have an equal opportunity to share their perspectives, while navigating large protests that often occur during community meetings.

MULTI-FAMILY OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS | MARIN COUNTY, CA Led the community engagement strategy working closely with Planning Directors from 11 jurisdictions across Marin County to collectively prepared Objective Design Guidelines and Standards that will be used as a toolkit County wide.

Outreach includes in-person workshops and a range of virtual platforms and interactive online tools.

ADDITIONAL RELEVANT PROJECTS
LINDENVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN | South San Francisco, CA
HARBOR INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | Belmont, CA
EASTSIDE INNOVATION DISTRICT AND NORTHEAST AREA PLANS | San Carlos, CA 2023–2031 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE | Corte Madera, Los Altos, Piedmont, Mill Valley, San Rafael, Larkspur
ASHBY + N. BERKELEY BART STATION ZONING | Berkeley, CA
DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN AND EIR | San Mateo, CA
MTC REGIONAL “PLANNING INNOVATIONS” FORUMS | Bay Area, CA DOWNTOWN VISION PLAN | Los Altos, CA

EXPERIENCE

PLAN TO PLACE
Founder + Principal, 2016 – present

M-GROUP
Principal Planner + Designer, 2013 – 2016
PMC
Senior Urban Planner, 2011 – 2013
MIG INC.

Project Manager, 2009 – 2011

RRM DESIGN GROUP
Senior Planner, 2004 – 2009

EDUCATION

MASTER OF ARTS
City and Regional Planning
California Polytechnic State University
San Luis Obispo, CA

BACHELOR OF ARTS
Urban Studies and Planning,
Visual Arts Minor
University of California, San Diego
San Diego, CA

PRESENTATIONS
“Retooling the Outreach Toolkit”
CCAPA Conference, Oakland, CA
“Achieving Sustainable Results: Public
and Private Efforts & Coordination”
CCAPA Conference, Hollywood, CA
"The Planner’s Guide to Implementing
Green Principles”
CCAPA Conference, San José, CA
MEMBERSHIPS +

ACCREDITATIONS
Co-Director, Sustainability Committee,
APA, Cal Northern - 2012-2015
American Institute of Certified Planners
(AICP)
Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design Accredited Professional (LEED AP)
San Francisco Bay Area Planning and
Urban Research (SPUR)
www.plantoplace.com

RACHAEL SHARKLAND
Sr. Engagement Specialist + Designer
Rachael has 10 years of experience working as a researcher, designer, and project manager on complex urban design projects including masterplans for higher education and health campuses and civic design and transit guidelines. Her experience in dance, counseling, and ecology informs her reverence for a participatory design process grounded in an ethics of resilience, equity, empathy, and agency. She is committed to design and leadership that promotes well-being for all life.

FEATURED PROJECTS
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA
Collaborated with the City in a three-year public engagement campaign that reached all 15 neighborhoods through sub-area advisory group meetings, pop-ups, in-person and virtual workshops, online feedback forms, and a dynamic project website.

HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATES | BAY AREA, CA
Designed and managed an inclusive engagement strategy in compliance with State Law and AFFH requirements including interactive mapping and website development, project videos, field interviews and workshops, and pop-up events.

REIMAGINE HILLSDALE | HILLSDALE SHOPPING CENTER, SAN MATEO, CA Co-designed and co-managed a comprehensive engagement with Gehl Studios including project messaging and branding, promotional collateral, a dynamic project website, virtual and in-person workshops.

NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | SAN CARLOS, CA
Designed and managed an inclusive outreach campaign to foster dialogue and build consensus among stakeholders to determine a long-term vision for zoning, land use, transit, infrastructure, and environmental remediation for San Carlos’ industrial Northeast Area.

NORTH VENTURA COORDINATED AREA PLAN | PALO ALTO, CA
Managed a comprehensive, community-centered engagement and design process with the City of Palo Alto to transform a light industrial site into a mixed-use neighborhood with an equitable open space, housing, and transit strategy. Outreach included stakeholder and community advisory meetings, surveys, polls, digital mapping, and facilitated walking tours.

SOCIAL EQUITY & INCLUSIVE OUTREACH TOOLKIT | SAN FRANCISCO, CA Co-created a guide for design professionals that outlines principles, frameworks, and tools to implement an equitable and inclusive public engagement process.

ADDITIONAL RELEVANT PROJECTS
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | Petaluma, CA
HARBOR INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | Belmont, CA
LINDENVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN | South San Francisco, CA
MISSION ROCK DESIGN GUIDELINES | San Francisco, CA

EXPERIENCE

PLAN TO PLACE
Sr. Engagement Specialist + Designer,
2021-present

PERKINS & WILL
Designer + Project Manager, 2016-2020

GLS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
Designer + Project Manager, 2014-2016

UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT
Project Manager
2008-2010

DANCE EDUCATOR
2016-present

CERTIFIED SOMATIC PRACTICIONER
2023

EDUCATION
MA Landscape Architecture
Harvard University, 2010-2013
BA Philosophy, Literature, and
History
Wesleyan University, 2003-2007

TRAINING
Integrative Counseling
Hakomi Institute, 2020–2022
Equity & Anti-Racism
Facilitation
Holistic Resistance, 2020-present
Mind-Body Coaching
Embody Lab, 2023
www.plantoplace.com

QUENTIN FREEMAN
Outreach Specialist and Graphic Designer
Quentin’s multidisciplinary work spans community-based research, visual arts, and place-based analysis and design to imagine and enact futures rooted in climate resilience and equity. A recent graduate from UC Berkeley’s Urban Studies program with emphasis on landscape architecture and socio-ecological sustainability, she is working to build connections between people and place, and believes wholly in a design process grounded in authentic and empowering participation at every step.

FEATURED PROJECTS
BELMONT HARBOR INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | BELMONT, CA Collaboratively creating high-level engagement strategies, designing outreach materials, and co-facilitating virtual and in-person pop ups, community workshops, and stakeholder meetings to empower the Belmont community to shape the future of the HIA. Ongoing creation of new, interactive engagement strategies.

LINDENVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN | SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA
Creating outreach materials in four languages, facilitating pop-up events and community workshops, and synthesizing feedback from the community for incorporation into the Lindenville Specific Plan.

SAN CARLOS NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | SAN CARLOS, CA Crafting high-level engagement strategies, designing virtual engagement materials, and co-facilitating virtual engagement events to give San Carlos residents a platform to shape the future of the Northeast Area.

CORTE MADERA CLIMATE ADAPTATION IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CORTE

MADERA, CA
Analyzing community needs and sentiments to craft effective engagement strategies, designing outreach materials, website, and project graphics to make the planning process as transparent and equitable as possible.

RELEVANT RESEARCH
“Cultural and Climatic Resiliency of Local Food Systems, Región de la Araucanía, Southern Chile.” University of California and Pontificia Universidad de Chile, Villarrica. Villarrica, Chile.
“Mapping the History of the Land in the East Bay, 1800-present day., to Understand Present Day Social Geographies and Access to Food and Land.” University of California, Berkeley.
“The Case for Cultural Districts as Restorative City Planning in Oakland,” researched and written for the East Side Arts Alliance, Oakland, CA.

EXPERIENCE

PLAN TO PLACE
Outreach Specialist + Graphic Designer,
2023-present

LEXICON OF SUSTAINABILITY
Graphic Designer + Storytelling Intern,
2022
CENTER FOR CITIES + SCHOOLS
Youth Planning Mentor, 2022

GROUNDWORK
Environmental Fellow, 2021
SANTA CRUZ MUSEUM OF ARTS +

HISTORY
Youth Arts Coordinator, 2015-2019
FREELANCE ARTIST + ILLUSTRATOR
2020 - present

EDUCATION
BA Urban Studies
University of California, Berkeley, 2019-
2023
16 plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services
E. FEES AND CHARGES
17 plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services
City of SSF | Facilitation Services for Community Discussions of Decommissioned City Facilities PLAN to PLACE | PROJECT BUDGET
JUNE 2024
Principal Sr.Engagement
Specialist
Outreach
Specialist
Hourly Billing Rate $290 $220 $180
TASK Description and Hours
1 Project Kick-off and Management 12 16 8 $8,440
2 Community Engagement Work Plan 4 4 6 $3,120
3 Develop Outreach Materials 8 16 16 $8,720

4.1 Community Open Houses (2) 16 30 30 $16,640

4.2 Hosted Tours of MSB and West Orange Library (2) 4 4 4 $2,760

4.3 Additional Meetings (4) 20 24 32 $16,840

4.4 Online Feedback Form 4 8 8 $4,360
5 Community Engagement Summary Report 12 10 12 $7,840
80 112 116 $68,720
Direct Costs (e.g., printing, workshop materials, travel) $2,500 Direct Costs (estimated cost for translation + interpretation services, workshop refreshments and childcare) $13,500 TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET $84,720
Task Number / Description
Subtotal
PLAN to PLACE
Project Subtotal
18 plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services
key themes memo supported by summary graphics and direct quotes. The feedback forms are anticipated to be administered and analyzed through Google Forms, or an equivalent software. Access to the feedback forms can be advertised at events, social media platforms, City newsletter and other resources with survey link and QR code for ease of access.

Feedback received will help inform the future programmatic changes to the Hillsdale Shopping Center.

INNOVATION DISTRICT VISION PLAN | SAN CARLOS, CA (2020-2021) Al Savay, Planning Director
City of San Carlos
email: [email protected]
phone: (650) 802-4209
Plan to Place lead outreach efforts for a visioning effort to redevelop an industrial site in San Carlos.

A highly collaborative engagement and visioning strategy identified community perspectives and priorities related to circulation, mix of uses, open space and the environment. Key outreach tools included virtual stakeholder meetings, community workshops and site walks with community members, property owners and stakeholders.

DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT | SAN JOSE, CA (2017-2021) Lori Severino, Former Diridon Program Manager
City of San Jose
email: [email protected]
phone: 510.541.3215
Working closely with Raimi + Associates and City staff, Plan to Place lead engagement activities related to Google’s proposal for this major transit hub in San Jose, including regular meetings with a 38-person advisory group (representing perspectives ranging from the formerly homeless and housing advocates, to major business and development interests), focus/solution group meetings, pop-up/intercept and stakeholder meetings, walking tours, and regional workshops facilitated in multiple languages.
“The Plan to Place team demonstrated professionalism, patience, and empathy in the face of protests and intense fears about displacement. They conducted an inclusive, transparent process that led to a set of desired outcomes. Ultimately, the thoughtful design and implementation of the engagement process helped build broad support for the outcomes. We highly recommend Plan to Place!”
- Lori Severino, Diridon Program Manager - City of San Jose 20 plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services
G. COMPLETED

REPORTS AND

PRESENTATIONS
21 plantoplace.com
City of South San Francisco | Facilitation Services
G. COMPLETED REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
The following are examples of comprehensive engagement summaries we have prepared at critical phases of the following projects - South San Francisco General Plan Policy Frameworks Summary and San Jose Diridon Station Area Civic Engagement Report. We would be happy to provide additional examples if desired. We plan to prepare a dynamic final summary for this effort that will balance key themes with graphics and imagery that will capture the input, hopes, desires, and direction received throughout the process. 1 Community Workshop #2 | July 14, 2020

SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GENERAL PLAN
Community Conversations:

Policy Frameworks
March, 2021 | Conversation Summary Notes
City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 2
This page intentionally left blank
3 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes
The City of South San Francisco hosted a series of Community Conversations for the General Plan Update between March 15, 2021 and March 31, 2021 virtually via the Zoom Meeting platform. The meetings were an hour and a half and were held on various days either midday (11:30am - 1pm) or during the evening (6pm - 7:30pm). The purpose of the conversations was to review the policy frameworks for a range of topics and sub areas as they related to elements of the South San Francisco General Plan Update. Through a presentation, conversation topics, live polls, and small group discussions, meeting participants asked questions and provided comments on each framework topic or sub area listed below:
● Sustainability | March 15 at 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.
● Climate | March 16 at 11:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.
● Health | March 17 at 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.
● Mobility | March 18 at 11:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.
● Land Use | March 23 at 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.
● East of 101 | March 24 at 11:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.
● Lindenville | March 25 at 11:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.
● Parks | March 25 at 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.
● Housing | March 29 at 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.
● Downtown | March 31 at 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.

The following is a summary of the conversations and input received.

Meeting Participant Demographics
Cumulatively for the entire series, there were approximately 19 members of the CAC present at the conversations and 160 members of the public. Many members of the public participated in multiple conversations. Most participants who took the demographic survey were over the age of 30 and identified as Asian, Hispanic/Latino, or White. The neighborhoods represented in residence, per a live poll that was administered during the meeting, included the following breakdown:
● 19% from Downtown
● 1% from El Camino Real/Orange Park
● 18% from Sunshine Gardens
● 9% from Winston Serra
● 2% from Avalon
● <1% from Lindenville
● <1% from East of 101
● <1% from Sign Hill
● 9% Westborough
● 11% Not from SSF
For the demographics of each meeting, see the respective section below (please see the Appendix for the comprehensive poll results).

Overview of Meetings
The agenda for each meeting followed a similar format:
● Welcome and Introductions
● Overview of the General Plan Update
● Policy Framework Highlights
● Participant Discussions
● Next Steps
City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 4
The presentation provided an overview of the project, outreach events to date, the purpose of the analyses and policy frameworks, an overview vision statement, core values, and guiding principles.

Policy Frameworks for South San Francisco
The next item on the agenda included an overview of the policy framework by topic or sub area for each meeting.

The policy frameworks are broad ideas to guide the direction of policy in the General Plan Update. Participants learned how the project team developed these frameworks from community and City staff input, as well as ongoing initiatives and activities at the City. The frameworks highlight key outcomes and performance metrics, and specific goals, policies, and implementation activities for each policy framework. Below lists each policy framework by topic in order of the meetings held chronologically.

Sustainability
The policy framework focusing on Sustainability was held on March 15 at 6pm. In attendance were 18 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, Hispanic or White, and from one of the following neighborhoods (Downtown, Sunshine Gardens, Winston Serra, Sign Hill, and not from SSF). Participants mostly work outside SSF and have been to a General Plan Update meeting before (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results).

At this meeting, the project team provided an overview of sustainability and previously conducted community engagement around the topic. The following list describes key themes from previous engagement upon which the policy framework draws:
● Establish the City as an environmental leader
● Access to public transit including BART, Caltrain, buses, and free shuttles ● Pedestrian and cyclist safety
● The need for improved parks and open spaces – preserve views and trail system ● The need for additional public and civic spaces
● Revitalize Colma Creek
● Lack of trees along streets and on residential properties ● Bring nature and biodiversity back into the City
● Preserve and enhance historic and cultural resources including public art ● Climate threats including sea level rise, emergency preparedness, and wildfires Described below are each goal for Sustainability and outcomes that each framework strives for:
• Goal #1: Make green buildings the standard in South San Francisco for new construction and major renovations.
● Goal #2: Improve the performance of existing buildings in South San Francisco. ● Goal #3: A resilient and fossil fuel free energy system. ● Goal #4: Divert organics from landfill.
● Goal #5: Increase carbon sequestration in open spaces and in the urban forest through marsh enhancement and tree planting.
● Goal #6: Make the wastewater treatment plant operate more efficiently.

Following the presentation, the project team conducted a live poll to gather insight on the goals and how well they align to the community. Participants were asked their perspective on the following (rated from 0 to 5, with 5 being the most agreed upon:
● Switch to electric equipment when replacing appliances: 4.6 ● Not accept or buy single-use plastics (water bottles and straws): 4 ● Install a “laundry-to-landscape” greywater system: 3.3 ● Buy/lease an electric vehicle: 3.5
● Walk or bike instead of drive to run errands or commute: 3.5 5 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes
● Update local building code: 3.5
● Support “Neighborhood Resilience Hubs”: 3.9
● Provide education and outreach to top food waste producers: 3.8 ● Require use of recycled urban water in applicable sectors: 3.9 ● Accelerate implementation of the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plans: 4.2 ● Focus on municipal operations GHG reductions: 3.9
*Please see appendix for full poll results
Meeting participants were then provided an opportunity to discuss ideas presented in the policy frameworks. The following is a summary of those conversations:
● Create opportunities with partnerships from local organizations and institutions to further progress sustainability goals and increase access to best practices. ● Incentivize residents and business owners to implement sustainable practices creatively through cityhosted campaigns and workshops ● Support Carbon Neutral by 2045
● Provide financial support and education for solar panel investment on an individual and community level ● Define the trajectory and implementation timelines, specifically with an All Electric Ordinance ● Define an agreed approach to leadership in SSF
● Think about the end user’s habits and convenience, specifically increasing opportunities for recycling and composting in public areas
● Focus on the maintenance, upkeep, and access of open space ● Create sustainable food sources for all residents that centers education, community, and wellness ● Install solar on city buildings and facilities
● Present individual actions as a starting point for implementing sustainable living ● Explain microgrids and their significance
● Comments associated with other policy frameworks:
o Health and Environmental Justice: Address disparities in air quality and associated health problems, specifically increased risk of asthma in residents close to 101. o Conservation: Expand tree planting to include streets with no trees currently o Climate and Safety Adaptation: Consider the impacts of flooding in flood-prone areas and increase resilience
Climate and Safety
The policy framework focusing on Climate and Safety was held on March 16 at 6pm. In attendance were 2 members of the CAC and 5 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, White and from either Sunshine Gardens, Winston Serra, Avalon/Brentwood, or Downtown. Participants worked in Downtown or outside SSF and have generally been to General Plan Update meetings (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results).

At this meeting, the project team provided an overview of natural hazards and climate change and previously conducted community engagement around the topic. The following list describes key themes from previous engagement upon which the policy framework draws:
● Colma Creek that manages flooding and sea level rise, restores ecology, increases public access, and improves public access to the San Francisco Bay and Bay Trail. ● A comprehensive sea level rise strategy
● An integrated street, urban forest, and green infrastructure network Described below are each goal for Climate and Safety and outcomes that each framework strives for:

Goal #1: The City proactively advances community resilience and is prepared for climate disruption Goal #2: Critical facilities have the necessary capabilities and can continue operations after all future hazards.

Goal #3: The City minimizes the risk to life and property from seismic activity and geologic hazards in South San Francisco.

City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 6
Goal #4: A resilient community that protects existing and future development from sea level rise and flooding through a continuum of adaptation solutions, including constructing levees / seawalls, expanding green infrastructure, and elevating new development.

Goal #5: A transformed Colma Creek that mitigates flooding and sea level rise, restores native ecologies, and increases access to and along the creek.

Goal #6: A City prepared for the combined impacts of extreme heat and poor air quality.

Goal #7: The City minimizes the risk to life and property from wildfire in South San Francisco Following the presentation, the project team conducted a live poll to gather insight on the frameworks and how well they align to the community. Participants were asked their perspective on the following and the agreement to participant values (rated from 0 to 5, with 5 being the most agreed upon):
● New City capital projects should account for [Sea Level Rise (SLR)]: 4.4 ● Levees and seawalls provide a great way to protect buildings: 3 ● Nature-based solutions are a great way to protect ecosystems: 4.4 ● New development in SLR risk areas should use adaptation measures: 4.2 ● New development in SLR risk areas should build on, fill, or elevate buildings: 3 ● Property sales should disclose SLR risk areas: 4.6
● Use Green infrastructure in Colma Creek to reduce flooding: 4.6 ● Prioritize low-income or marginalized groups in weatherization programs: 4.2 *Please see appendix for full poll results
Meeting participants were then provided an opportunity to discuss the draft framework. The following is a summary of the conversation:
● Spread awareness about how to stay cool during heat waves, including cooling centers (location, hours, and for whom) and in-home practices that consider safety of residents ● Increase individual engagement and awareness through emergency and non-emergency education ● Focus on outreach to individuals and communities by collaborating with partners and leveraging creative means
● Implement city-funded programs that promote sustainable best practices ● Continue considering the capabilities of critical facilities ● Consider hazard mitigation and outreach with accessibility—consider how the community needs to get information
● Comments associated with other policy frameworks:
o Conservation: Expand urban forests to help reduce heat days and work with PG&E to implement these in their corridors
o Land Use and Housing: Increase housing near transit
o Noise: Integrate noise pollution as a hazard and mitigate its impact Community Health and Social Equity
The policy framework focusing on Health and Equity was held on March 17 at 6pm. In attendance was 1 member of the CAC and 10 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, Hispanic, and from one of the following neighborhoods (Avalon/Brentwood, Downtown, Westborough, not from SSF). Participants work in either East of 101, El Camino Real, Westborough, or not in SSF. Most participants have been to a General Plan Update meeting, but some have not (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results).

At this meeting, the project team provided an overview of inequities and health risks and previously conducted community engagement around the topic. The following list describes key themes from previous engagement upon which the policy framework draws:
● Impacts of future growth
● Noise, traffic and pollution impacts
● Renters, teachers, and people of color are priced out 7 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes
● Housing unaffordability has led to overcrowding
● Increase in houseless Latinos, older adults, and people with disabilities ● Welcoming and diverse community
● Latino community feels ignored
● Mental health center for youth and young adults
● More grocery stores
● Community food gardens
Described below are each goal for Health and Equity and outcomes that each framework strives for:

Goal #1: Be a leader by collaborating across department and jurisdictions to incorporate equity considerations into policies and programs.

Goal #2: Engage all residents in decisions that impact their lives.

Goal #3: Be a leader in promoting healthy communities through collaboration, prevention, and education.

Goal #4: Close the gap of healthy food options for low-income residents in the city.

Goal #5: Support safe housing and shelter throughout South San Francisco.

Goal #6: Protect vulnerable households from displacement Goal #3: Reduce air pollution exposure near freeways and industrial uses.

Following the presentation, the project team conducted a live poll to gather insight on the frameworks and how well they align to the community. Participants were asked their perspective on the following and the agreement to participant values (rated from 0 to 5, with 5 being the most agreed upon:
● Ensure that SSF staff, boards and commissions are reflective of diversity: 4.6 ● Hire staff who speak multiple languages (Spanish, Mandarin, and Tagalog): 3.6 ● Have multilingual interpretation and translation at community meetings: 3.6 ● Encourage resident ownership (condos, cooperatives, and CLTs): 5 ● Develop an anti-displacement plan: 4.6
● Partner with local shelter to provide more cots for emergencies: 4.4 ● Create a Community Drop-in Center for people without homes: 4.5 ● Work with developers to create a grocery store Downtown or East of 101: 4 ● Buildings near Lindenville must reduce indoor air pollution: 3.8 *Please see appendix for full poll results
Meeting participants were then provided an opportunity to discuss the draft framework. The following is a summary of the conversation:
● Describe the decisions behind metrics used as key performance indicators for the policy frameworks ● Provide age-friendly outcomes that specifically create opportunities for seniors, including daycare, senior action commission, and meals on wheels
● Embrace creativity with anti-displacement strategies including COVID19 protections phasing out, increased ADU capacity, resources for displaced or houseless youth and college students, homesharing, and disability financing
● Make the correlation clear between these frameworks and the upcoming Housing Element Update ● Partner with institutions like Kaiser that have data available for further study ● Consider the community’s capacity to engage on these frameworks where there are so many meetings in such a small timeframe
● Consider help and support from the County
● Comments associated with other policy frameworks:
o Parks and Public Facilities: Provide age-friendly outcomes that specifically create opportunities for seniors, including daycare, senior action commission, and meals on wheels o Economic Development: Include small businesses in anti-displacement conversations o Economic Development: Create space for small business ventures, perhaps through pop-ups City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 8
o Economic Development: Engage workers in the conversation and discuss data on small businesses
o Mobility: Consider the intersection of health, equity and transportation, specifically by offering micro mobility options, shared car uses, and transit to services and amenities Mobility
The policy framework focusing on Mobility was held on March 18 at 11:30am. In attendance were 2 members of the CAC and 14 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, White, and from either Sunshine Gardens or outside SSF. Participants mostly work outside SSF or East of 101 and have been to a General Plan Update meeting. In addition to these questions, participants were asked about their transportation habits. Most participants either drive to work alone or on the train (pre-pandemic) and expect to be in the office only for important meetings or 0-1 days post-pandemic (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results).

At this meeting, the project team provided an overview mobility and transportation in SSF and previously conducted community engagement around the topic. The following list describes key themes from previous engagement upon which the policy framework draws:
● Residential parking
● Safety and maintenance
● Trail connections
● Multimodal facilities
● Traffic
Described below are each goal for Mobility and outcomes that each framework strives for:

Goal #1: Safe for people of all ages and abilities regardless of mode Goal #2: Comfortable and convenient for all modes.

Goal #3: Proactively managed traffic congestion and parking Goal #4: Development patterns that reduce vehicle miles, curb emissions, and increase livability Goal #5: Equitable access to transit service
Goal #6: Reasonable travel times for all mobility needs Goal #7: Easy access to play, fitness, and active transportation networks Goal #8: Transit stations are first choice for regional travel and a destination in their own right Following the presentation, the project team conducted a live poll to gather insight on the frameworks and how well they align to the community. Participants were asked the following questions:
● What factor would most incentivize you to change your mode of travel? o Reduced transit fares: 11%
o Better bicycle infrastructure: 0%
o Improved sidewalks and crossing: 0%
o Increasing parking costs: 11%
o More frequent transit service: 55%
o New transit modes: 22%
● What is the most important factor in deciding your mode of travel? o Speed: 25%
o Ease of Access: 25%
o Comfort: 0%
o Health: 0%
o Privacy: 0%
o Multiple Factors: 50%
*Please see appendix for full poll results
9 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes
Meeting participants were then provided an opportunity to discuss the draft framework. The following is a summary of the conversations:
● Increase the frequency, reliability, cleanliness and affordability of transit ● Focus on parking and the current deficit and note the shortcomings of parking permits ● Create a system that is flexible and bends to the unique needs of riders, for example, families or seniors ● Create a seamless rider experience no matter the transit agency, including payment—collaborate across agencies and public spaces
● Consider a bus express lane on Highway 101
● Focus on areas with intersecting mobility and affordability issues, like Old Town ● Diversify mass transit and consider reimplementing the 1949 El Camino Real system ● Revisit the assumption that residents ‘will not use cars’ ● Improve safety with lighting and trail upgrades and maintenance ● Ensure that the infrastructure between transit modes is accessible and safe no matter the time of day ● Work with SamTrans specifically to reduce cost inefficiencies ● Consider the impacts of on-demand vehicle transit on taxis ● Consider future technology and its impacts, in particular, autonomous vehicles ● Incentivize transit and EV usage
● Comments associated with other policy frameworks:
o Social Equity: Implement a system that responds to residents for different claims, like 311 calls Land Use
The policy framework focusing on Land Use was held on March 23 at 6pm. In attendance were 5 members of the CAC and 26 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, White or Asian, from outside SSF, Winston Serra, Sunshine Gardens, Downtown, Sign Hill, or Westborough. Participants mostly work outside SSF, in Downtown or East of 101 and have been to a General Plan Update meeting before (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results).

At this meeting, the project team provided an overview of land use designations and the city’s land use preferred alternative. The following list describes key themes integrated into the preferred alternative upon which the policy framework draws:
● Maintain industrial in Lindenville and East of 101
● Create new, vibrant residential neighborhoods in East of 101 and Lindenville ● Produce a range of housing types for different income levels and household types ● Celebrate the history, culture, and diversity of the Downtown Described below are each goal for Land Use and outcomes that each framework strives for:

Goal #1: Complete 20-minute neighborhoods, where residents can access most of their everyday needs within a short walk, bike, or transit trip.

Goal #2: Transit-oriented communities that mix high quality development, affordable housing, and improved mobility options.

Goal #3: A diverse range of housing options that create equitable opportunity for people of all ages, races/ethnicities, abilities, socio-economic status, and family types to live in South San Francisco.

Goal #4: A diverse supply of affordable housing options.

Goal #5: Opportunities for residents to live in healthy and safe housing options and promote sustainability in housing development.

Goal #6: Foster a diverse economy and range of businesses by maintaining, beautifying, and expanding spaces for neighborhood commercial, including retail, restaurants, and small offices.

Goal #7: Spaces for research and development, life sciences, and high-tech employment opportunities and operations.

City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 10
Goal #8: Opportunities for industrial, manufacturing, and warehousing, in Lindenville and East of 101.

Goal #9: A network of attractive, pedestrian-oriented, human-scale and well-landscaped streets and civic spaces throughout the city.

Goal #10: High level of quality in architecture and site design in all renovation and construction of buildings.

Goal #11: Collaboration with new private development to take collective action to achieve plan goals.

Following the presentation, the project team conducted a live poll to gather insight on the frameworks and how well they align to the community. Participants were asked their perspective on the following and the agreement to participant values (rated from 0 to 5, with 5 being the most agreed upon):
● Access from all neighborhoods to a mix of uses is important: 4.2 ● Childcare and pre-k facilities should be expanded: 3.8 ● Health food options should be expanded: 3.6
● Affordable housing should be allowed in all neighborhoods equitably: 3.7 ● More housing should be allowed near transit: 3.7
● Housing should be created for seniors: 3.6
● Housing should be created for multigenerational families: 3.7 ● Housing should be allowed on school or church sites: 2.7 ● It is important to maintain industrial jobs: 3.5
● We should have an industrial preservation program: 3.2 ● We should grow life sciences and technology businesses: 3.3 *Please see appendix for full poll results
Meeting participants were then provided an opportunity to discuss the draft framework. The following is a summary of the conversations (including chat conversations throughout the session):
● Focus on the creation of neighborhoods that are walkable and have a sense of community that celebrates local and historical culture
● Collaborate county-wide to offer not only low-income housing, but also more general affordable housing, and consider eliminating R1 zoning
● Factor the plans of transit agencies when building transit-oriented development ● Balance building height, affordable housing, and mixed-use land uses ● Consider the implications of parking and traffic with more development, but also how transit intersects with this
● Concern for the plan not integrating everything the community has said over the past year ● Consider amenities provided to employees and collaborate to give the public access ● Create affordable housing for local residents, not driven by the biotech industry ● Create community spaces, like a community garden
● Work with R&D to create inclusivity
● Comments associated with other policy frameworks:
o Parks and Public Facilities: Dedicate more park space per resident o Parks and Public Facilities: Reevaluate the amount of schools available to residents and the quality of education based on class size
o Economic Development: Provide resources and aid to small businesses, specifically non-english speaking businesses
o Economic Development: Increase opportunities for local businesses and utilize corporate money to reinvest in the local economy
o Mobility: Create safer pedestrian and bike streets
o Health and Environmental Justice: Consider the inequities with pollution across the city o Housing: Consider housing plan for young individuals priced out o Housing: Develop a metric for gentrification and displacement 11 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes
East of 101
The policy framework focusing on East of 101 was held on March 24 at 11:30am. In attendance were 2 members of the CAC and 17 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, White, from outside SSF, and work either outside SSF or in East of 101. Participants have been to a General Plan Update meeting before. In addition to these questions, participants were asked about their mobility habits. Most participants drove alone pre-pandemic, and expect to be in the office 0-1 days post-pandemic. Most participants noted that more frequency in transit would incentivize alternative mobility mechanisms (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results).

At this meeting, the project team provided an overview of land use designations and the sub area’s land use preferred scenario. The following list describes key themes integrated into the preferred scenario upon which the policy framework draws:
● Create residential and mixed -use neighborhoods near the Caltrain station ● Develop housing affordable to people earning a variety of income levels ● Ensure appropriate services and amenities to support new residential and employment growth ● Continue to encourage a mix of life science, biotech, technology, and industrial businesses ● Emphasize sustainability and resilience, particularly in relation to climate change and sea level rise ● Improve connections to the East of 101 areas, including new streets, public transportation, and pedestrian and bike networks
● Retain industrial land uses to support business diversity ● Ensure intensified commercial and industrial uses do not overburden transportation system and infrastructure
● Add new parks and open spaces
Described below are each goal for East of 101 and outcomes that each framework strives for:

Goal #1: A new transit-oriented community with a diverse mix of uses and places and programming to inspire creativity and social interaction that welcome all South San Francisco residents Goal #2: Sufficient housing to provide for a range of housing types for different income levels and household types and that sustains services and amenities to support residents and businesses.

Goal #3: A cluster of life sciences as an economic engine for the City and an international hub while blending new emerging industries into the district.

Goal #4: A cluster of industrial businesses as a hub for the region.

Goal #5: A well-connected and accessible district with high-quality transit and walking and biking paths that seamlessly connect East of 101 with Downtown, Lindenville, and the rest of the City Goal #6: Minimize vehicle trips through parking requirements, Transportation Demand Management, and alternatives travel modes.

Goal #7: Steward the San Francisco Bay, Colma Creek, and its habitat.

Goal #8: Build in flexibility for East of 101, the San Francisco Bay shoreline, and Colma Creek to evolve over time, responding and adapting to climate disruption
Following the presentation, the project team conducted a live poll to gather insight on the frameworks and how well they align to the community. Participants were asked their perspective on the following and the agreement to participant values (rated from 0 to 5, with 5 being the most agreed upon:
● Housing should be allowed near transit: 3.5
● Priority housing sites should be designated: 3.3
● Public land should be used for housing: 2.6
● Parking minimums should be removed to encourage housing: 2.6 ● New development along Colma Creek should use context-sensitive design: 3.7 ● It is important to maintain industrial jobs: 4.5
● We should have an industrial preservation program: 4.3 ● We should grow life sciences and technology businesses: 3.7 City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 12
*Please see appendix for full poll results
Meeting participants were then provided an opportunity to discuss the draft framework. The following is a summary of the conversations:
● Create and dedicate public spaces, especially parks and open space and a community center ● Balance housing with needs of residents and build out amenities and services accordingly, especially food and groceries
● Increase housing in the sub area, specifically very low- and low-income housing ● Better connect trails, entrances, and exits throughout the area for pedestrians and bicyclists ● Identify office space and its relationship to open space ● Build out ferry capacity with public and employees
● Increase accessibility to the area to attract travelers ● Create resiliency on the shoreline
● Consider the safety of parks for individuals when designing and allocating spaces ● Collaborate with adjacent jurisdictions and SFO Airport on sea level rise projects and the implications each project has on each other
● Enable wildlife well-being by creating building setbacks and flexibility on the Bay Trail ● Ensure that tax burdens don’t fall on residents and make sure corporations are paying their fair share ● Add a retired section to the demographics
● Highlight parks in the sub area in the presentation
● Consider the marinas and residents of this area
Lindenville
The policy framework focusing on Lindenville was held on March 25 at 11:30am. In attendance was 1 member of the CAC and 12 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, White, from outside SSF, Downtown, Sunshine Gardens, Westborough, or Orange Park. Most participants work outside SSF, in Downtown, or in East of 101 and have been to a General Plan Update meeting before. In addition to these questions, participants were asked about their mobility habits. Most participants drove alone pre-pandemic and expect to be in the office 0- or 4-days post-pandemic. Most participants noted that new transit modes would incentivize alternative mobility mechanisms (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results).

At this meeting, the project team provided an overview land use designations and the sub area’s land use preferred alternative. The following list describes key themes integrated into the preferred alternative upon which the policy framework draws:
● Celebrate the history and culture
● Preserve small businesses
● Preserve industrial uses to maintain a base of higher-paying jobs that match skill sets of residents ● Incorporate housing affordable to varying income levels ● Transform Colma Creek into a public amenity and transform area around it into a mixed-use neighborhood ● Consider the impacts of future growth, including potential displacement and traffic impacts, on Downtown, Orange Park, and other surrounding areas
Described below are each goal for Lindenville and outcomes that each framework strives for:

Goal #1: Create a new residential neighborhood centered along Colma Creek within a short walk of Downtown amenities and services that provides a range of housing types for different income levels and housing types.

Goal #2: Expand living, working, and shopping options in Lindenville.

Goal #3: Transform Colma Creek and create new open spaces to provide opportunities for social interaction, recreation, flood protection, and urban ecology.

Goal #4: A cluster of industrial businesses as a hub for the region. 13 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes
Goal #5: Support and preserve a core area of light industrial and service uses that provide good paying jobs for South San Francisco residents.

Goal #6: Proactively support the industries, artists, institutions, and programs that spur the creative economy.

Goal #7: Construct safe, comfortable, and accessible pedestrian and bicycle facilities that invite people of all ages and abilities with improved connections to Downtown, El Camino, and East of 101.

At this meeting, the project team provided an overview of parks/open space and conservation/cultural resources and previously conducted community engagement around the topic. The following list describes key themes from previous engagement upon which the policy framework draws:
● Downtown needs a community center, parks, and gathering spaces. ● Sunshine Gardens needs a park.
● The community needs more senior services and programming and connections to services. ● Residents expressed desire for another pool.
● Residents should have improved access to recreational facilities at public schools. ● There is a need for more daycare, childcare, and after school programs. ● Parks need to be safe and have better lighting.
● Public art should be incorporated into parks.

City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 14
● Parks and walking trails need to be better maintained. ● There should be more community events.
● Colma Creek that manages flooding and sea level rise, restores ecology, increases public access, and improves public access to the San Francisco Bay and Bay Trail. ● Steward the San Francisco Bay
● An integrated street, urban forest, and green infrastructure network ● Preserve and improve access to San Bruno Mountains and Bay Area trail ● Some concern on the interactions between coyotes and other wildlife and developed communities near the San Bruno Mountains.

Described below are each goal for Parks, Conservation and Cultural Resources and outcomes that each framework strives for:

Parks Goal #1: Expand the network of parks and gathering spaces throughout the city, accommodating the physical and social needs of users of all ages and abilities.

Parks Goal #2: Improve access to parks, gathering spaces, and public amenities in Downtown.

Parks Goal #3: Expand the amount of open space in South San Francisco and ensure it is accessible to the public.

Parks Goal #4: Provide convenient and safe trail and other pedestrian connections throughout the community.

Parks Goal #5: Provide quality recreational programming and facilities that provide recreational opportunities to all residents, regardless of ability, neighborhood, or economic background.

Parks Goal #6: Provide appropriate resources and staffing to ensure parks and recreational facilities are adequately funded and maintained.

Parks Goal #7: Provide quality public facilities and services to South San Francisco residents Parks Goal #8: Provide quality childcare and preschool programs citywide.

Conservation Goal #1: Support nature in the city to encourage healthy ecosystems, improve air and water quality, improve public health, and adapt to a changing climate.

Conservation Goal #2: Steward the San Francisco Bay and its habitat.

Conservation Goal #3: Protect threatened and endangered wildlife and plant species in South San Francisco.

Conservation Goal #4: Improve Colma Creek water quality and re-establish habitat along the corridor.

Conservation Goal #5: Preserve important historic architectural resources for the aesthetic, educational, economic, and scientific contribution they make to South San Francisco’s identity and quality of life.

Conservation Goal #6: Protect sites, features, places, or objects that are of cultural value to one or more California Native American Tribes.

Following the presentation, the project team conducted a live poll to gather insight on the frameworks and how well they align to the community. Participants were asked their perspective on the following and the agreement to participant values (rated from 0 to 5, with 5 being the most agreed upon):
● Develop community gardens, mini parks, and plazas: 4.3 ● Develop parks in all neighborhoods: 4.7
● Improve public access to SSFUSD facilities: 4
● Develop Colma Creek as an amenity: 3.5
● Convert vacant buildings or sites into recreational facilities: 4.1 ● Improve ped. access to parks, recreational facilities, and trails: 4.4 ● Provide more community events, festivals, and classes: 4 ● Match programming with community wants and needs: 4.3 ● Expand childcare, preschool, and after school programming: 4.2 ● Equitably provide public facilities and services in all neighborhoods: 4.4 ● Develop shuttle services and “pop-up” services: 3.8
● Discourage use of invasive, non-native plants in landscape areas: 3.8 ● Establish standards and guidelines for new construction near the Bay: 4.3 ● Establish a Wildlife Watch program: 3.4
15 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes
● Establish standards and guidelines for construction along Colma Creek: 3.8 ● Encourage the voluntary conservation and re-use of historical structures: 3.7 ● Explore the feasibility of a Downtown Historic Commercial District: 3.8 ● Expand resources (historic maps, markers, or self-guided walking tours): 2.7 ● Include the history of Native Americans at Colma Creek: 3.6 *Please see appendix for full poll results
Meeting participants were then provided an opportunity to discuss the draft framework. The following is a summary of the conversations:
● Increase the amount of parks and ensure every resident is within ¼ mile of a park or open space ● Acknowledge the lack of parks in Sunshine Gardens and Avalon and align the vision of parks with residents ● Open park space on school property (fields, tracks, etc.) as an interim step while building more park space, specifically in Sunshine Gardens
● Build a school in Sunshine Gardens to account for influx of youth ● Consider a park on San Bruno Mountain
● Ensure that plans being developed on the policy frameworks here are seen through and involve the community in the process
● Secure park space in Old Town before properties get sold ● Increase opportunities and access to parks, including the Bay Trail ● Adopt cultural heritage in park space through kiosks, gardens, artwork, and information ● Acknowledge the physical and mental health importance of parks ● Invest in aging or existing parks for much needed need upgrades ● Create a joint agreement with schools to develop the surrounding area and implement sustainable design in the facilities
● Create a community center, community garden space, child center, and community pool ● Plant trees to help mitigate the climate crisis and provide heat escapes for seniors, like the trees on hillside ● Implement a pop-up program for recreation and flexible spaces for small local businesses ● Encourage residents to landscape with native ecology
● Continue to workshop with youth and underrepresented communities ● Create space for sports, like a baseball and soccer field ● Ensure that all parks are safe for all ages, including against theft of seniors, and include emergency buttons ● Study the impacts of surrounding businesses and pollution on Colma Creek, like the Costco Gas Station ● Provide information on ongoing projects that provide public open space, like Kilroy Oyster Point Housing
The policy framework focusing on Housing was held on March 29 at 6pm. In attendance were 2 members of the CAC and 20 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, White, Hispanic, or Asian, and from Westborough or Downtown. Most participants work outside SSF and have been to a General Plan Update meeting before (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results).

At this meeting, the project team provided an overview of housing and the Housing Element Update process in addition to previously conducted community engagement around the topic. The City presented their vision for housing:
● Ensure a high quality of life for all residents by providing a diverse supply of housing affordable to all income levels and people living with disabilities.
● Promote housing options for households with distinct needs, including multigenerational families, empty nesters, and younger and older adults.
● Encourage new housing production while also preserving affordable housing and protecting vulnerable residents from housing instability and displacement.

City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 16
● Focus new housing in complete neighborhoods with access to retail and services, parks and open space, and transit.
● Make progress to achieving a balance of jobs and housing through promoting the production of new housing.
● Enhance the safety and aesthetics of all neighborhoods.

Meeting participants were then provided an opportunity to provide comment on housing topics. The following is a summary of the conversations:
● Clarify the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation and the housing numbers needed to achieve it at each income level
● Balance the current lack of parking with new residents expected with additional housing ● Share housing ideas for East of 101
● Increase the ratio of housing to open park space
● Explain the consequences of failing to meet the RHNA allocation ● Focus on housing affordability with more units being planned and consider trusts to enable their feasibility ● Share the location of planned housing sites
● Explain the process from identifying sites to construction ● Implement sustainable building practices for new construction ● Keep current zoning that spaces out homes
● Create affordability for all generations of residents and prevent displacement ● Consider ADUs to meet RHNA
● Create affordability for essential workforce (teachers, firefighters, etc.) ● Implement a strategy to keep Biotech from driving the housing market ● Build near transit and build dense
● Balance job opportunities and housing units
● Build a range of housing, including the missing middle housing ● Strategize a mechanism to retain the value of housing despite changing zoning, but also balancing more housing to prevent displacement
● Consider home ownership in new housing developments
● Engage at-risk of displacement residents in these conversations ● Acknowledge that housing is a human right and focus on this right over profits ● Explain affordable housing resell restrictions
Please note, a housing policy framework was not presented at this meeting. Rather, the housing policies will be identified in a parallel Housing Element Update process. For more information, please visit https://www.letstalkhousing.org/.

Downtown
The policy framework focusing on Downtown was held on March 31 at 6pm. In attendance were 2 members of the CAC and 18 members of the public. Participants identified as mostly 31-64, White or Hispanic, from Downtown, and work either Downtown or outside SSF. Most participants have been to a General Plan Update meeting before, but many have not or were not sure. In addition to these questions, participants were asked about their mobility habits.

Most participants drove alone pre-pandemic and expect to be in the office 3- or 5-days post-pandemic. Most participants noted that new transit modes would incentivize alternative mobility mechanisms (please see appendix for comprehensive poll results).

At this meeting, the project team provided an overview of land use designations and the sub area’s land use preferred scenario. The following list describes key themes integrated into the preferred scenario upon which the policy framework draws:
● Celebrate the history and culture of Downtown
● Encourage retention of existing and local businesses and protect historic buildings 17 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes
● Promote new residential, mixed use, and employment uses to add business patrons ● Focus new improvements on Grand Avenue
● Create new open space types and amenities
● Construct safe, comfortable, and accessible pedestrian and bicycle facilities ● Protect residents/businesses from displacement
● Advance the social, cultural, environmental, and physical goals of the community Described below are each goal for Downtown and outcomes that each framework strives for:

Goal #1: Support existing neighborhood commercial and provide opportunities to expand commercial Downtown.

Goal #2: Promote new residential, mixed use, and employment uses to add business patrons and residents in order to create a sustainable and thriving Downtown, while maintaining a scale and character that is complementary to existing uses.

Goal #3: Create new opportunities to live Downtown and protect existing residents against threats of displacement.

Goal #4: Foster contextual building design and development that benefits residents.

Goal #5: Construct safe, comfortable, and accessible pedestrian and bicycle facilities that invite people of all ages and abilities to access Downtown amenities and services, Caltrain, Colma Creek and employment in East of 101 and Lindenville.

Goal #6: Celebrate the history and culture of Downtown and its residents through arts and cultural resources.

Goal #7: Create new, accessible open space types and amenities that will accommodate the physical and social needs of users of all ages and abilities.

City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 20

21 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes
Climate Menti Polls

City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 22

23 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes
Health Menti Polls

City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 24

25 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes
Mobility Menti Polls

City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 26

27 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes
Land Use Menti Polls

City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 28

29 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes
East of 101 Menti Polls

City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 30

31 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes
Lindenville Menti Polls

City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 32

33 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes
Parks Menti Polls

City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 34

35 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes
Housing Menti Polls

City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 36

37 Community Workshop #4 Summary Notes
Downtown Menti Polls

City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 38

City of San Jose:

Diridon Station Area
Civic Engagement Report 2018
October 31, 2018
This page intentionally
left blank.

Acknowledgements
SAAG (Station Area Advisory Group)
Bill Souders, San Jose Downtown Residents Association (Homeowner) Boris Lipkin, California High Speed Rail Authority
Carl Guardino, Silicon Valley Leadership Group (SVLG)
Charlie Faas, San Jose State University
Chris Augenstein, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Chris Enders, San Jose Downtown Association
Dan Mountsier, Alameda Business Association
Edward Saum, Shasta Hanchett Park Neighborhood Association Ernst Calais, Adobe Systems
Harvey Darnell, North Willow Glen Neighborhood Association Jean Cohen, Santa Clara County & San Benito Counties Building and Construction Trades Council Jeffrey Buchanan, Working Partnerships USA
Jim Goddard, SAP at San Jose
Jon Pedigo, PACT
Jonathan Martinez, Cahill & Georgetown Home Owners Associations Kathy Sutherland, Delmas Park NAC
Kevin L. Christman, Gardner Neighborhood Association
Kiyomi Honda Yamamoto, Greenbelt Alliance
Laura Winter, St. Leo’s Resident
Leslee Hamilton, Guadalupe River Park Conservancy
Leslye Corsiglia, SV @Home
Liz Scanlon, CalTrain (staff)
Madison Nguyen, The Silicon Valley Organization
Maria Noel Fernandez, SV Rising
Jeff Hosea, Google
Miguel Marquez, Santa Clara County
Nadia Aziz, Law Foundation of Silicon Valley
Nicole Brown, Lofts on the Alameda
Norma Camacho, Santa Clara Valley Water District
Pete Kolstad, Market Almaden NAC
Sarah McDermott, South Bay AFL-CIO Labor Council
Sondra Weber, Plant 51
Shannon Alloway, San Jose Downtown Residents Association (Former Homeless Resident) Shiloh Ballard, Silicon Valley Bike Coalition
Stephen McMahon, San Jose Unified School District
Teresa Alvarado, SPUR
Walter Wilson, Minority Business Consortium
Whitney Morris, San Jose Downtown Residents Association (Renter) SAAG Alternates
Andrew Tubbs, Delmas Park NAC
Ben Pacho, Silicon Valley Bike Coalition
David Bini, Santa Clara County & San Benito Counties Building and Construction Trades Council Deborah Arant, Shasta Hanchett Park Neighborhood Association Derrick Seaver, San Jose Downtown Association
Eddie Truong, The Silicon Valley Organization
Elizabeth Fama, Plant 51
Eloy Wouters, St. Leo’s Resident
Glen Williams, Santa Clara County
Greg Peralta, Lofts on the Alameda
Larry Clark, Alameda Business Association
Jaclyn Tidwell, SPUR
Jaye Bailey, San Jose State University
Jeremy Taylor, Gardner Neighborhood Association
Jim Lawson, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Jodi Starbird, Guadalupe River Park Conservancy
John Ingco, North Willow Glen Neighborhood Association
Kelly Doyle, California High Speed Rail Authority
Ken Caveney, SAP at San Jose
Matt Vander Sluis, Greenbelt Alliance
Matthew Warren, Law Foundation of Silicon Valley
Melanie Richardson, Santa Clara Valley Water District
Melissa Reggiardo, CalTrain
Michael Parrish, Guadalupe River Park Conservancy
Nathan Ho, Silicon Valley Leadership Group (SVLG)
Nathan Svoboda, San Jose Downtown Residents Association Paul Escobar, San Jose Downtown Residents Association
Pilar Lorenzana, SV@Home
Raj Saklikar, Cahill & Georgetown Home Owners Associations Reginald Swilley, Minority Business Consortium
Steve Adamo, San Jose Unified School District
City of San Jose
Lori Severino, Civic Engagement Program Manager
for the Diridon Station Area
Kim Walesh, Deputy City Manager
Lee Wilcox, Chief of Staff
Loren Haley, Real Estate Development Manager
Nanci Klein, Director of Real Estate
Bill Ekern, Diridon Project Manager
Consultant Team
Plan to Place
Dave Javid, Principal
Leah Chambers, Outreach Specialist
Blaze Syka, Web and Graphic Design
Raimi + Associates
Matt Raimi, Principal
Kym Dorman, Principal
City of San Jose:

Diridon Station Area
Civic Engagement Report 2018
Table of Contents
Executive Summary

1. Introduction
Overview
Purpose of the Civic Engagement Process
Purpose of the Report
Structure of the Report
Planning Context

2. Community Engagement Process
Overview
Engagement Activities
Station Area Advisory Group
Solution Groups
Community Forums and Community Meetings
Pop-Up Workshops
Stakeholder Meetings
Online Feedback Form
Walking Tours
Project Website

3. Key Themes
Overview
Issues
Desired Outcomes
Housing and Displacement
Jobs, Education, Economic Development
Land Use, Design, and Parking
Public Space, Creeks, and Trails
Transportation and Transit
Environmental Sustainability
Online Feedback Form Results

4. Conclusion
i-x
1 1
2 4
5 6
15 15
16 17
21 23
25 26
27 29
29 31
31 32
41 43
50 58
65 71
76 78
81 October 31, 2018
City of San Jose:

Diridon Station Area
Civic Engagement Report 2018
Table of Contents (continued)
Appendix (separate document)
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Potential Solutions from Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG) + Public Activity/Event Log
Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG)
Solution Groups
Community Forums
Community Meetings
Pop-Up Workshops
Stakeholder Meetings
Online Feedback Form
From the Public
Comments on the Draft Report
October 31, 2018
CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | i Executive Summary for the
Diridon Station Area Civic
Engagement Report
Introduction (Chapter 1)
San Jose’s Diridon Station is a major regional transit facility and, over the coming years, will experience a significant increase in transit service and ridership due to the addition of BART and High Speed Rail, Caltrain electrification, and the expansion of Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) bus and commuter rail service. The City San José adopted the Diridon Station Area Plan (“DSAP”) in 2014 to guide development in support of these major transportation investments. The DSAP envisions a high-density, mixed-use, vibrant, transitsupportive neighborhood that expands Downtown.

Since the adoption of the DSAP, Google expressed an interest in building a master-planned, mixed-use development in the Diridon Station Area. In June of 2017, the City and Google entered into an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement for the sale of about 20 acres of City-owned lands to Google. City Council is tentatively scheduled to make a decision on this land sale in December 2018.

Google’s interest in the area, among other factors, served as the impetus for the City of San José to undertake an extensive civic engagement process between February and September of 2018. The purpose was to spur community conversation about issues and opportunities, refine the vision for the Diridon Station Area, and help inform the City’s negotiations with Google. The primary goal of the engagement process was to provide a balanced, inclusive, and effective two-way dialogue with a broad range of the San José community. This report documents and summarizes the input gathered through the engagement process.
ii
Civic Engagement Process (Chapter 2)
The civic engagement process included a variety of methods to share information and gather input on the community’s hopes, issues, and ideas for the Diridon Station Area in general and, more specifically, a potential Google project. At the core of the process was the convening of the Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG), which included 38 community members appointed by the City Council. In addition to the ten SAAG meetings and 11 Solution Group (subcommittee) meetings, the City held seven Community Forums and Meetings, two walking tours, six pop-ups at neighborhood events, and five presentations to stakeholder groups. The project website (www.diridonsj.org) had nearly 22,000 page views, and more than 600 people completed an Online Feedback Form.

Overview of the Civic Engagement Process
CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | iii Key Themes (Chapter 3)
This community dialogue generated a wide range of ideas. Housing and displacement were the dominant topics of SAAG discussions and of public comments. There was extensive discussion about the housing crisis currently facing San José and concerns about the future if Google were to locate a major office development, as well as opportunities to add homes near transit, support new affordable housing, and address displacement.

The other issues and opportunities raised most frequently were related to:
revitalization of Downtown and the Diridon Station Area; job opportunities and social equity; community benefits; expectations of Google and others; growth impacts and public services; High Speed Rail impacts; safety and homelessness; environmental sustainability; and effects on San Jose’s identity.

The most frequent hopes and goals expressed by community members were summarized as “Desired Outcomes” by topic: Housing and Displacement; Jobs, Education, and Economic Development; Land Use, Design, and Parking; Public Space, Creeks, and Trails; Transportation and Transit; and Environmental Sustainability. The preliminary list of Desired Outcomes was based on SAAG discussions and initial public outreach. Feedback gathered through engagement efforts in September and October, including review of the Draft Report, reinforced these preliminary outcomes and resulted in refinements. The most significant change was the addition of Environmental Sustainability as its own topic.

The complete list of Desired Outcomes can be found at the end of this Executive Summary. This not a priority list of recommendations or a consensus vision for the potential Google project and the Diridon Station Area. Rather, the Desired Outcomes represent a variety of perspectives from the community, highlighting where there appears to be general agreement and where there were the greatest differences in opinion.
iv
Next Steps (Chapter 4)
The input gathered through the civic engagement process has been valuable in shaping Google’s initial design thinking and illuminating top community priorities. The input will continue to inform a variety of decisions related to the Diridon Station Area, including but not limited to the City’s Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Google as part of the land sale process this fall and future agreements on community benefits. It will also help inform implementation of and future updates to the Diridon Station Area Plan, including the development review of private development proposals by Google and others.

At a citywide level, the input can help inform existing efforts such as those related to affordable housing, anti-displacement, workforce development, innovation, and sustainability. The graphic to the right shows the three ways in which input may be used. As planning and development efforts for the Diridon Station Area progress, the City will continue to convene the SAAG and engage the San José community. For example, in October 2018, the City kicked off a major engagement effort for the Diridon Integrated Station Concept Plan, a collaborative effort among four public agencies to expand and reconfigure Diridon train station for future transit services.

Ways That Input from the Civic Engagement Process Will Be Used Appendix
The Appendix to this report includes a significant amount of detailed information on the civic engagement process. This includes: Frequently Asked Questions about the potential Google development and civic engagement process, a full list of Potential Solutions (ideas for how to achieve the Desired Outcomes), an event log that lists all activities in chronological order, meeting summaries, copies of notes taken at community events, and comment letters from the SAAG and public.

CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | v Housing and Displacement | Desired Outcomes
The following Desired Outcomes reflect a nearly universal concern for the housing crisis; however, there was a wide range of nuanced perspectives about how to meaningfully address it and the implications for the potential Google development in the Diridon area.

General Principles
• Everyone involved takes responsibility to address the housing crisis, including but not limited to the City, Google, and other companies/developers.
• The City adopts more and stronger tools to help fight displacement, supplementing the existing programs and policies.
• More affordable housing is generated throughout the city, focusing on high density housing in Urban Villages
• The strategy for addressing housing issues integrates homeless services. • The ultimate goal is no direct/indirect displacement from San Jose, and no increase in homelessness.

Development of the Diridon Station Area
• The Diridon Station Area has dense, affordable housing across all incomes for current and future residents and workers.
• At least 25% of housing units are offered at below-market rates for lower-income households (ranging from extremely low to moderate).
• Developers build inclusionary Housing units on-site or within the Diridon Station Area, rather than pay in-lieu fees or build outside of the area.
• There is no direct and indirect displacement of existing lower-income residents from the Diridon Station Area and nearby neighborhoods due to gentrification spurred by this development. • New development provides compensation and relocation assistance if redevelopment of existing housing occurs.

Citywide Impacts and Benefits
New resources generated by Google and other companies/developers go to:
• Affordable housing development, focusing on areas well-served by transit (including within the Diridon Station Area itself);
• Acquiring, rehabilitating, and preserving the affordability of existing multi-family housing properties in neighborhoods at the greatest risk of gentrification; • Community ownership models to increase homeownership opportunities (e.g., Community Land Trusts, etc.) – when building new housing or preserving existing housing; and • Organizations that provide legal assistance and education to tenants, which includes the legal defense of low-income Santa Clara County tenants facing eviction proceedings. vi
General Principles
• New development offers quality jobs that pay living wages (i.e., cover the cost of housing in San Jose). • New development helps diversify San Jose’s economy such that residents of all skills and educational levels have more opportunities.
• There are strong career pipelines that help existing residents and youth get good jobs in the tech industry and other higher-paying sectors.
• Local schools are supported with additional resources and innovation to provide quality education to local youth.
• New development protects, supports, and involves local, small businesses and non-profits.

Development of the Diridon Station Area
Google and other companies/developers in the Diridon Station Area:
• Adhere to responsible contracting standards and use Project Labor Agreements to ensure fair and safe working conditions for contract and construction workers. • Partner with small, local businesses in both the construction and operation phases (such as through procurement policies, catering, events, etc.)
• Provide worker retention to ensure service workers retain their jobs and do not face mass layoffs if building owners or future tenants change.
• Adopt a local hiring policy.
• Reduce barriers to employment based on race, gender, immigration status, and previous incarceration.

Citywide Impacts and Benefits
New resources generated by Google and other companies/developers go to:
• Early childhood education and childcare for lower-income households. • Local job training in high growth sectors, such as construction, IT, manufacturing, healthcare, and business (such as pre-apprenticeship and apprenticeship programs in trade industries). • Local, existing schools to use as the school district sees fit. • Restorative justice programming in schools.
• Partnership/mentorship programs through San Jose State University (SJSU) and local community colleges.

Jobs, Education, and Economic Development | Desired Outcomes As reflected in the following Desired Outcomes, Community Members want to enhance educational and economic opportunities for all residents of San José, with a range of perspectives on prioritizing social equity and leveraging Google’s strengths to support access to jobs in tech.

CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | vii Land Use, Design, and Parking | Desired Outcomes
There was strong agreement among community members for the following Desired Outcomes, reflecting general support for a well-designed, high-density, mixed-use station area that integrates with Downtown, incorporates historic features and public art, and is sensitive to the surrounding neighborhoods.

Land Use
New development in the Diridon Station Area:
• Optimizes development density to take full advantage of the transit investments. • Includes a complementary mix of commercial, office, and residential uses, with emphasis on affordable housing.
• Incorporates ground floor retail in strategic locations and amounts. • Incorporates public spaces, including open space along the creeks. • Has a coherent development pattern that is varied and interesting, yet has a consistent feel. • Is an extension of the Downtown core, rather than a separate district, with a strong sense of place.

Design
• The design of buildings and public spaces are oriented to the human-scale to support an active street life and accessibility for abilities.
• Tech campuses are open, permeable, and integrated with surroundings such that employees support local businesses and that the public has access to amenities. • New development has an appropriate interface with existing neighborhoods and mitigates impacts, such as those related to traffic, parking, transit routes, and noise. • Public art and historic/cultural preservation are integrated early into project design and plan implementation to enhance and protect existing character and identity. • New buildings create an interesting Downtown skyline.

Parking
• The supply of parking is proactively managed to adapt to changes in travel patterns overtime and to support goals for reduced car travel.
• Existing parking plans and programs that were developed with community input form the foundation for parking management in the Diridon Station Area.
• Parking structure are future-proof (i.e., designated to allow for re-purposing if no longer needed). • The amount of land dedicated to single-use parking is minimized, and parking is not a visually prominent aspect of the built environment.
• There is a shared parking district for private development, transit users, and the SAP Center. • There is sufficient parking for modes other than cars. • Parking impacts on neighborhood streets are minimized. viii
Public Space, Creeks, and Trails | Desired Outcomes
The following Desired Outcomes had the highest level of agreement among community members, who seek a safe, accessible, and connected public realm that reflects San José’s unique identity.

The following outcomes mainly apply to development within and surrounding the Diridon Station Area. • Parks, open space, plazas, and trails in the Diridon Station Area are safe, visible, well-maintained, and accessible to everyone.
• The area has a range of public space types at a variety of scales (e.g., pocket parks, green roofs, plazas, community gardens, etc.) and opportunities for accessing nature. • There is a signature plaza near Diridon Station and Santa Clara Street that provides space for community gathering and special programming, in addition to circulation functions. • Public spaces are activated through temporary and permanent programming such as public art, popup retail, and events. • Partnerships with the business community and neighborhood groups advance projects, implement programming, and help keep spaces maintained.
• There is an interconnected network of “green fingers” with inviting pedestrian and bicycle facilities. • The Guadalupe River and Los Gatos Creek trail systems are linked. • Los Gatos Creek is daylighted at Park Avenue, with restored habitat and a continuous off-street trail. • Riparian habitat along the creeks is enhanced.
• New development faces creeks and other open spaces.

CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | ix Transportation and Transit | Desired Outcomes
There was very strong agreement among community members for the following Desired Outcomes, reflecting the significant interest in making the area supportive of transit use and safer for pedestrians and bicyclists, while also proactively managing vehicle traffic, parking, and emerging modes of travel.

The following outcomes mainly apply to development within and surrounding the Diridon Station Area. • There are pedestrian-friendly streets with small blocks, safe crossings, wide sidewalks, and amenities such as street trees and benches.
• There are direct street, trail, and bike connections to Diridon Station, Downtown, adjacent neighborhoods, and the regional network – with emphasis on improved east-west links. • The safety of major intersections is improved, especially the Bird Ave/280 interchange. • Traffic congestion is minimized during construction and on adjacent residential streets. • The Diridon Station Area greatly exceeds citywide targets for reduced car travel. • The transit system is high quality, affordable, convenient, and frequent. • The capacity of the transit system is designed for future growth, and the transportation system as a whole is flexible and adaptable.
• Transit infrastructure is designed to avoid impacts to homes, parks, businesses, and community facilities.
• The various modes of transit that intersect at Diridon Station are inter-connected. • Bus routes and the light rail system provide direct connections to Diridon Station from the airport and neighborhoods throughout the city, including South San Jose and Berryessa.

Environmental Sustainability | Desired Outcomes
The following Desired Outcomes were added following review of the Draft Report to fully capture the community’s interest in integrating nature, enhancing habitat, using innovative green building techniques, and minimizing pollution.

The following outcomes mainly apply to development within and surrounding the Diridon Station Area. • New development minimizes adverse environmental impacts, including contributions to global climate change.
• New development serves as a model for eco-district planning, design, and implementation. • New development adheres to Climate Smart San José pillars and strategies and LEED Gold or Platinum standards for green building.
• Creeks and other natural resources are integrated early into projects, using principles of healthy ecosystem design.
x

PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT

BLANK FOR FORMATTING
1Introduction
Overview
San Jose’s Diridon Station is located immediately west of Downtown San Jose and near the SAP Center. For years, Diridon Station has served as a major transit facility for the region - with Amtrak rail, VTA light rail, Caltrain, Altamont Corridor Express (ACE) commuter rail, and local and regional bus services. Over the next 10 to 20 years, planned transit improvements will significantly expand transit capacity at Diridon Station. These transit improvements include the electrification and modernization of the Caltrain system (which will result in more frequent and faster service), the extension of BART service, and the addition of California High Speed Rail (HSR) service. The expanded transit will make the Diridon Station one of the most active transit hubs in California. It will be the only location in the Bay Area where BART, Caltrain, Amtrak, and High Speed Rail all converge.

In 2014, the City of San José adopted the Diridon Station Area Plan (DSAP) to guide development around Diridon Station and support these major transportation investments. As described under Planning Context below, the DSAP envisions a high-density, mixed-use, vibrant, transit-supportive neighborhood that expands Downtown.

Since the adoption of the DSAP, a number of factors have prompted the City to rethink parts of the Diridon Station Area Plan and conduct the civic engagement process described in this report. First, the DSAP envisioned a major league ballpark in the heart of the Diridon Station Area. This ballpark is no longer a possibility and thus the plan needs to be updated to reflect this change.

Second, Google expressed an interest in building a master-planned, mixed-use development in the Diridon Station Area. In June of 2017, the City and Google entered into an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) for the sale of about 20 acres of City-owned lands to Google. City Council is tentatively scheduled to make a decision on this land sale in December 2018. (See the Planning Context

2 section below for additional information.) In addition to the Google project, there are other developers seeking entitlements to build in and around the Diridon Station Area.

There has also been progress on the major transit improvement projects. The City of San José and the transit agencies recently launched a collaborative planning effort for a new integrated station. This planning process is beginning this Fall (2018) and will result in a Diridon Integrated Station Concept Plan. Completion of the first phase of this work is expected to occur by summer 2019.

Lastly, the regional economic context has changed since the 2008-14 period, when the national recession was the backdrop to the original planning process for the Diridon Station Area. Now, the regional economy is booming, adding hundreds of thousands of jobs. Meanwhile, new housing construction has lagged relative to demand, leading to a significant housing shortage. Housing prices for both rentals and ownership are increasing rapidly, gentrification of lower-income neighborhoods is occurring throughout the Bay Area, and wages are not keeping up with the cost of housing for many people. These factors are pushing out (or threatening to push out) residents of San José. The City has been working on a variety of fronts to address the housing crisis and implement its long-term strategies under the General Plan.

Given this regional and citywide context, the prospect of Google building a mixed-use development in Downtown San José presents an opportunity to implement the City’s plans for the Diridon Station Area and advance Downtown and citywide goals. It is also important to understand and address the potential for negative impacts that could come from this large-scale development.

Purpose of the Civic Engagement
Process
The above factors served as the impetus for the City of San José to undertake an extensive civic engagement process in February 2018. The purpose was to spur community conversation about issues and opportunities, refine the vision for the Diridon Station Area, and help inform the City’s negotiations with Google. The primary goal was to provide a balanced, inclusive, and effective two-way dialogue with a broad range of the San José community.

As described in Chapter 2, the engagement process included a variety of methods to share information and gather input on hopes, concerns, and ideas for CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 3 the future of the Diridon Station Area in general and, more specifically, the potential Google project.

First, the City convened the Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG), which included 38 community members appointed by the City Council. From February 2018 through September of 2018, the City held 10 meetings with the SAAG plus an additional 11 meetings with SAAG subcommittees, called Solution Groups. Each meeting offered opportunity for public comment. The civic engagement process also included the following activities to involve the general public:
• Community Forums and Community Meetings held in neighborhoods outside of Downtown
• Pop-up workshops at special events throughout San José • Stakeholder meetings (presentations and discussions with community groups)
• An online feedback form
• A website with information on the project (www.diridonsj.org) Through these efforts, there were an estimated 1,200 in-person encounters with community members. In addition, the website has nearly 22,000 page views.

The input gathered through the engagement process will inform a variety of decisions related to the Diridon Station Area, including but not limited to:
• Agreements with Google, including the Memorandum of Understanding (2018) and the Development Agreement
• Google’s development concepts and design thinking
• Private development proposals by other property owners, companies, and real estate developers
• Implementation of and future updates to the Diridon Station Area Plan, Downtown Strategy, and other applicable plans
• Transit improvements and station modifications

4 Purpose of the Report
This report summarizes the civic engagement process that occurred between February and September of 2018. More specifically, the report summarizes the Key Themes (including the Top issues and opportunities and Desired Outcomes) and documents the range of specific ideas generated by the SAAG and the public (included as a list of Potential Solutions in the Appendix). Together, this input reflects the values, aspirations, and concerns of the community with respect to the potential Google development and Diridon Station Area in general. It also provides specific ideas for consideration in the decision-making processes listed above.

The report is not a priority list of recommendations or a consensus vision for the potential Google project and the Diridon Station Area. Rather, the report documents the variety of perspectives from the community, highlighting where there appears to be general agreement and where there were the greatest differences in opinion. It is also intended to demonstrate how community input may be utilized.

The target audiences for this report include: the City Council, City Administration (staff), Google, Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG), general public, transit agencies and other public agencies, non-profits, developers, and companies.

CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 5 Structure of the Report
The report includes the following chapters:
• Chapter 1: Introduction. This chapter provides an overview of the process and the report, followed by background information on the Diridon Station Area Plan, the potential Google development, and other applicable planning efforts.
• Chapter 2: Community Engagement Process. This chapter describes the civic engagement activities completed between February and September 2018 and the outreach methods used throughout the process. • Chapter 3: Key Themes. This chapter summarizes the key issues and opportunities discussed by the SAAG and the community, and details the Desired Outcomes for the Diridon Station Area and the potential Google project. It is organized by the major topics discussed during the project:
o Housing and Displacement
o Jobs, Education, and Economic Development
o Land Use, Design, and Parking
o Public Space, Creeks, and Trails
o Transportation and Transit
o Environmental Sustainability
• Chapter 4: Conclusion. This chapter provides a brief summary of the key themes and an overview of the next steps in the civic engagement process for the Diridon Station Area, including work efforts that will build upon input received to date.
• Appendix. The Appendix includes additional background information (Frequently Asked Questions), the full list of Potential Solutions (ideas for achieving the Desired Outcomes), an engagement activity log, meeting summaries, and notes and photos (where applicable) from each of the engagement activities.

6 Planning Context
The Diridon Station Area is outlined in Figure 1.1. It is a subdistrict of Downtown San José. The Downtown area is generally bounded by Taylor Street to the north, San José State University and City Hall to the east, Interstate 280 to the south, Figure 1.1: Location of the Diridon Station Area Plan Boundaries CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 7 and the railroad tracks to the west. State Route 87 runs in a north/south direction and generally divides the Diridon Station Area from the rest of Downtown. Los Gatos Creek flows into the Guadalupe River at the confluence of Santa Clara Street on the west side of State Route 87.

Downtown San José has long been the subject of City-led planning activities, transportation investments, and economic development initiatives over the past decades. When discussing the vision for the Diridon Station Area and how a Google development would fit in, it is critical to understand and build upon these past planning efforts. Indeed, countless hours by residents, businesses, advocacy organizations and City staff went into developing and implementing these plans.

The purpose of this section is to provide background context for the input received through the civic engagement process. This section includes a summary of the Diridon Station Area Plan, Envision San José 2040 General Plan, and Downtown Strategy, as these plans overlap to guide the future development of Downtown. It then describes the potential Google development, including an overview of the land sale and development process.

Diridon Station Area Plan (DSAP)
In 2014, the City Council adopted the Diridon Station Area Plan (DSAP) to transform the 240-acre area into a vibrant, transit-oriented destination for people to live, work, visit, and play. This high-level land use plan was created over five years, with extensive involvement from the 31-member Diridon Station Area Good Neighbor Committee.

The Diridon Station Area (according to the DSAP) is envisioned as a new urbanstyle mixed-use area with: improved parks, trails and public spaces; safe, convenient pedestrian and bike connectivity; a greater variety and level of transit service; and new housing, shops, and jobs. Once developed, the area would also help generate significant ongoing annual revenues that support the provision of city-wide public services including public safety, transportation improvements and other critical city services.

The DSAP divides the Diridon Station Area into three zones to define the longterm focus of land use development (see Figure 1.2). The northern zone was envisioned as a mid-intensity business district in an urban format. The southern zone is envisioned to have primarily residential and neighborhood-serving uses, with a mix of existing housing and new higher density infill development. The central zone, which includes the Diridon Station and the SAP Center, is envisioned to have a mix of high-intensity office and entertainment-oriented uses, as well as new public plaza adjacent to the station. The plans for a major league baseball

8 stadium in the central zone have since changed. The DSAP process included an Environmental Impact Report under the California Environmental Quality Act, which allowed for a significant increase in development, as shown in the Table

1.1. Table 1.1: New Development Capacity under the Diridon Station Area Plan Land Use Type Unit
Office 4,963,400 square feet
Residential 2,588 homes
Retail/Restaurants 424,100 square feet
Hotel 900 rooms
Figure 1.2: The three “Identity Zones”, from the Diridon Station Area Plan CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 9 General Plan
The Envision San José 2040 General Plan is the foundational planning document that will guide the development of the city over the next three decades. The City Council unanimously adopted the General Plan in 2011, after three years of extensive community input from more than 5,000 residents and more than 50 public meetings.

The General Plan calls for 360,000 new jobs and 120,000 new homes by 2040, and identifies how this new development would fit within the City’s neighborhoods, districts, and corridors. A critical goal of the General Plan is to create a vibrant Downtown, as community input emphasized a desire for an expanded and more prominent commercial, social, and cultural destination that properly represents a city of 1 million people. Accordingly, the General Plan originally allowed for 48,500 new jobs and 10,360 new housing units in Downtown.

The General Plan establishes about 70 Urban Villages as the primary targets for new residential growth, promoting infill housing and neighborhood-serving retail in accessible clusters spread throughout the city. The General Plan emphasizes job growth in Downtown (including the Diridon Area) and other employmentoriented Growth Areas to support goals for reducing car travel, congestion, and environmental impacts and for promoting economic opportunities for San José residents and long-term fiscal sustainability for the City. Since people are willing to travel farther distances from their home to stations than from stations to their workplaces, locating employment uses on lands closest to major transit hubs is most effective at supporting transit ridership. The Diridon area is the most strategic location to accommodate job growth because it has the City’s most significant transit station, which is planned to expand with additional intercity and interregional services in the coming decade (as described above).

Downtown Strategy
The City adopted the “Downtown Strategy” planning document in 2000 with the goal of transforming the city center into a more vibrant urban core with a wider mix of uses, higher density development, and transportation improvements. The City is updating the Strategy, primarily to increase the General Plan’s development capacity for the Downtown area. Specifically, the update will transfer 10,000 jobs (approximately 3 million square feet of commercial development) and 4,000 dwelling units from other growth areas to Downtown.

The Downtown Strategy update also includes amendments so that future development Downtown is consistent with planned regional transportation improvements, such as BART.

10 Potential Google Development
Early in 2017, Google expressed interest in building a master-planned, mixed-use, transit-oriented development in the Diridon Station Area, consistent with the overall vision of the DSAP. Based on preliminary discussions with Google, the master plan would include about 6-8 million square feet of office/R&D space and retail/commercial amenities on about 50 acres. This level of development would result in an estimated 20,000 jobs. The preliminary development concept is to integrate with the surrounding community through open-style urban design and active, high-quality public spaces. They also want to demonstrate innovation in workplace design and sustainability.

In pursuit of this vision, Google has acquired private parcels in and around the Diridon Station Area and would like to acquire about 20 acres from the City of San José to incorporate into their master planned development (see Table 1.2 and Figure 1.3). In June of 2017, the City and Google entered into an Exclusive Negotiations Agreement (ENA) for the potential sale of these lands, as a practical and timely way to implement key elements of the DSAP.

Table 1.2: Summary of Lands under Consideration for Sale to Google Size Existing Uses
City-owned
Land
2 sites (7 parcels)
totaling 13.4
acres
Surface parking lots for SAP Center and the San
José Fire Department Training Facility
SARA Land 5 sites (9 parcels)
totaling 6.5 acres
Surface parking lots for Caltrain users and SAP
patrons, Stephen’s Meat site, Patty’s Inn, and a
building currently used by San Jose Taiko
CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 11 Figure 1.3: Map of the City-owned and SARA sites

12 Some of the land under consideration for sale to Google was owned by the “Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency” (SARA) and was recently transferred to the City to sell for economic development purposes by the end of 2018, under the State’s plan for the dissolution of Redevelopment Agencies. The properties under consideration for sale to Google are mostly developed with parking lots, and there is no housing.

The ENA specified that in order to sell the land to Google, the City and Google must negotiate and agree to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and a Purchase and Sale Agreement (PSA). This will then be followed by a Development Agreement as the project specifics are developed.
• The MOU will outline a high-level statement of the vision and goals for the development, the approach to a Community Benefits Plan (to be included in a Development Agreement), and expectations related to the development process. The purpose of the MOU is to clarify the intended use of the land and to provide certainty for both the City and Google to advance to the next stage of the project.
• A PSA is a legally binding document that will set out the prices and terms for the land sales (real estate transactions).
• A Development Agreement is a legally binding contract between a City and a developer that is negotiated during a development review process.

The agreement sets the obligations of both parties and contracts the developer to provide benefits to the City, such as infrastructure improvements, public open space, or monetary payment into funds, in exchange for certainty about development standards and requirements that apply over the course of the development, from project entitlement through construction. The MOU can be considered a high-level preview of the Development Agreement.

Before construction could occur, Google must submit a proposal to the Planning Department and apply for land use entitlements. This initiates the formal development review process, which includes environmental impact analysis, any legislative actions such as rezoning or plan amendments, and Development Agreement negotiation. City Council will have ultimate approval of the project, with recommendations from the Planning Commission and other advisory bodies.

Following project approval, Google would begin applying for building permits. It is expected that the project would be constructed in several phases over at least 10 years.

CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 13 City Council is tentatively scheduled to consider the MOU and PSA on December 4, 2018. The development review process is anticipated to begin in 2019 and last at least two years. Civic engagement will continue throughout this period.

Additional information on the potential Google development and associated process can be found in the Frequently Asked Questions Document, which is located in the Appendix.

14 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT

BLANK FOR FORMATTING
2 Community
Engagement Process
Overview
The City conducted a civic engagement process between February and October of 2018 with multiple platforms to share information and gather input related to the future of the Diridon Station Area, including a potential Google development.

As described in the previous chapter, the primary goal of the civic engagement process was to provide a balanced, inclusive, and effective two-way dialogue with a broad range of representatives from the San Jose community. The City aimed to involve all interested community members and stakeholders by sharing information, offering meaningful opportunities to provide input, and informing participants about how their input will be shared and used. 16 Engagement Activities
Between February and October of 2018, the Diridon Station Area Civic Engagement process included over 50 community engagement activities, ranging from Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG) meetings and community forums to stakeholder presentations, pop-up workshops, and an online feedback form.

There were an estimated 1,200 in-person encounters with members of the public, and the website (www.diridonsj.org) had close to 6,000 unique visitors and nearly 22,000 page views.

The City hired Plan to Place (led by Dave Javid) and Raimi + Associates (led by Matt Raimi) as consultants to assist with the community engagement process.

City staff collected email addresses at each of the engagement events and through the project website, maintained an email list for the project, and sent occasional updates on the process, such as when new events were scheduled.

The following sections describe the objectives, meeting format, communication and documentation, and schedule of events for each type of activity. Please refer to the Appendix for the meeting summaries and raw notes from each of the meetings, as well as an event log that lists all activities in chronological order.

Figure 2-1: Overview of the Diridon Station Area Civic Engagement Activities CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 17 Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG)
The SAAG formed the core of the community engagement effort. The City Council appointed 38-member organizations to the SAAG in January 2018. The SAAG represents a range of stakeholder perspectives, including neighborhood associations, public agencies (including transportation, water, and education agencies), employers (including Google), and specific interest groups (including housing, labor, business, environment, regional planning, and transportation organizations). The SAAG met 10 times between February and October, with meetings held approximately one to two times per month.

Objectives
The City and its consultants shared background information and facilitated focused discussions with the SAAG to gather input on short-term and future decisions related to the Diridon Station Area, including the potential Google development. The SAAG was not a formal decision-making body and was not asked to vote or agree on recommendations at the end of the process. Rather, the SAAG’s role was to give input in the following ways:
• Clarify community interests, aspirations, and concerns; • Help identify desired outcomes and potential solutions; • Serve as sounding board for initial development and design concepts; • Help ensure that diverse perspectives are included in the engagement process; and
• Assist the broader community in understanding and engaging with the process.

City staff and the consultant team worked with the SAAG to determine the desired goals of the meetings and overall process, as well as the information needed to provide context for the discussions. The first set of meetings included background presentations and discussions aimed at identifying the aspirations and concerns related to the potential Google project and the future of the Diridon Station Area. For example, the City invited Google representatives to share their high-level vision for the area. The SAAG also discussed how the civic engagement process would help inform future planning in the area. The initial questions asked of the group generally included:
18 Community Aspirations and Preferences
• What would you like to see in the Google development itself? In the broader Diridon Station Area?
• What other community benefits would you like the Google project to consider?
• What are the top priorities?
Potential Approaches to the Challenges that Come with Development • What are the key challenges or issues that will need to be addressed as the Diridon Station Area develops?
• What are potential models, solutions, or options that should be considered?
SAAG members were given the opportunity to present their ideas or vision to the group and what they believed was their constituents’ highest priority for the future of the area. The 5 minute presentations were characterized as mini “TED Talks”, and covered a range of topics related to housing, jobs, education, transportation and open space. (The video recording of the presentations is available on the SAAG page of the project website: www.diridonsj.org).

Subsequent meetings were designed to delve deeper into the major topics that were identified by the SAAG and explored through the Solution Group Meetings (described in the next section). City staff, the consultant team and SAAG members that participated in various Solution Groups, reported the overall themes and list of Desired Outcomes and Potential Solutions back to the larger group for each topic. Staff then compiled, refined, and organized the Desired Outcomes into subtopics and facilitated a group discussion to gauge overall level of agreement with these statements (see Chapter 3 for the list of Desired Outcomes and other Key Themes).

At the October 10th meeting, the SAAG provided feedback on the Draft Civic Engagement Report. SAAG members and the public were invited to submit comments in writing as well; staff received six emails/letters from SAAG members and four comment letters from the public (included in the Appendix).

Throughout the process, the SAAG was encouraged to draw upon its own outreach to represent their respective community interests. For example, prior to the City’s civic engagement process, Silicon Valley Rising conducted a nearly 1,000-person survey of San José residents and a series of townhalls attended by over 700 residents, and summarized the findings in a report called “Envisioning Community: Our community’s expectations for the San Jose Google megacampus.” Silicon Valley Rising and its coalition members channeled this feedback into the SAAG process.

CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 19 Typical Meeting Format
All meetings were held in the Committee Wing Rooms of City Hall (118-120). The format of the meetings typically included a short presentation by the City and consultant team with updates related to ongoing engagement activities and planning efforts in the Diridon Station Area (e.g., status update on transit projects and development activity in the pipeline). The majority of the meetings were reserved for discussion with the SAAG about key topics. Every meeting also included an opportunity for public comment for those in attendance (typically two minutes per speaker at the end of the meeting).

Communication and Documentation
In compliance with the City’s Sunshine Ordinance and Brown Act, staff posted meeting agendas to the project websites at least one week in advance of each SAAG meeting. Meeting agendas were also emailed to SAAG members prior to each meeting. For most meetings, staff sent a pre-meeting email with a detailed agenda and relevant information to help prepare for the discussions. Most of these resources were posted on the project website under “Background”.

The consultant team and City staff summarized all of the input from the SAAG and public in meeting notes that were posted to the project websites and distributed back out to the SAAG. Each meeting was videotaped, with the recordings and PowerPoint presentations posted to the project website.

Meeting Schedule
The following is the list of the 10 SAAG meetings held between February and October 2018, along with the main agenda items for each meeting.

SAAG Orientation Meeting - February 28, 2018
• Provided an orientation on the overall engagement process to the SAAG members
• Discussed SAAG roles, responsibilities, and schedule
• Through an interactive exercise, provided an opportunity for the SAAG members to meet their colleagues and build relationships SAAG Meeting #1 - March 21, 2018
• Reviewed existing conditions in the Diridon Station Area and past planning efforts (e.g., Diridon Station Area Plan)
• Discussed the specific roles and responsibilities of the SAAG • Reviewed the draft meeting topics, and follow up on the list of background information/data desired
• Discussed the overall community engagement process
20 SAAG Meeting #2 - April 9, 2018
• Provided an understanding of the Brown Act and City’s Sunshine Ordinance • Google representatives provided an overview of Google’s high-level design principles and inspiration
• Reviewed the existing conditions data
• Discussed the overall objectives and intent of the Solution Groups SAAG Meeting #3 - April 30, 2018
• Provided an update on transportation improvements planned at Diridon Station
• Heard from SAAG members about what inspires them and their ideas for the Diridon Station Area through “TED” Talks
• Finalized the timing of and assignments to the Solution Groups • Shared an update on all planned engagement activities SAAG Meeting #4 - May 23, 2018
• Received a presentation from Google representatives on their early design thinking for the Diridon Station Area
• Heard from SAAG Members about what inspires them and their ideas for the Diridon Station Area
• Shared an update on all planned engagement activities SAAG Meeting #5 - June 27, 2018
• Heard from SAAG Members about what inspires them and their ideas for the Diridon Station Area through additional “TED” Talks
• Discussed preliminary results from the Housing Solution Group SAAG Meeting #6 - July 9, 2018
• Completed the “TED” Talks
• Received report-backs from the Land Use, Public Space, and Transportation Solution Groups
SAAG Meeting #7 - August 13, 2018
• Received an update on transit projects
• Received report-backs from the Jobs and Housing Solution Groups • Reviewed the outline for the Civic Engagement Comprehensive Report SAAG Meeting #8 - August 29, 2018
• Received an update on current development in the Diridon Station Area and the Downtown Design Guidelines
• Clarified the group’s top Desired Outcomes and Potential Solutions SAAG Meeting #9 – October 10, 2018
• Reviewed the Draft Civic Engagement Comprehensive Report and provided feedback, including report-backs from small group discussions CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 21 • Received an update on the One Engine Inoperative study (analyzing potential changes to airspace protections on downtown development capacity) • Reflected on the SAAG experience
Solution Groups
The Solution Groups were subcommittees comprised of SAAG members to have focused discussions around the key topic areas:
• Housing, Displacement, and Gentrification;
• Jobs, Education, and Economic Development;
• Transportation, Access and Traffic;
• Parks, Public Space, Sustainability and Neighborhood Quality of Life; and • Land Use and Design.

Every SAAG member was encouraged to volunteer for one to two groups, and a majority of the SAAG was involved with at least one group (see the Appendix for the SAAG members that attended each of the Solution Group meetings and for the meeting facilitators assigned to each group).

Objectives
The purpose or objectives of the Solution Groups was defined as the following:
• Explore issues and opportunities, and develop desired outcomes and potential approaches to present to the SAAG; and
• Develop a list of potential solutions for each topic that could be considered in the MOU and (later) Development Agreement discussions with Google.

Each group was asked to confirm the overall themes for each topic area, then discuss the related background information, refine the topics, and prepare a list of Desired Outcomes in the first meeting. In the second meeting, the group identified potential solutions, or ideas or models that can be explored to help achieve the desired outcomes. The Housing group met three times to provide enough time to cover that topic area, given the local and citywide implications.

Staff reported the results of their discussions back to the SAAG. The purpose of the “report-backs” was to enhance a shared understanding of the key issues, desired outcomes, and potential solutions, and discuss the overlap between topic areas. SAAG members were asked to uncover the commonalities and possible tension points that needed further exploration.

Typical Meeting Format
The Solution Group meetings were held in multiple rooms around City Hall depending on availability, but primarily in the Committee Wing Rooms or the City 22 Manager’s conference room. The meetings were facilitated by City staff and consultants, and members were asked to identify data or information needs that could help support the process. Every meeting was open to the public and included times for public comment.

Communication and Documentation
In compliance with the City’s Sunshine Ordinance and Brown Act, staff posted the meeting agendas to the project websites at least three days in advance. Meeting agendas and relevant meeting material were also emailed to SAAG members prior to each meeting. The consultant team and staff summarized all of the input from the Solution Groups in meeting notes that were posted to the project websites and distributed to the SAAG.

Meeting Schedule
There were eleven total Solution Group meetings held between May and July of 2018. Each of the five Solution Groups met twice, except for the Housing group which met three times to provide enough time for that group and public in attendance to discuss this important topic. The following are the dates the Solution Groups met.
• Land Use and Urban Design Meeting #1 - May 15, 2018
• Public Spaces, Parks, Open Spaces and Neighborhoods Meeting #1 - May 16, 2018
• Housing, Displacement and Gentrification Meeting #1 - May 17, 2018 • Transportation and Access Meeting #1 - May 22, 2018
• Jobs, Education and Economic Development Meeting #1 - May 24, 2018 • Public Spaces, Parks, Open Spaces and Neighborhoods Meeting #2 - June 4, 2018
• Transportation and Access Meeting #2 - June 6, 2018
• Land Use and Urban Design Meeting #2 - June 7, 2018
• Housing, Displacement and Gentrification Meeting #2 – June 11, 2018 • Jobs, Education and Economic Development Meeting #2 - June 25, 2018 • Housing, Displacement and Gentrification Meeting #3 - July 10, 2018 Summaries of the Solution Group meetings can be found
in the Appendix
CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 23 Community Forums and Community Meetings
The City of San Jose hosted multiple communitywide events in neighborhoods throughout the City. This included four Community Forums in late June and three Community Meetings in September. Each event included a presentation to share information, followed by small group discussions to gather input.

Objectives
As advertised in the event notices, meeting participants were invited to:
• Learn about the Diridon Station Area, including planned transit improvements and a potential Google development;
• Share their feedback; and
• Ask questions.

The presentations at both the Community Forums and Community Meetings allowed City staff to share relevant background information about the Diridon Station Area planning efforts, the potential Google project, and the community engagement process. The purpose was to increase understanding and awareness and to provide context for the small group discussions.

The focused discussions with meeting participants at the Community Forums sought to identify the range of initial hopes, concerns, and ideas for the Diridon Station Area and a potential Google project, as well as write down questions and provide answers when possible. In the small group discussions, facilitators asked participants to complete the following sentences to prompt input:
• “My vision for the Diridon Station Area is…”
• “Google coming to San Jose could be good for me if…”
• “What I fear most about this possible development is…” • “One potential solution that I’d like considered is…” • “One remaining question I have is…”
The main purpose of the Community Meetings in September was to report back and gather feedback on the preliminary Desired Outcomes. These vision statements were divided into subtopics aligning with the Solution Groups and derived mainly from SAAG discussions, but also based on input received through other engagement activities (see Chapter 4 for additional detail on the Desired Outcomes). In the small group discussions, participants could focus on specific topics or provide feedback on all topics. The discussion prompts included:
• Which of these Desired Outcomes are most important to you? • Are there any you disagree with? If so, why?
• Is there something missing from this list?
24 Typical Meeting Format
The community forums and meetings included a short background presentation by City staff to share information on the Diridon Station Area and community engagement process. City staff and consultants then facilitated small group discussions to gather input. Staff wrote down the verbal comments from participants onto flipcharts.

The forum held at Mayfair Community Center on June 23 was presented in Spanish by fluent Spanish speakers, and two of the four small groups were facilitated in Spanish. Every other Community Forum and Meeting offered simultaneous interpretation of the presentation in both Spanish and Vietnamese.

Mandarin interpretation and American Sign Language were also offered at each of the Forums, although only one person requested Mandarin interpretation at one of the Forums. Of the five groups at the Gardner Community Meeting, one involved Spanish facilitation and interpretation. Two of the three small groups at the Vietnamese-American Community Center were facilitated in Vietnamese. One of the two small groups at the Mexican Heritage Plaza meeting was facilitated in Spanish.

Each forum and meeting offered light refreshments and supervised activities for children to encourage and support broad attendance at the events.

Communication and Documentation
City staff and the consultant team prepared digital postcards for the forums and meetings, which were emailed to the SAAG, other community leaders such as City Council, and the project email list. The City posted the meeting notices through its social media outlets and through digital ad boosts on Facebook. Staff also advertised these events at the SAAG meetings, and asked SAAG members to help advertise the events through their communication channels. Each forum and meeting description and agenda were also posted to the project website at least one week in advance of the first Community Forum and Meeting of each round.

Most of the noticing materials was available in Spanish and Vietnamese, in addition to English. This included the social media posts. The digital postcard was translated into Spanish for the Community Forums and into both Spanish and Vietnamese for the Community Meetings.

During the small group discussions, staff took notes on flipcharts. Following the Community Forums and Community Meetings, City staff and the consultant team took photos of all flipchart notes, transcribed the notes (and translated them into English if necessary), compiled and analyzed the feedback, and prepared a CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 25 summary. Photos of the notes and a transcription of comments from the Community Forums and from the Community Meetings are included in the Appendix of this report. The powerpoint presentations used at these events were posted to the project website, including the Spanish and Vietnamese versions handed out at the Community Meetings.

Event Schedule
The following is a complete list of the Community Forums and Meetings. • Community Forum #1 - Leininger Center at Kelley Park - June 20, 2018 • Community Forum #2 - Southside Community Center - June 21, 2018 • Community Forum #3 - Mayfair Community Center (presented in Spanish) - June 23, 2018
• Community Forum #4 - Bascom Community Center - June 26, 2018 • Community Meeting #1 - Gardner Community Center - September 10, 2018
• Community Meeting #2- Vietnamese-American Community Center - September 11, 2018
• Community Meeting #3 - Mexican Heritage Plaza - September 25, 2018 Pop-Up Workshops
“Pop-up workshops” (or tables with information about the project) were held at six planned community events throughout the City from June through September of 2018. The pop-up workshops provided an opportunity to share information and gather additional input using similar discussion prompts used at the Community Forums and Meetings.

Objectives
Pop-up workshops offered a method for informing and engaging the community in an informal manner and using an interactive activity to gather feedback. The specific objectives of the Pop-up workshops were to:
• Reach a broad cross-section of the community;
• Educate the public about the civic engagement effort; • Gather input on hopes, concerns, and ideas for the Diridon Station Area (the first two workshops); and
• Get feedback on preliminary Desired Outcomes and Potential Solutions (the last four workshops).
26 Typical Format
The Pop-up Workshops involved setting up a table and several boards, including one with background information and 1-2 for collecting input. At the first two pop-up workshops, participants were asked to write their response to the following questions on sticky notes and place them on the boards:
• What would a successful Diridon Station Area look like? • What major issues should be addressed as the area develops? • What ideas or solutions should be considered?
For the second set of pop-up workshops (the last four workshops), the boards listed the emerging Desired Outcomes and top Potential Solutions. Participants were asked to place a dot next to 3 strategies for each of the five topic areas (aligning with the Solution Groups) to reflect their priorities. These prompts for input were generally consistent with those asked at the Community Forums and Community Meetings.

Communication and Documentation
City staff emailed the project email list, and encouraged SAAG members to help advertise the pop-up workshops through their communication channels. The pop-up workshops were also advertised at the SAAG meetings. Each workshop description was also posted to the project website in advance of each workshop.

Following the Pop-up workshops, City staff and the consultant team took photos of the boards and compiled the feedback into a summary, which is included in the Appendix to this report.

Schedule of Events
• SPUR San Jose Annual Member Event - June 6, 2018
• Dancin’ on the Avenue (Willow Glen) - June 16, 2018
• National Night Out - August 7, 2018
• District 2 Village Fest - August 18, 2018
• Stroll on the Alameda - August 26, 2018
• Viva Calle - September 23, 2018
Stakeholder Meetings
City staff were invited to present at five stakeholder meetings with various groups between July and September 2018.

Objectives
The main objectives of the stakeholder meetings were to:

CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 27 • Describe the overall project objective and process and share background information;
• Provide a platform for stakeholders to share their input during times and locations that are convenient for them (e.g., existing regularly planned meetings); and
• Discuss issues and opportunities with community members.

Typical Meeting Format
Stakeholder meetings generally consisted of a presentation, followed by questions/answers and comments by meeting participants.

Communication and Documentation
City staff coordinated the planning and logistics of the stakeholder meetings with members of the SAAG. Meeting participants provided feedback on the issues, opportunities, and desired outcomes for the Diridon Station Area. Staff only took notes at the Downtown Residents meeting. This feedback is documented in this report.

Schedule of Events
The following is a list of the stakeholder meetings that City staff attended. • Silicon Valley Organization (SVO)/Chamber - July 27, 2018 • Downtown Residents Association - August 2, 2018
• Willow Glen Neighborhood Association - September 13, 2018 • San Jose Downtown Association - September 14, 2018
• Construction Financial Management Association - September 19, 2018
Online Feedback Form
An online/mobile Feedback Form was also used to gather community input. The Feedback Form mirrored in-person activities held in September to gather input at a key interval in the engagement process, as staff worked toward confirming and refining the Desired Outcomes by topic. The online platform using Survey Monkey was launched on September 14, 2018 and was accessible through September 30, 2018.

Objectives
The objective of the online form was to get feedback on the preliminary Desired Outcomes for the Diridon Station Area, based initial community input. The information was identical to what was shared at the Community Meetings, providing an alternate format to gather input for those that could not attend the 28 meetings in person or a supplemental format for meeting attendees to provide more detailed feedback. The Desired Outcomes were organized by the following subtopic: Housing and Displacement, Jobs and Education, Land Use, Public Space, Creeks and Trails, Transportation, Parking, and Design. Participants were free to provide input on any or all topics, including write-in comments for each subtopic, and could provide other general ideas and comments at the end of the form.

Communication and Documentation
The Online Feedback Form was advertised at the SAAG meetings and Community Meetings, and through the City’s social media channels. Staff also emailed the project email list and encouraged SAAG members and other community leaders to help advertise the Online Feedback Form through their communication channels.

Survey Monkey generated a results document, which is included in the Appendix.

A total of 716 forms were submitted, although the number of responses declined as questions progressed, with about 500 completing the full form. Here is a summary of the responses to the demographic questions asked at the end of the form:
• Of the 500 respondents that provided their emails, nearly half reported to live in the four of the five zip codes closest to the station: 95125, 95112, 95126, and 95110. Five responses (1%) were from 95113, which includes the core area of Downtown, mainly developed with commercial and public uses.
• The vast majority of respondents live in San Jose (93% of 491 responses). • Of those who answered the question, 63% reported that they had not participated in any Diridon Station Area civic engagement effort his year.

The remainder participated in a variety of activities including attending SAAG meetings, pop-ups and stakeholder meetings.
• A slight majority of respondents are male (54% of 471), with 44% female and 2% gender neutral.
• There was a diverse age distribution based on the 469 responses to this question, although youth and young adults under the age of 25 were vastly under-represented relative to the population.
o Under 18 years old: 0.2%
o 18 to 24 years old: 2%
o 25 to 34 years old: 18%
o 35 to 44 years old: 28%
o 45 to 54 years old: 28%
o 55 to 64 years old: 17%
o 55+ years old: 6%
CITY OF SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION AREA CIVIC ENGAGEMENT REPORT | 29 • The majority of respondents were homeowners (78% of 477) and white/Caucasian (66% of 455). These numbers are disproportionately high relative to San José, which is about 27% white/Caucasian and has about 56% owner-occupied units.1
There were 1,092 unique write-in comments to the open-ended questions. Staff coded these comments according to the key themes, to provide an additional data point for characterizing the range of perspectives. Key findings of this analysis are included in Chapter 3.

Walking Tours
City staff led two walking tours of the Diridon Station Area on Saturday, May 19th and Wednesday, May 30th of 2018. Members of the public were invited to gain a better understanding of the context of the area and explore opportunities. The walking tour route was as follows:

1. Diridon Historic Station

2. Dancing Pig and AT&T

3. Fire Training Center

4. Santa Clara Housing Authority

5. Private residential development

6. Sprouts and Orchard Supply

7. Private residential development

8. Patty’s Inn/Taiko

9. Lot D and Los Gatos Creek

10. SAP Center

11. Northern Industrial sites

12. Autumn Parkway extension

13. Guadalupe River Park

14. Trammel Crow Office/Residential
Project Website
A project website (www.diridonsj.org) was set up in April 2018 and accessible throughout the engagement process. It was used as the main online portal to communicate upcoming events and post meeting materials (e.g., agendas, presentations, meeting minutes, summary notes). The website was also used to share background information and resources, including a Frequently Asked 1 San José Demographics Fact Sheet, available at:
https://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/780 .
30 Questions (FAQ) document. As noted above, the site was viewed by about 6,000 unique visitors and had nearly 22,000 page views through October 2018.

In addition, the City maintained a webpage for the Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG) to post meeting agendas, minutes, and recordings to comply with the Sunshine Ordinance and Brown Act:
http://www.sanjoseca.gov/index.aspx?NID=6000.

Objectives
The key objectives of the project website were to house information organized as follows:
• HOME page. The Home page includes a brief description of the engagement process and the information included on the website, a snapshot of Upcoming Events with links to individual pages for each event, and Project Updates, with links to summary information from past events and other available resources.
• ABOUT page. The About page provides a more detail description of the Diridon Station Area, and background information about the Potential Google Project, such as Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ), and the anticipated steps in the negotiation and development process. • SAAG page. This page includes the SAAG roster and links to each of the individual SAAG and Solution Group meeting pages, where agendas, summaries, images, and video recording links are posted. • ENGAGEMENT page. This page on the website houses a link to all of the engagement activities that were held and planned, as well as a conceptual timeline of the events from the beginning of the process in February 2018.
• BACKGROUND page. Resources related to the Diridon Station Area that were provided to the SAAG are housed on this page and organized by major topic (e.g., Land Use, Public Space, Housing, Transportation, and Jobs).
• CONTACT page. This page on the website includes contact information for both City staff and the consultant team for additional questions or comments, and a portal to provide an email address to be added to the email list for updates on events.
3 This chapter summarizes the key themes from the engagement process. The key themes are based on input from the Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG) and analysis of the frequently made comments through the other public engagement methods.

This chapter begins with an overview of the top Issues and Opportunities raised by participants most frequently. This includes topics for consideration, existing problems, concerns about the future, and opportunities created by a master planned Google development in the Diridon Station Area.

The next section lists the top Desired Outcomes. Desired Outcomes are high-level statements of the desired end state and generally include the hopes, aspirations, visions and goals expressed by community members. The Desired Outcomes are organized by topic: Housing and Displacement, Jobs, Education, and Economic Development; Land Use and Design; Public Space (including Creeks and Trails), and Transportation (including Transit and Parking). The full range of Desired Outcomes are presented with an indication of where there is general agreement and where there is not.

The next chapter lists the Potential Solutions, or ideas for how to achieve the Desired Outcomes provided by community members. These include actions, mechanisms, policies, programs, projects, or partnerships. Some are highly specific, others are general. The full range of suggestions raised by community members are presented without analysis. See the Appendix for a complete collection of comments received, organized by engagement method.

These categories of input (Issues, Desired Outcomes, and Potential Solutions) align with the questions asked throughout the process. The initial phase of outreach asked the SAAG and general public about their hopes for a Google project, vision for the Diridon Station Area, concerns/fears about the potential development, and ideas for how to address the challenges and take advantage of opportunities.

This community dialogue generated a wide range of input—from high level to detailed, from focused on the station area or surrounding neighborhoods to having a citywide or even regional implications, and from urgent to far in the future. While some input was intended to be specific to the relationship with Google, many of the comments could apply to other developers and companies located in the Diridon Station Area. These distinctions were made where applicable. Chapter 4 describes how the community input may apply to future implementation and planning efforts that go beyond the Google project and Diridon Station Area.

The following sections summarize these top 10 issues and opportunities:

1. Housing and Displacement

2. Revitalization of Downtown and the Diridon Station Area

3. Job Opportunities and Social Equity

4. Expectations of Google and Others

5. Community Benefits

6. Growth Impacts and Public Services

7. High Speed Rail Impacts

8. Safety and Homelessness

9. Environmental Sustainability

10. Effects on San Jose’s identity
Housing and Displacement
Housing and displacement was the dominant topic of SAAG discussions and of public comments. The SAAG talked extensively about the housing crisis currently facing San José and the region, as well as concerns about escalated housing costs for the future if Google were to locate a major office development in the Diridon Station Area. They also pointed out opportunities presented by a Google development to add housing, support affordable housing, and reduce displacement. Here is a summary of the key issues raised during these discussions:

• There is a significant lack of affordable housing relative to the high demand created by the booming economy. Lower-income service workers are particularly affected, but moderate-income professionals are also struggling to afford housing. In response, more and more households are either living in overcrowded conditions, falling into homelessness, or leaving the city. Cities in the region have failed to support housing growth commensurate with the demand driven by tech industry job growth.

Resources and policies dedicated to providing affordable housing and preventing displacement have been insufficient. While the City has some programs and policies to help with the affordable housing crisis, many SAAG members called for more and stronger tools.
• It is assumed that new office development by Google would generate both high-paying tech jobs and lower-paying service jobs. New tech workers would drive up housing prices even more, while service workers may not get paid enough to afford housing in San José. This will worsen the housing shortage and affect neighborhoods citywide, including the east side. Increased housing costs would force people to work more and/or move farther away – leading to longer commutes, adverse environmental impacts, and lower quality of life. The number of people experiencing homelessness could increase.
• There could be widespread redevelopment and property turnover in the Diridon Station Area and adjacent neighborhoods, leading to direct and indirect displacement of existing residents. Lower-income residents are more likely to be people of color, so their displacement could make San José less diverse over time. In addition, redevelopment of older buildings and historic resources within and surrounding the Diridon Station Area could result in the loss of existing character and heritage. • This project presents opportunities to generate affordable housing within the Diridon Station Area and throughout the City if Google commits to providing funds through an impact fee. As a master developer, they may be able to deliver on more housing and amenities compared to a collection of smaller developers and more than required by the current DSAP. Implementation of the Diridon Station Area Plan would increase housing opportunities near a major transit hub, which supports strategies for accommodating housing demand.

Through the public engagement methods, many people provided personal accounts of the housing crisis: long commutes, financial strain, loss of neighbors to displacement, anxiety from the threat of losing their own home, seeing or experiencing homelessness, etc. There is an overall concern about the ability to afford housing and fear of being pushed out of San José, particularly from neighborhoods close to future public transit. People often referred to the home price increases and displacement of residents in Mountain View. There were consistent calls for the engagement process to focus more on housing issues and for there to be a city plan to address housing demand, displacement, and homelessness. There is a strong sense of urgency and desire to do more now to mitigate displacement pressures.

Revitalization of Downtown and the Diridon
Station Area
When asked about hopes at the initial SAAG meetings, much of the input reflected the desire to think big and do something bold—to design a distinctive, world-class development and to make Diridon a model for sustainable, equitable, and resilient development. Several SAAG members emphasized the potential for supporting local businesses, catalyzing downtown development, and strengthening Downtown as a desirable place to live and a vibrant, dynamic cultural hub.

The SAAG generally sees a master development by Google as a major opportunity to implement the Diridon Station Area Plan and help achieve its vision for transforming the area into a mixed use, walkable neighborhood— integrated into Downtown and sensitive to adjacent residential uses. The Desired Outcomes for Public Space, Transportation, Creeks/Trails, Land Use, and Design are generally consistent with the adopted Diridon Station Area Plan, as described in the following section.

The opportunity for revitalization could resolve existing issues with “dead zones” (i.e., areas of inactivity that feel unsafe and unwelcoming). The project is an opportunity to activate the neighborhood through redevelopment and new amenities as well as programming such as art, events, and temporary features in the short-term. Also related to place-making are the opportunities for preserving historic resources and culturally significant features, for capitalizing on Los Gatos Creek as a focal point for community gathering and amenities, and for designing new development with environmental stewardship in mind.

Several SAAG members representing neighborhood groups thanked Google for reaching out and listening, and look forward to working with them to make the potential development a reality.

Job Opportunities and Social Equity
Throughout the process multiple SAAG members emphasized the potential for the development to generate a significant amount of local jobs, support local small businesses, and catalyze economic opportunities beyond just the Diridon Station Area.

With respect to Jobs, the SAAG expressed an overall concern about the social equity effects of Google coming to San Jose, including concerns about new service jobs not paying enough for workers to afford living in San José, impacts on citywide housing prices and subsequent displacement of lower income households, and the potential for the benefits to bypass long-time residents.

Currently, many residents, particularly on the east side, are “job patching” - or needing to piece together income from a variety of jobs and business ventures.

There are also concerns about the quality and mobility opportunities of subcontracted jobs, as contracting out certain work is a common business practice among Google and other tech companies. Some community members also expressed concerns about racial inclusion at Google, which has low shares of Latino employees relative to San José’s population.

The SAAG discussed the links between jobs and housing and recognized the need to provide more affordable housing—allowing lower-wage workers to live near their place of employment and reducing displacement pressures so that existing residents could stay and benefit from the investments and opportunities presented by a Google development in the Diridon Station Area.

During the public engagement process, community members frequently expressed concern over the well-being of lower-income people and vulnerable populations. Some talked about growing inequity and the increasing resentment between the “haves” and “have nots”. There were also concerns about equitable funding for public schools and school closures due to declining enrollment caused by displacement of low-income families.

These concerns for social equity reflect an overarching goal to create a San José that is better for all people.

Community Benefits
The term “community benefits” was raised consistently throughout the process, mainly in the context of affordable housing, job training, educational programs, transportation improvements, and/or public space. There is general agreement that Google should provide some benefits to San José beyond the project itself and that agreements with Google should set forth a plan for this contribution.

There is desire to begin work on citywide issues now and not wait until Google buildings are built and occupied.
(Note: The City Council’s intent is for a Community Benefits Plan to be a part of the Development Agreement, which would be negotiated by the City and Google during the development review process and be subject to City Council approval.

Community engagement will continue throughout the development review process. Refer to Chapter 4 and the FAQ’s in the Appendix for additional information).

Several members of the SAAG view the land sale as having significant leverage to negotiate community benefits with Google and would prefer to have Google commit to clear requirements as part of—or before—the land sale. They have advocated for a Community Benefit Agreement (CBA) as the specific tool for ensuring the Google project results in citywide benefits and mitigates impacts.1 They state this is needed due to the lack of applicable City policies, such as a commercial linkage fee that would generate funds for affordable housing and anti-displacement efforts. They want the CBA to require Google to contribute to an affordable housing fund and commit to other benefits. They suggest that the value of these benefits should take into account the value of the Google development with the transit improvements in place, any requested up-zonings, and other policy decisions that add value (“value capture”). They also suggest that a committee of community, labor, and faith leaders should lead the negotiation of the CBA and oversee its implementation and enforcement.

Proponents of this approach suggest that a CBA would provide strong enforceability (because they can be legally binding and enforceable by the community signatories) and increase community support.

Other mechanisms for generating community benefits raised at SAAG meetings include Commercial Linkage Fees, Tax Increment Financing, special assessments, and dedicating revenues from the sale of land.

Expectations of Google and Others
The SAAG discussed whether Google should be treated similarly to other employers, versus having different expectations of Google as a large organization

with a large development proposal. In general, the SAAG wants the City and Google to think big and the community should ask for what they want. They want Google to be a partner in addressing existing issues, mitigating impacts, and maximizing benefits to San José. The arguments for treating Google differently than a typical development include: the public’s role in this project (i.e., major transit investments and the sale of public land for a portion of the master plan), anticipated City Council legislative decisions (i.e., plan amendments and rezoning to increase development capacity); the large scale of the project; research on the impacts of tech-driven growth on working families; the different economics for Google as a user-developer compared to traditional real estate developers; and Google’s willingness to offer community benefits to Mountain View.

Several SAAG members, however, questioned the ability, desirability, and fairness of the City to request or demand different requirements or extra fees from Google, noting that it does not seem like the City would do this for other developers, land owners, or companies that are planning to locate in San Jose.

They questioned the implications of treating Google in this manner. While some suggested that the Desired Outcomes should set a standard for all businesses looking to locate in San José, there is also concern about unintended consequences of requirements on small, local businesses.

There was much discussion among the SAAG and public about the role of Google in addressing the housing crisis. Many recognize the housing crisis as a regional/statewide issue, and believe that Google cannot be expected to solve it.

While there is strong desire to set the bar high for Google and the City with respect to mitigating displacement, this sentiment is balanced with a desire to set attainable goals. Some community members want to make sure that the City balances housing needs with job growth goals, and does not push “too much” such that San José misses out on the net benefits of a Google project or worse, has to deal with the negative effects of Google locating somewhere else without the positive fiscal impacts of the local jobs. A suggestion is to focus on the delta of how Google project could amplify existing challenges, and avoid the expectation that they will solve every existing problem. On the other hand, some community members do not want Google to assert “too much” influence over the City and for the City to give up “too much” to Google. They do not want to end up with weak or unenforceable agreements. They want accountability—for Google and the City to fulfill their commitments. They call for transparency in this decision-making process to ensure that decisions are made in the public interest.

The Potential Solutions offered by community members with these concerns often echoed the suggestions from some SAAG members on Community Benefit Agreements and related mechanisms.

There was recognition that, in the past decades, San Jose has at times needed to incentivize or subsidize development to come to San José, and questions about whether the City will give subsidies to Google or other developers. (Note: the City Council has directed no subsidy of Google and Google has not asked for subsidies.) There were also some concerns about selling public land to Google.

Some community members want the City to lease the land or otherwise keep it for public use over the long-term. Some say that given the housing crisis, the best use of the land is for affordable housing. As a philosophy, some feel that publicly-owned land should not be sold for private development. (Refer to the FAQ’s in the Appendix for additional information on the negotiation process).

Growth Impacts and Public Services
The SAAG discussions and public comments typically recognized the benefits and rationale of high density development in the Diridon Station Area as part of a transit-oriented growth strategy. Some see the specific benefits of concentrating office space next to Diridon Station, noting the opportunity for people to commute by transit from all over the greater Bay Area, and support improving transit service to strengthen the links to affordable housing in other areas.

However, some community members reacted to the prospect of a major master planned development by Google with strong concerns about job and population growth in San Jose in general. Community members with this reaction often coreferenced traffic congestion, parking shortages, the loss of open space, and general sense of over-crowding as concerns. Some expressed concern about housing prices going up too much, but do not want more housing construction in San Jose. There were multiple comments that recognize the possibility for growth impacts but still support investment in the Diridon area.

Many community members discussed public services, including fire, police, roads, libraries, community centers, public open space, and schools. There are concerns about the potential impact of new development on these services. There are also concerns about the quality of existing services throughout San José and the recognition that new commercial development can increase revenues for the City to improve services.

High Speed Rail Impacts
Another consistent theme is related to the construction of High Speed Rail tracks and increase in train service through residential neighborhoods. Neighborhood representatives consistently raised concerns about the potential loss of homes, businesses, and public open space. Several members of the public reinforced concerns about high speed rail impacts, such as increased noise.

Safety and Homelessness
An underlying theme of many of Issues and Desired Outcomes discussed is safety. It was often raised in the context of the transportation network, homelessness, accessibility, and/or the use of public spaces. For example, there is concern about the safety of roadways for pedestrians, especially at major intersections and in construction zones. Some people explained that using Diridon Station felt unsafe at certain times of the day and called for more security. Similarly, many community members said they avoid the creek-side parks and trails because they are often occupied by homeless people.

There was a general desire to humanely address homelessness, in part to make creek trails and public spaces feel more welcoming to families, in addition to the concerns summarized under Housing above. As described under Revitalization, development of the Diridon Station Area, including redevelopment of parking lots and vacant industrial properties, is seen as an opportunity to increase use of public spaces and improve the security of the area.

Environmental Sustainability
One of the strongest reactions to the Draft Report was the lack of focus on environmental sustainability, including green building, eco-district planning, habitat enhancement, and integration of nature into development. While this was not a major topic of early conversations, there was an emerging desire by the SAAG and public to ensure that the Google project and the Diridon Station area incorporate cutting-edge sustainable design. Residents see an opportunity for new development to increase people’s connection to nature and the creeks.

In addition, many of the comments received throughout the process are related to desires for improved connectivity, walkability, and transit services —leading to reductions in auto-oriented trips, less pollution, and mitigation of related growth impacts. Overall, the comments addressed the desire to be good stewards of natural resources and to plan for resiliency.

In response to this substantial public comment and SAAG feedback, a new topic was added to the Desired Outcome list in the following section.

San Jose’s Identity
At the heart of many of the SAAG discussions and public comments is the effect of new growth and development on San Jose’s collective identity. Currently, many community members take pride in San Jose’s ethnic diversity and unique quality of life. Some cite its history as a welcoming place for new immigrants and the working class to live and organize. There are concerns about the negative impact that a major development by Google could have on the community fabric and sense of place – mainly due to displacement from San Jose due to rising housing costs but also with respect to the tech company’s relationship to the Diridon Station Area and city in general.

Many community members conveyed desires for Google to be integrated into the neighborhood (not isolated); for development to reflect an understanding and respect for San Jose’s history; for the area to convey a sense of welcoming and belonging for all through its small businesses, art, events, and design; and for the decision-making process related to the Google project to involve impacted communities. Ultimately, the project should help preserve – and not undermine – San Jose’s cultural diversity.

For some community members, the fear of widespread displacement leads them to oppose to the sale of City-owned lands to Google and to the potential Google project in general. An organized group of San José community members consistently attended civic engagement events to express this opinion, as well as their distrust in Google and the decision-making process. This included protests at two Station Area Advisory Group meetings, in addition to participation in small group discussions at the Community Forums and Community Meetings.

This section presents the Desired Outcomes, which are the aspirations for the Diridon Station Area. The Desired Outcomes are based primarily on SAAG discussions at the nine SAAG meetings through August and the 11 Solution Group meetings (attended by a subset of SAAG members who self-selected to focus on specific topics), although the Desired Outcomes also reflect the key themes from the general public engagement (please refer to Chapter 3 for a description of each engagement method).

City staff compiled the initial round of feedback into a preliminary and comprehensive set of Desired Outcomes, based primarily on the SAAG Solution Group and report-back discussions. This list is a reflection of the most frequently made comments per topic or subtopic. Staff refined this list based on SAAG feedback at the August 29th meeting, at which SAAG members were asked to gauge their level of agreement with each set of Desired Outcomes. Staff then augmented the Desired Outcomes based on the input from the public throughout the process and released the Draft Report for review. Staff hosted several engagement activities in September and October 2018 to get feedback on the initial set of Desired Outcomes, including an Online Feedback Form, three Community Meetings, and a SAAG meeting. The outreach on the Draft Report resulted in refinements to some of the outcomes and additions of new ones, but affirmed high levels of agreement for most Desired Outcomes. (Refer to the end of this chapter for a summary of the Online Feedback Form results across topics and to the Appendix for the full results.)
The full list of Desired Outcomes is included in the following sections. The order in which outcomes are listed within each topic does not necessarily reflect the frequency, importance, or level of agreement among SAAG members or the public. Additional context to clarify the intent of the outcome and the range of perspectives, including any points of contention, have been added below each of the Desired Outcome statements. The amount of discussion for each statement does not necessarily reflect the time spent discussing the concept at SAAG meetings or public events.

The Desired Outcomes for Housing/Displacement and Jobs/Education fall into three categories: General Principles, Development of the Diridon Station Area (DSA), and Citywide Impacts and Benefits. The Desired Outcomes for the other topics mainly apply to development of the Diridon Station Area or Downtown.

The Housing/Displacement and Jobs/Education have extra categories because there was substantial discussion about the citywide implications on the housing, displacement, education, and job opportunities, as well as about requiring Google to provide funding for community benefits at the citywide scale for these topics. Depending on the mechanism, other developers and employers could also pay into a system to support community benefits. The focus on other topics were physical improvements to the Diridon Area. By framing the input as Desired Outcomes for the area (and for citywide efforts in the case of Housing/Displacement and Jobs/Education), the focus became identifying commonly-held community values that can guide both a Google development and San José’s future.

In some instances, Solution Groups conducted a ranking exercise of the Desired Outcomes and/or Potential Solutions. The results of the voting exercises are included in a separate text box to show the priorities of a subset of the SAAG.

The Appendix includes the full list of Potential Solutions generated by the SAAG and public. This includes other ideas that are not already reflected in the Desired Outcomes or that provide more detailed suggestions on how to achieve the Desired Outcomes.

Potential Solutions, which provide more detail on
how to achieve the Desired Outcomes, can be found
in the Appendix.

Housing and Displacement
This topic includes Desired Outcomes and Potential Solutions for housing and displacement, including the number, type and affordability of housing units produced; and displacement through gentrification. As noted above, these topics were some of the most discussed at the SAAG meetings and throughout the civic engagement process.

Desired Outcomes
The following outcomes are grouped into three categories reflecting the various geographic scales of the housing issue. First are General Principles that would apply to the City, Google, and other stakeholders when planning for housing and preventing displacement; these represent the general themes of what community members want to see for this topic. Next are outcomes related specifically to development within the Diridon Station Area and could be implemented through the development review process. Last are outcomes related to Citywide Impacts and Benefits and how any resources generated by Google and other developers should be used at this scale to address housing goals. The Citywide Impacts and Benefits list is based on the results of the ranking exercise completed by the SAAG’s Housing, Displacement, and Gentrification Solution Group (provided below) – with revisions to reflect additional SAAG discussion and public input.

General Principles
Everyone involved takes responsibility to address the housing crisis, including but not limited to the City, Google, and other companies/developers.

People are tired of the blame game and want everyone to do what they can to help solve the housing crisis. There needs to be a clear plan for addressing displacement and generating affordable housing to meet demand, with roles for everyone. In other words, addressing the affordable housing crisis will take action from the City of San José, taxpayers, and residential and commercial developers. As discussed above under “Expectations of Google and others,” there was much discussion about the role of Google. With respect to the housing crisis, some SAAG and community members pointed out that the housing crisis is a regional issue with multiple causes and Google should not be expected to solve it alone, while others called for Google to provide enough housing to meet all of the projected demand resulting from its office development. Some do not want the City to use the regional nature of the problem as an excuse for not doing its part or for not requiring Google to mitigate its growth impacts, and want to ensure that the City is an equal partner in addressing the housing crisis. There was strong agreement that many of the solutions should be citywide.

The City adopts more and stronger tools to help fight displacement, supplementing the existing programs and policies.

Community leaders who have been involved in previous efforts to strengthen tenant protections called for additional tools and stronger regulations to aggressively fight displacement. This mirrors calls from the general public for the City to do more to protect them from high housing prices pushing them out of San Jose. Examples include further strengthening the rent control ordinance and protections under the Ellis Act (refer to the Potential Solutions list in the Appendix for other specific ideas from the SAAG and public).

More affordable housing is generated throughout the city, focusing on high density housing in Urban Villages.

This reflects the citywide need for more affordable options throughout the city, as well as concerns that the Diridon Station Area may take on too much of the housing demand and that redevelopment with high density housing in established neighborhoods – rather than in Urban Villages – would inadvertently lead to more displacement. It was also suggested to include publicly owned land as a focus for more affordable housing and for the City to have faster permit processes to facilitate high density residential development.

The strategy for addressing housing issues integrates homeless services.

In addition to generating more affordable housing and preventing displacement due to gentrification, the strategy must incorporate more homeless services as a means for helping people and getting people into permanent housing. This also includes more resources for treating people with mental illness and for serving vulnerable populations.

The ultimate goal is no direct/indirect displacement from San José, and no increase in homelessness.

This reflects the top concern among the general public. Nearly all SAAG members seemed to agree that displacement from San José is a major concern, and that minimizing it should be a goal for the Google project. Some community members feel that the City should reject the idea that anything less than zero displacement is an acceptable outcome. However, there was much discussion on the various ways of interpreting the intention of the displacement-related outcomes, with questions about the definition of “indirect”, the ability to link displacement to a single cause, the feasibility of

mandating “zero” displacement, and the potential tension between avoiding displacement with other goals for the city and Station Area – such as infill development that increases the housing supply.

There is some concern that a ‘zero displacement’ policy would be so absolute and inflexible that it could force San José to turn away new workplace development and associated resources for addressing the housing crisis and providing community benefits. Some community members expressed desire to quantify this concept to predict displacement and track outcomes, while others suggest a process-oriented approach by committing to “make every effort” or “use every policy lever” to prevent displacement. Several people at the Community Meetings suggested that the goal should be to “decrease homelessness,” as this implies that we are okay within maintaining existing levels.

Development of the Diridon Station Area
The Diridon Station Area has dense, affordable housing across all incomes for current and future residents and workers.

The SAAG generally agreed on the need for high density, affordable housing near the station. Some SAAG members and the public specifically advocated for extremely low-income and moderate-income households within the broad range of “lower-income”. This reflects concerns for the most vulnerable populations, as well as for the “missing middle” (i.e., the lack of housing options for people that do not qualify for subsidies yet have a hard time affording market rates). While several members of the public called for Google to build housing for their workers as part of their master development, the SAAG generally called for housing to be open to existing residents that want better transit access, not just future workers.

At least 25% of housing units are offered at below-market rates for lower-income households (ranging from extremely low to moderate).

The SAAG discussed this specific goal several times. It is based on the Urban Village target. The current requirement in the DSAP is 15%. There was concern about the feasibility of requiring this higher level for Google or other specific development projects without stifling development – and then getting no housing. The counter-perspective is that Google could handle this affordability level because they have greater financial capacity than the typical developer (see “Expectations of Google and others” discussion above). Others, particularly members of the public, want to see higher affordable targets than 25%. This outcome could be a target for all development within the area, rather than a requirement for each individual project, which would encourage 100% affordable projects as part of the overall housing strategy.

Developers build Inclusionary Housing units on-site or within the Diridon Station Area, rather than pay in lieu fees or build outside of the area.

This reflects desires to develop a mixed-income, integrated neighborhood, to maximize affordability around transit recognizing that lower-income households have higher transit dependency, and to get subsidized units built ASAP rather than deferred to a future project. However, there is tension with the desire to generate funds for the construction and preservation of affordable housing.

There is no direct and indirect displacement of existing lower-income residents from the Diridon Station Area and nearby neighborhoods due to gentrification spurred by this development.

This reflects concerns about redevelopment directly displacing people, as well as rising rents pushing out existing residents. Many SAAG members feel that the priority should be low-income people, while some think this principle should apply to all residents. As with the general “no displacement” concept citywide, there were discussions about how to interpret this outcome with respect to the Diridon area. Several SAAG members suggest re-phrasing this as “Limit direct displacement to the highest degree possible and fully mitigate any remaining displacement with new affordable housing.” New development provides compensation and relocation assistance if redevelopment of existing housing occurs.

Solution Group Ranking Exercise
The SAAG Solution Group on Housing, Displacement, and Gentrification suggested that Google provide resources (i.e., funding) to the City and/or nonprofit partners to reduce displacement resulting from new jobs. Staff prepared a list of potential strategies for distributing resources to achieve the desired outcomes related to housing, based on the Housing Solution Group discussions.

Staff then asked the SAAG members to rank them in order of importance and compiled the results. The group completed the exercise verbally during their third meeting on July 10; participants included: Gardner Neighborhood Association, Law Foundation of Silicon Valley, PACT, Silicon Valley Bike Coalition, South Bay AFL-CIO Labor Council, SV Rising, SV@Home, and Working Partnerships USA. The following table shows the top five strategies, which were refined and incorporated into the top Desired Outcomes. See the Appendix for the complete results. They are listed here to reflect the priorities of a subset of SAAG members.

The 5 top strategies for distributing resources to achieve the desired outcomes • Acquire land and build affordable housing, focusing on areas well-served by transit (including within the Diridon Station Area itself). • Acquire, rehabilitate, and preserve affordability of existing multi-family housing properties in neighborhoods at the greatest risk of gentrification. • Build high density housing outside of the Diridon Station Area, including the East Side.
• When building new housing or preserving existing housing, utilize community ownership models to increase homeownership opportunities (e.g., Community Land Trusts, etc.).
• Increase funding support for organizations that provide legal assistance and education to tenants; fund the legal defense of low-income Santa Clara County tenants facing eviction proceedings.

Housing, Gentrification and Displacement
Solution Group - Ranking Exercise Results
Pop-up Workshop Exercise
Community members placed 50 dots on the board for Housing and Displacement strategies over the course of the five pop-up-workshops. The top two priorities from the Pop-up workshop dot exercise were: “Build more affordable housing throughout the city, focusing on areas well-served by transit” (32% of the dots for this topic), and “Build more housing to help meet the demands of regional job growth and reduce commute distances (30% of dots).”
Community Meetings
Based on frequency of comments received at the Community Meetings held in September, the most important issues and Desired Outcomes were related to:
• Preventing displacement from San José (based on top concern about rising housing costs)
• Homelessness
• Increasing the affordable housing requirement for the Diridon Station Area
• Prioritizing local residents for rental housing
• Streamlining the permitting process for housing projects • Strengthening rent control
Online Feedback Form
About 670 people reacted to the Desired Outcomes for Housing and Displacement using the Online Feedback Form. Agreement for these outcomes ranged from 51% and 76% (based on selecting “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”).

While there was strong support for the concepts, this topic had the highest level of disagreement, with 12-31% of respondents saying they “Disagree” or “Strongly Disagree” with each of the outcomes. Based on the write-in comments, some of the reasons for disagreement with the Housing and Displacement outcomes include:
• The City should balance housing needs with job needs, so that the City can raise more revenues for affordable housing and public services. • The City is growing too much.
• There is concern about high density (multi-family) housing. There should be more single-family housing and/or greater protections for existing low density neighborhoods.
• Job growth should be the emphasis for this project, not housing.

• At least some of the extra resources generated by Google and others should go to improving public services like police and schools – not just housing.
• There should be more focus on improving transit to better link jobs and affordable housing in other areas.
• The outcomes should call out specific target populations such as teachers and seniors.
• There should be more emphasis on citywide impacts, not just the Diridon Station Area.
• Google should provide on-site housing.
• There should be more emphasis on housing for the “missing middle” or moderate income families.
• There should be more emphasis on resolving the homeless issue, such as by funding housing and services for the homeless.
• Affordable housing and homeless services should not be concentrated downtown.
• Homelessness is a separate issue that the City needs to address on its own; it is not Google’s responsibility.
• It is the City’s, not Google’s, responsibility to address the housing crisis.

Refer to the end of this chapter for a summary of the Online Feedback Form results across topics and to the Appendix for the full results.

Conclusion
Input from the public reinforced the Desired Outcomes for Housing and Displacement. Community members emphasized the urgency to address the housing crisis with more affordable housing options and the importance of preventing further displacement if Google were to build offices in San Jose. There were many cautionary tales about gentrification and suggestions to learn from mistakes made in other Bay Area cities. There was a general call to action for the City, Google, and other stakeholders to do everything possible to reduce displacement pressures. However, the feedback on the initial Desired Outcomes, particularly the Online Feedback Form, revealed that many community members also want to make sure that any requirements of Google are feasible and are balanced with other community goals. While concern over the housing crisis was nearly universal, there is a wide range of nuanced perspectives about how to meaningfully address it and the implications for the potential Google development in the Diridon area.

Jobs, Education, and Economic Development
This section includes a variety of topics related to the production of jobs within the Google development; indirect business and employment opportunities; the relationship between jobs and housing; education and job training for existing residents; and the fiscal and economic benefits to the City.

Desired Outcomes
As with the Housing and Displacement section, the following outcomes are grouped into three categories reflecting the various geographic scales: General Principles, Development within the Diridon Station Area, and Citywide Impacts and Benefits. The lists in the last chapter are based on the results of a ranking exercise completed by the SAAG’s Jobs, Education, and Economic Development Solution Group – with minor revisions to reflect the SAAG discussion during the report-back. See below for the results of the ranking exercise, for reference.

General Principles
New development offers quality jobs that pay living wages (i.e., cover the cost of housing in San Jose).

Some SAAG members feel strongly that all jobs should offer living wages, including subcontracted service jobs.2 There is a concern about mandating wages at the project level, especially without knowing the specific job types.

This outcome also relates to the desire for balanced job and housing growth, with some members of the public wanting to see new housing built for Google employees before any jobs are added so as to avoid displacement. Several people at the Community Meetings suggested that the definition of living wages should be the “full cost of living in San José,” not just housing costs.

New development helps diversify San Jose’s economy such that residents of all skill and educational levels have more opportunities.

This reflects an underlying theme of enhancing social equity and economic mobility and ensuring benefits accrue to the most vulnerable and disadvantaged people in San José. The Google project should offer a range of opportunities for jobs and job training, not just high-tech.

There are strong career pipelines that help existing residents and youth get good jobs in the tech industry and other higher-paying sectors.

This reflects the desire to maximize local hiring and ensure that people are preparing to take advantage of new opportunities for quality jobs.

Local schools are supported with additional resources and innovation to provide quality education to local youth.

The Google partnership presents a major opportunity for innovation and greater support of the local education system for preparing ethnically diverse students for jobs of the future. This is a high priority for some members of the public. At the October SAAG meeting, several members emphasized the importance of K-12 education, and the opportunity for Google to work with schools to improve STEM and computer science education.

New development protects, supports, and involves local, small businesses and non-profits.

This reflects concerns about the effect of rising rents, and the desire to prevent the displacement of existing local businesses and non-profits. Community members suggested proactive outreach to impacted businesses to assist with relocation. It also reflects concerns about the potential for an insular tech campus that provides free amenities to its employees and the desire to also promote local spending and integration into the community. In addition, there should be intentional engagement with under-represented minority-owned businesses such as through a mandate for a percentage of contracts to go to under-represented groups. Non-profits connect people to resources and will have higher demand for services as housing/economic insecurity grows, and therefore, should be supported. New taxes on small businesses should be avoided.

Development of the Diridon Station Area
Google and other companies/developers in the Diridon Station Area:

Adhere to responsible contracting standards and use Project Labor Agreements to ensure fair and safe working conditions for contract and construction workers.

Several SAAG members consistently pointed to the potential for Google to rely heavily on contract workers that would face disparities in working conditions compared to their direct employees (such as lower wages and fewer benefits), based on research of existing business practices in the tech industry. They call for a commitment to hiring companies recommended by
www.responsiblecontractorguide.com to ensure good working conditions for services workers. In addition, they point to Project Labor Agreements, which establish the terms and conditions of employment for construction projects, in order to promote quality, stable job opportunities for local workers, quality construction, and community benefits.

Partner with small, local businesses in both the construction and operation phases (such as through procurement policies, catering, events, etc.).

This supports the General Principle of supporting local businesses, and the desire for the Google project to enhance economic opportunity in general, not just by adding high-tech jobs.

Provide worker retention to ensure service workers retain their jobs and do not face mass layoffs if building owners or future tenants change.

SAAG members point to examples of worker retention policies.

Adopt a local hiring policy.

This idea reflects a very common public sentiment that new jobs should prioritize local residents.

Reduce barriers to employment based on race, gender, immigration status, and previous incarceration.

There is desire for Google and other tech companies to reflect San José’s diversity, recognizing the current underrepresentation of many population segments in the technology industry today. Examples include: “ban the box” and sanctuary campus policies.

At the October 10, 2018 SAAG meeting and in reaction to the Draft Report, there were questions about how these Desired Outcomes apply to smaller businesses and developments within the area over time. The underlying concern is that small, local business would have a hard time implementing some of these policies, compared to larger, wealthier companies like Google, and that costly requirements could have the unintended consequence of pushing out small local companies. There should be careful consideration of the feasibility and implications of these requirements.

Another concern is that some of these policies such as local hiring and worker retention are worthwhile goals but could be difficult to implement and administer as requirements that run with the land and could be particularly onerous on smaller, infill projects and retailers, if required for development other than Google.

Citywide Impacts and Benefits
New resources generated by Google and other companies/developers go to:
• Early childhood education and childcare for lower‐income households; This reflects the understanding that the early years of childhood are critical to lifelong success, and there is currently a large unmet need among lower-income households for affordable, quality educational programs. In addition, providing more affordable daycare options allows great flexibility for families to work, save money, and invest in other critical needs like housing. Several people at the Community Meetings suggested that childcare resources should go to all residents, not just low-income households.
• Local job training in high growth sectors, such as construction, IT, manufacturing, healthcare, and business (such as pre‐apprenticeship and apprenticeship programs in trade industries);
The City has established effective workforce development and apprenticeship programs that could scale up to serve more people if there was additional funding. The focus should be on high growth sectors that offer clear career pathways to quality jobs. Many members of the public emphasized the need for workforce pipelines to ensure that local youth can enter the high-tech sector, and several specifically suggested apprenticeship programs. • Local, existing schools to use as the school district sees fit; The local school system’s biggest challenge to preparing youth for the jobs of the future is the lack of funding; adding new programs often causes more administrative burden than it’s worth and does not address the underlying need for more resources in order to meet basic needs, such as paying its teachers and bus drivers enough to afford the high cost of living in San José. Some community members think the emphasis of educational resources should be on leveraging Google’s strengths and modernizing K-12 education to prepare youth for technology-related careers; this should include upgrading the curriculum, use of technology, and professional development for teachers and faculty.
• Restorative justice programming in schools;
This refers to an alternative approach to traditional disciplinary actions like suspension and expulsion, which have lifelong impacts on educational and employment opportunities; instead, it uses peer mentoring and social interventions to help troubled youth stay in school and be successful. Since there are clear racial disparities in school discipline practices, this supports goals for diversifying the tech sector.
• Partnership/mentorship programs through San Jose State University (SJSU) and local community colleges.

The intent is to help connect San José youth to the job opportunities, recognizing the value of direct relationships in supporting educational attainment, particularly for disadvantaged and underresourced students. The emphasis is on public and local colleges, since private schools tend to be more expensive and colleges outside of the city are less likely to serve local residents.

Solution Group Ranking Exercise
Similar to the ranking exercise for the Housing Solution Group, the SAAG Solution Group on Jobs, Education, and Economic Development suggested that Google provide resources (i.e., funding) to the City and its partners to strengthen the educational system and promote economic opportunity for San José residents. They also suggested policies that should apply to Google (and could apply to other large developers/companies that develop in the Diridon area).

Staff prepared two lists of potential solutions based on the Solution Group discussions, and asked the SAAG members to select up to 5 or 6 of the ideas and rank them in order of importance. The Jobs, Education, and Economic Development Solution Group completed the exercise after the second meeting by emailing in their responses for staff to compile. Participating organizations included: Alameda Business Association, Law Foundation of Silicon Valley, San Jose State University, San Jose Unified School District, Santa Clara & San Benito Counties Building and Construction Trades Council, Silicon Valley Bike Coalition, South Bay AFL-CIO Labor Council, SV Rising, and Working Partnerships USA. For the Jobs exercise, some participants selected their top 1-4 choices for each set of ideas, because they had concerns about the other strategies.

The tables above illustrate the top things that Google and other companies and developers could do as part of developing in the Diridon Station Area, and the top programs that Google or others could help fund to achieve the desired Things that Google and others could do as part of developing in the Diridon Station Area:
• Commit to Responsible Contracting standards to ensure contracted it out jobs are good quality jobs with fair and safe working conditions.
• Use Project Labor Agreements, to stabilize the terms and conditions of employment in construction jobs, to help ensure quality job opportunities for local workers. • Partner with local businesses in and around the Diridon Station area through catering, events, and patronage (e.g., via at procurement policy) • Provide worker retention to ensure service workers retain their jobs and do not face mass layoffs if building owners or future tenants change service providers during operations. • Adopt a local hiring policy to provide jobs for residents.

Jobs, Education and Economic Development
Solution Group – Ranking Exercise Results (1)
Programs that Google or others could help fund to achieve the desired outcomes:
• Provide funding for early childhood education and childcare for lower-income households.
• Increase resources for pre-apprenticeship and apprenticeship programs in trade Industries.
• Establish a fee or Levy to generate extra revenue for local, existing schools to use as the district sees fit
• Increase resources for local job training and high growth sectors, such as construction, it, manufacturing, Healthcare and business.
• Provide resources for restorative justice programming in schools. • Support partnership / mentorship programs through San Jose State University (SJSU) and local community colleges.

Jobs, Education and Economic Development
Solution Group – Ranking Exercise Results (2)
outcomes related to jobs, education and economic development. These were refined and incorporated into the top Desired Outcomes. See the Appendix for the complete results. They are listed here to reflect the priorities of a subset of SAAG members.

Pop-up Workshop Exercise
Community members placed 32 dots on the board for Jobs, Education, and Economic Development strategies over the course of the five pop-up-workshops.

The top two priorities from the Pop-up workshop dot exercise were: “Support new jobs that pay living wages - enough to support a family and cover housing prices” (41% of dots for this topic), and “Increase support for K-12 schools to prepare youth for jobs of the future” (22% of dots).

Community Meetings
Based on frequency of comments received at the Community Meetings held in September, the most important issues and Desired Outcomes were related to:
• Ensuring quality education for all students
• Local hiring preference and pipelines
• Provide training for non-tech jobs
• Living wages
• Childcare
• Impacts on schools
• Proactive outreach to impacted businesses to assist relocation Online Feedback Form
About 550 people reacted to the Desired Outcomes for Jobs, Education, and Economic Development using the Online Feedback Form. Based on selecting “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”, agreement for all but one of the outcomes exceed 60%. With agreement at 82%, the outcome statements with the highest agreement include: “New development offers quality jobs that pay living wages” and “Local schools are supported with additional resources and innovation to provide quality education to local youth.” The outcome with the lowest agreement was “Restorative justice programming in schools” (53%). It is possible that many people that completed the Online Feedback Form are not familiar with this concept and additional information would have been helpful, based on the high share of “Neutral” responses (31%).

Refer to the end of this chapter for a summary of the Online Feedback Form results across topics and to the Appendix for the full results.

Conclusion
There was general agreement among the SAAG Solution Group on Jobs, Education, and Economic Development that the strategy for maximizing citywide benefits should build upon existing resources and programs, rather than creating new ones. But it was also suggested that the focus should be on effectiveness, regardless if a program is new or existing. The group also discussed the links between jobs and housing, recognizing the need to provide more affordable housing so lower-wage workers can live near their place of employment and to reduce displacement pressures so that existing residents can stay and benefit from the investments and opportunities presented by a Google development in the Diridon Station Area.

Input from the public reinforced most of the Desired Outcomes derived from SAAG discussions. While many community members expressed optimism about the increase in job opportunities and potential to leverage Google’s innovation capabilities, there was some skepticism about the ability for all to benefit from a Google development in San José.

Land Use, Design, and Parking
This section addresses land use mix, density, building height, site layout, urban design, architectural style, parking, block length, sense of place, neighborhood quality of life, and the relationship between the Diridon Station Area and Downtown.

Desired Outcomes
The following outcomes mainly apply to development within and surrounding the Diridon Station Area.

Land Use
New development in the Diridon Station Area:

Optimizes development density to take full advantage of the transit investments.

This reflects a desire to locate the highest density development within walking distance to Diridon Station to maximize the number of people who take transit. Overall, there was general agreement that higher density development should be located closest to the Diridon Station. (Refer to the Growth Impacts discussion under Issues above for counterviews on development at the city scale).

Includes a complementary mix of commercial, office, and residential uses, with emphasis on affordable housing.

The SAAG generally recognized the need for a diverse mix of uses in the Diridon Station Area and the need to focus on affordable housing. Public comments also identified the need for a diverse mix of uses in the Diridon Station Area as opposed to focusing on a single use. However, there were differences of opinion about the amount and location of specific uses within area. Some community members think the emphasis should be commercial development to best support the transit investments and/or generate more revenue for citywide purposes (local schools, public services, etc.). Some believed that more high-density, affordable housing should be located near transit in the central zone of the DSAP while others believed that the greatest intensity of jobs should be adjacent to Diridon Station. There is also concern about the compatibility of new office buildings with existing residential uses in the southern zone of the Diridon Station Area, such as the impact on parking.

Incorporates ground floor retail in strategic locations and amounts.

The SAAG and the public almost unanimously agreed that having retail and other active uses at the ground floor of new buildings is critical to the vibrancy and pedestrian-oriented character of the Diridon Station Area. There was a concern that retail uses should not be required in all areas, since it could add to the cost of housing and/or lead to vacant storefronts which would have the opposite effect on street life (deadening rather than activating). Thus, it should be located in “strategic locations and amounts” to ensure that there is a critical mass of commercial uses in certain areas. Additionally, both the SAAG and the public wanted to ensure there is space and support for small, local “mom and pop” businesses.

Incorporates public spaces, including open space along the creeks.

This outcome was added based on comments on the Draft Report and based on a SAAG suggestion to ensure that the land use mix explicitly reflects natural resources and public spaces. Feedback on the Desired Outcomes revealed some of the strongest support for the public space concepts, reinforcing the importance of this land use to the community.

Has a coherent development pattern that is varied and interesting, yet has a consistent feel.

This reflects the idea to create a strong sense of place for the area, balancing diversity of building types with the need for consistency so the area doesn’t feel disjointed. Some community members want to avoid having all “glass boxes” and encouraged more creative design.

Is an extension of the Downtown core, rather than a separate district, with a strong sense of place.

There was significant agreement with this concept by both the SAAG and the public that Diridon should be connected to Downtown and not a separate district. Concerns were raised about creating a completely new district without physical, psychological, and design connections. Ideas for how this can be achieved include improved roadway access, consistent landscaping, signage, and marketing.

Design
The design of buildings and public spaces is oriented to the human-scale to support an active street life and accessibility for all abilities.

There was nearly unanimous agreement and many comments about the need to make the Diridon Station area walkable, human-scaled, and pedestrianoriented. Recommendations included locating buildings near the street, activating ground floor uses, creating walkable block sizes, designing streets with wide sidewalks and slower traffic speeds, and adding landscaping to create an attractive environment. Accessibility was raised as an important component of human-centered design.

Tech campuses are open, permeable, and integrated with surroundings such that employees support local businesses and that the public has access to amenities.

This desired outcome came up frequently with both the SAAG and public. They want Google and other companies to avoid creating walled-off and insular campuses. They did not want these companies to provide free meals and services internal to the campuses, but rather, encourage employees to leave the buildings and patronize local businesses. Additional comments identified the need for providing pedestrian circulation between buildings on the street level, making sure that buildings are not too large, and ensuring permeable spaces between buildings (e.g., streets, paseos, trails).

New development has an appropriate interface with existing neighborhoods and mitigates impacts, such as those related to traffic, parking, transit routes, and noise.

This theme came up consistently among the SAAG and general public. It reflects the concern that large-scale redevelopment can have impacts on the residents and businesses in adjacent areas. The concerns were both about construction, since it will occur over a long period of time, and on-going impacts such as spill-over parking in residential areas.

Public art and historic/cultural preservation are integrated early into project design and plan implementation to enhance and protect existing character and identity.

This Desired Outcome reflects the many comments related to historic resources and preserving the cultural identity of the area, which is more than just buildings that qualify for historic preservation under City, State, or federal regulations. There was also a desire to be proactive in identifying, preserving, revitalizing and/or repurposing historic features – rather than waiting for individual development projects to come along. For example, there is strong interest in inventorying and preserving iconic commercial signage. Further, there were many comments requesting public art to be incorporated into development to enhance the sense of place. Overall, there was strong support from the SAAG and the public for this outcome, with some comments about

ensuring balance so that historic preservation did not prohibit development.

Community members also suggested supporting local artists, and reflecting San José’s diverse culture through integrating public art in a variety of scales and methods.

New buildings create an interesting Downtown skyline.

This outcome recognizes that airport-related height limits have led to relatively short buildings in Downtown San José compared to other large cities, and that those height limits encourage new development to be built at the same heights with flat tops in order to max out their floor area potential – creating a flat skyline. There is desire to make Downtown San José feel more like other downtowns of international cities, which have varied building heights and rooftop designs. When raised in SAAG discussions, the desire for an “interesting” skyline was balanced with the need to optimize density in the Diridon Area. As a counter perspective, one SAAG member suggested “thinking inside the box” and embracing the height limitations – focusing on vertical activation to fill the volume with interesting public life.

Parking
The supply of parking is proactively managed to adapt to changes in travel patterns overtime and to support goals for reduced car travel.

There was general agreement from the SAAG that parking management is critical to the success of an urban, transit-oriented district such as the Diridon Station Area. However, some SAAG members want to proactively drive changes in travel patterns to achieve other desired outcomes such as reduced driving and increased transit use, rather than react to changing demand.

Several expressed the desire to balance this goal with the current need to provide enough parking for the SAP Center, transit station, and new and existing development. The public was more likely to express concerns about parking shortages, particularly people that live in other parts of San José and rely more on driving. Existing commuters that use Diridon Station and attendees of the SAP Center expressed concern about access in the future given the development of parking lots and increase in demand for transit services.

Existing parking plans and programs that were developed with community input form the foundation for parking management in the Diridon Station Area.

Significant work has been done to develop and implement parking management plans in the area. Several SAAG members note that future plans should respect the past work, and that future plans for parking should not just start from scratch. This sentiment was echoed by several members of the public, who want to ensure continued implementation of existing programs that are working well (Downtown and east of Downtown).

Parking structures are future-proof (i.e., designed to allow for re-purposing if no longer needed).

Community members that advocate for this outcome refer to changing travel patterns, such as autonomous vehicles, ride sharing services, and increased public transit use, which will likely reduce the need for parking overtime. As such, parking structures should be designed so that they can be repurposed for other uses if no longer needed for parking.

The amount of land dedicated to single-use parking is minimized, and parking is not a visually prominent aspect of the built environment.

There was recognition that development of the Diridon Station Area is an opportunity to replace parking lots with buildings and public spaces that add to the sense of vibrancy and safety. In new development, parking should be provided belowground, in well-designed structures, or otherwise tucked away.

The intent of this design principle is to make the area more attractive and promote transit use and other modes, over car travel. In addition to parking, new development should consider placing other infrastructure below ground (such as stormwater treatment), rather than taking up valuable surface land.

There is a shared parking district for private development, transit users, and the SAP Center.

This relates to the first Parking outcome in that the SAAG generally wants to ensure that parking for the area is managed comprehensively. There is recognition that the existing and future uses are complementary, and that shared parking could help reduce the overall amount of parking needed. There is concern, however, that shared parking may not be feasible or acceptable to the private development, and Google may end up requiring dedicated and secure parking for their employees that is not shared with the general public.

There is sufficient parking for modes other than cars.

This Desired Outcome reflects the discussion that parking should be more than just about cars. Parking for bikes and other vehicles (some of which might not yet be developed) should be planned for.

Parking impacts on neighborhood streets are minimized.

Neighbors living within and near the Station Area have concerns about spillover parking on nearby residential areas if too little parking is provided in the

Diridon Station Area to meet demand. In addition to taking up street parking, there are concerns about extra traffic on local streets as people circulate looking for parking (see Transportation below).

Pop-up Workshop Exercise
Community members placed 58 dots on the board for Land Use and Design strategies over the course of the five pop-up-workshops. The top two priorities from the Pop-up workshop dot exercise are to: “Focus on human-scaled design to create a safe, vibrant, and attractive pedestrian experience” (28% of dots for this topic), and “Preserve historic buildings and other features that provide a sense of character to the station area” (22% of dots). Note that parking strategies were grouped with Transportation for the pop-up workshop exercise.

Community Meetings
Based on frequency of comments received at the Community Meetings held in September, the most important issues and Desired Outcomes were related to:
• Supporting artists and reflecting culture in public art • Providing sufficient parking
• Parking impacts on the neighborhoods
• Space for medical uses
• Commercial uses
Online Feedback Form
Between 479 and 542 people reacted to the Desired Outcomes for Land Use, Design, and Parking using the Online Feedback Form. Based on selecting “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”, agreement was at least 72% for each of the Design outcomes, 71% for the Land Use outcomes, and 54% for the Parking outcomes.

The outcomes with the highest agreement include: Development in the Diridon Station Area optimizes development density to take full advantage of the transit investments (88%), “The design of buildings and public spaces is oriented to the human-scale to support an active street life and accessibility for all abilities” (83%), and “New development has an appropriate interface with existing neighborhoods and mitigates impacts, such as those related to traffic, parking, transit routes, and noise.”
The outcome with the lowest agreement is “Existing parking plans and programs that were developed with community input form the foundation for parking management in the Diridon Station Area”. This statement also had a high share of “Neutral” responses at 35%, indicating that many respondents are likely not aware of the existing programs to have a strong opinion.

Refer to the end of this chapter for a summary of the Online Feedback Form results across topics and to the Appendix for the full results.

Conclusion
Overall, there was very high level of agreement between SAAG members and between the SAAG and general public on the majority of topics related to land use and design. There was overwhelming agreement that the Diridon Station Area should be an extension of the Downtown, that the Google development should be integrated with the other buildings in the Diridon Station Area rather than a walled-off campus, that there should be high-quality design and varied architecture, and that the new neighborhood should be walkable and pedestrianoriented. There was also agreement that a diverse mix of uses was critical to creating a vibrant neighborhood. However, there were differences in opinion about the overall mix of uses and the location of each use within the Diridon Station Area, concerns about the impact of new development on traffic, housing costs and adjacent neighborhoods, and the overall amount of parking in the Diridon Station Area.

From a process perspective, the concept of value capture was consistently raised during SAAG discussions. As discussed above under “Community Benefits”, the concept is that the value of community benefits should take into account transit improvements in place, any requested up-zonings, and other policy decisions that add value. The SAAG Solution Group on Land Use discussed the need for value capture tools to help ensure that the public is able to receive some benefit from these changes.

Public Space, Creeks, and Trails
This topic includes parks, open space, green space, creek corridors, trails, and the public realm. It overlaps with the Environmental Sustainability, Land Use, Design, and Transportation topics.

Desired Outcomes
The following outcomes mainly apply to development within and surrounding the Diridon Station Area.

Parks, open space, plazas, and trails in the Diridon Station Area are safe, visible, well-maintained, and accessible to everyone.

This reflects desires for public spaces to be more family-friendly, safe, clean, and inviting to all. Safety includes visibility to enhance the sense of security and deter criminal activity. Visibility also promotes access and better utilization of the existing spaces. Access among people of all ages, physical abilities, and income levels is important to community members. For example, there is desire to make recreational programs more affordable.

The area has a range of public space types at a variety of scales (e.g., pocket parks, green roofs, plazas, community gardens, etc.) and opportunities for accessing nature.

This should include urban agriculture, cultural spaces, and vertical activation of public spaces on top of buildings, not just at the ground level and within parks. Other desired amenities include more children’s play areas, regularly programmed/activated spaces, and greenery overall. This includes protecting existing community resources and providing more community facilities in surrounding neighborhoods, such as childcare facilities.

There is a signature plaza near Diridon Station and Santa Clara Street that provides space for community gathering and special programming, in addition to circulation functions.

This intention is to provide a focal point for the neighborhood and a safe place for people to hang out before and after events at the arena, taking advantage of the significant pedestrian activity around the transit station. Programming could include late night activities, food trucks, entertainment, outdoor dining, pre- and post-event gathering for SAP center, and other active uses.

Public spaces are activated through temporary and permanent programming such as public art, pop-up retail, and events.

Activating public spaces is intended to improve the safety and security, as well as make the area a more vibrant, interesting place to live, work, and visit.

Partnerships with the business community and neighborhood groups advance projects, implement programming, and help keep spaces maintained.

This reflects desires for more collaboration and innovative use of resources to ensure that spaces are upgraded, better utilized, and maintained at a higher quality. It recognizes the constraints on City services and capacity of other community members to work together to improve the neighborhood. A suggestion is for new development to fund the long-term maintenance of public spaces in the area.

There is an interconnected network of “green fingers” with inviting pedestrian and bicycle facilities and public restrooms along creek trails.

This reinforces the open space framework in the DSA, which calls for a welllandscaped system of trails, paseos, and sidewalks. It also reflects a key theme for improved connectivity. Community members commonly suggested adding restrooms in public spaces, particularly along the creek trails.

The Guadalupe River and Los Gatos Creek trail systems are linked.

This project offers the opportunity to close existing gaps in the trail network within the Diridon Station Area. Several community members suggested that this outcome include the connection to the Three Creeks Trail, which is immediately south of the station area.

Los Gatos Creek is daylighted at Park Avenue, with restored habitat and a continuous off-street trail.

The intent of this outcome is to improve the creek corridor for salmon and other wildlife, allow for safer pedestrian/bicycle connectivity, and improve the aesthetics of the area. There were questions about the hydrological implications and feasibility.

Riparian habitat along the creeks is enhanced.

This speaks to the inconsistent quality of the riparian corridor as urbanization has encroached on the creeks to various degrees throughout the Station Area.

The intent is to improve the wildlife habitat, water quality, and flood protection of the creek corridor.

New development faces creeks and other open spaces.

The intent is to activate the public spaces and enhance connections between buildings and the natural environment. It reflects the general desire to design development to take better advantage of the creeks through open spaces, site planning, and architecture. One suggestion is to create a “river walk” along Los Gatos Creek with trailside amenities such as sidewalk cafes.

Solution Group Ranking Exercise
The SAAG Solution Group on Parks, Public Space, Sustainability, and Neighborhood Quality of Life identified a list of Potential Solutions and categorized them into Major Capital projects and Nearer-term projects. They then completed a ranking exercise in which they ranked the top solutions from each category. Staff separated out the top “guiding principles for designing new development” from the Nearer-term list to better reflect how these ideas could be incorporated into the Google project and other decisions. See the three tables on the following pages for the top solutions, and the Appendix for the complete results. The top ranking ideas are generally reflected in the Desired Outcomes above, and are listed here to reflect the priorities of a subset of SAAG members (representing Delmas Park Neighborhood Association, Greenbelt Alliance, Guadalupe River Park Conservancy, North Willow Glen Neighborhood Association, Plant 51, San Jose Downtown Residents Association, Shasta Hanchett Park Neighborhood Association, SPUR, and St. Leo's residents).

The ranking exercise reflects extensive overlap with the Land Use, Design, and Transportation topics. For example, it reinforced desires to improve key pedestrian/bicycle connections, activate spaces that are currently dead zones, and incorporate historic/cultural resources and public art.

Top 5 Major Capital Solutions
• Include a Diridon Central Plaza as a Signature plaza destination (more than just a dropoff), located on Santa Clara Street with late-night activities, food trucks, entertainment, outdoor dining, pre- and post-event gathering for SAP Center and other active uses. • Connect the Guadalupe River and Los Gatos Creek trail system as it goes under 280 so pedestrians and bikers can cross in a safe manner; integrate with Three Creeks trail systems.
• Daylight Los Gatos Creek.
• Provide better connections so residents can get to the many existing parks and open spaces that already exist nearby, overcome existing barriers and isolation. • Make the 280/Bird overpass safer for walkers and bikers, including children.

Parks, Public Space, and Sustainability
Solution Group – Ranking Exercise Results (1)
Top 4 “Near-term” Solutions
• Save and showcase neon and historic signs from local businesses (late 40’s-early 70’s) in the Diridon Area.
• Improve key pedestrian/bicycle connections (e.g. create inviting, well-lit, pedestrian/bike connections under 87 freeway to Children’s Discovery Museum). • Employ early activation and programming for residents throughout the construction phase (e.g., pop-up retail, food trucks, social/educational events, kids activities, signage and VR experiences to learn about history and future development plans). • Compile comprehensive list of historic resources in the Diridon Area.

Parks, Public Space, and Sustainability
Solution Group – Ranking Exercise Results (2)

Pop-up Workshop Exercise
Community members placed 49 dots on the board for Parks and Public Space strategies over the course of the five pop-up-workshops. The top two priorities from the Pop-up workshop dot exercise are to: “Include a central plaza next to the Station as a signature destination space (more than just a drop-off)” (22% of dots for this topic), and “Connect the Guadalupe River and Los Gatos Creek trail systems” (27% of dots). “Provide better pedestrian/bicycle connections between residents and existing parks and open spaces” also received a high share of the dots for this topic (20%).

Community Meetings
There was strong support for the Desired Outcomes under this topic at the Community Meetings held in September. Based on frequency of comments received, the most important issues were related to:
• Connecting and maintaining the creek trails
Top 9 Guiding Principles for Designing New Development
• Design all streets as “Complete Streets” with multi-modal connections for bikes/pedestrians and traffic calming.
• Restore and creatively re-use other historic resources. • Comprehensively integrate public art into design from the beginning into buildings, streets, and open spaces; use public art (temporary as well as permanent) and landscaping to draw people along.
• Use “greenfingers” of parks open space as catalysts for new development. • Avoid creating “dead zones” of inactivity; fix scary, problematic spots. • Scale new development appropriately where it interfaces with existing development. • Use neighborhoods as testbeds for new ideas.
• Ensure that new buildings provide more “eyes” on new and existing parks. • Integrate open spaces into places where people will (and do) live and work.

Parks, Public Space, and Sustainability
Solution Group – Ranking Exercise Results (3)
• Leveraging the Google development to daylight the Los Gatos Creek at Park Avenue
• Protecting existing community resources (such as the Gardner Health Center) and adding new Community Centers and childcare facilities • Making recreational programs more affordable
• Providing restrooms along creek trails
Online Feedback Form
About 530 people reacted to the Desired Outcomes for Public Spaces, Creeks, and Trails using the Online Feedback Form. Agreement for these outcomes ranged from 68% and 91% (based on selecting “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”). This topic, along with Transportation, had the highest levels of agreement. The outcome with the highest agreement (and the second highest across all topic areas) was: “Parks, open space, plazas, and trails in the Diridon Station Area are safe, visible, well-maintained, and accessible to everyone.” Next was “The area has a range of public space types at a variety of scales (e.g., pocket parks, green roofs, plazas, community gardens, etc.) and opportunities for accessing nature” (87%). “New development faces creeks and other open spaces” had the lowest level of agreement (68%), but also a high share of “Neutral” responses (26%).

Refer to the end of this chapter for a summary of the Online Feedback Form results across topics and to the Appendix for the full results.

Conclusion
Overall there is general agreement between SAAG members and between the SAAG and the public that parks, trails and open spaces should be a critical element of any revitalization efforts. The SAAG’s main concern is about improving the quality of existing spaces and the connectivity between parks and trails.

However, in general, the general public tended to make more comments about building new public spaces, safety, and environmentally-friendly design from the public compared to the SAAG.

Transportation and Transit
This section focuses on the transportation system as a whole, including transit services in the Diridon Station Area. There is extensive overlap between this topic and Land Use, Parking, and Public Spaces (including Trails).

Desired Outcomes
The following outcomes mainly apply to development within and surrounding the Diridon Station Area.

There are pedestrian-friendly streets with small blocks, safe crossings, wide sidewalks, and amenities such as street trees and benches.

This reflects the general desire to make the area more walkable and promote an active street life. Several members of the public want to see car-free zones without parking lots and other accommodations for gas-powered vehicles.

Several people at the Community Meetings suggested that this should include “bike- and scooter-friendly” as well, using facilities like bike lanes and separated cycle tracks.

There are direct street, trail, and bike connections to Diridon Station, Downtown, adjacent neighborhoods, and the regional network – with emphasis on improved east-west links.

Connectivity was a common theme in discussions about necessary improvements to the Diridon Station Area, recognizing that the existing gaps in the networks and that the railroad tracks, SR 87 freeway, and creeks serve as barriers to east-west transportation. There should be emphasis on the first and last mile connections to the station to increase transit ridership. The bicycle network should include safe bike paths, interconnected trails, and abundant bike parking.

The safety of major intersections is improved, especially the Bird Ave/280 interchange, in support of the traffic safety initiative.

While there was general desire for enhancing the safety of intersections for pedestrians, the emphasis was on safe walking routes for children and enhancing the I-280 interchange.

Traffic congestion is minimized during construction and on adjacent residential streets.

Many members of the public are concerned about existing traffic congestion and want it to get better and not worse. Among SAAG members, there is both the desire to reduce delay at intersections and the recognition that traffic congestion encourages the use of other modes of travel. They discussed the pros and cons of managing streets for vehicle flow and speed. Managing traffic during construction is important for minimizing disturbance to residents and businesses and to ensure emergency access. Maintaining pedestrian safety during construction is also important to residents.

The Diridon Station Area greatly exceeds citywide targets for reduced car travel.

The City of San Jose General Plan sets an ambitious target for shifting travel patterns in favor of walking, biking, and transit - away from automobile use - for environmental, social, and economic purposes. In order to achieve this citywide goal by 2040 and counteract the parts of the city where this mode shift will be more difficult to attain, the Diridon Station Area must go well beyond the citywide target. As an overarching principle, it should be easy and affordable for people to get to and from the Diridon Station area.

The transit system is high quality, affordable, convenient, and frequent.

This reflects existing challenges related to the quality and price of transit services. Improvements are needed to the transit system to successfully manage traffic and parking demand and to achieve the vision for a vibrant, walkable area. Some community members specifically want to see Google and other companies subsidize public transit use for all workers and to rely on public transit rather than private shuttles. Funding for long-term operations and maintenance will be important for achieving the high quality aspiration overtime.

The capacity of the transit system is designed for future growth, and the transportation system as a whole is flexible and adaptable.

Infrastructure, including improvements to Diridon Station, should accommodate the substantial increase in passengers projected for the future.

This also reflects the commonly expressed need to consider and accommodate new and emerging transportation technologies.

Transit infrastructure is designed to avoid impacts to homes, parks, businesses, and community facilities.

This refers mainly to the design of the High Speed Rail system through the Diridon Station Area and adjacent neighborhood to the south. Previous planning documents have shown alignments and designs that would directly impact existing uses, and residents have been working with High Speed Rail to minimize these construction impacts. There are also concerns about the safety of at-grade crossings and the operational effects of increased train frequency through the neighborhoods. SAAG members representing the neighborhoods most affected by the high speed rail project have advocated for an alignment that is elevated above the freeway interchange to avoid the construction and operational impacts on residential areas.

The various modes of transit that intersect at Diridon Station are inter-connected.

Community members want the station to have short, seamless, and well-timed transfers between transit services (Caltrain, BART, High Speed Rail, light rail, and buses) in order to be user-friendly, promote transit use, and manage passenger flows. People want to have integrated transit passes that promote smooth transfers between services.

Bus routes and the light rail system provide direct connections to Diridon Station from the airport and neighborhoods throughout the city, including South San Jose and Berryessa.

It was common to hear from community members living in north or east San José that the light rail system does not provide a direct route to Diridon Station, making it impractical to take transit to arena events or to link to commuter transit options. More direct routes with lower travel times would increase the chances of riding transit to access the Diridon Station Area. A seamless connection to the airport and its long-term parking facilities would help manage parking demand in Diridon.

Pop-up Workshop Exercise
Community members placed 48 dots on the board for Transportation and Transit strategies over the course of the five pop-up-workshops. The top priority from the Pop-up workshop dot exercise was: “Provide more bike and pedestrian facilities, including trails, to enhance connectivity with Downtown and adjacent neighborhoods” (31% of the dots for this topic). Next highest were: “Reduce traffic congestion and delay at intersections” and “Consider emerging and future transportation modes (e.g., autonomous vehicles, electric scooters,” which each got 17% of the dots.

Community Meetings
Based on frequency of comments received at the Community Meetings held in September, the most important issues and Desired Outcomes were related to:
• Traffic impacts and congestion
• Transit, including the affordability, long-term funding for operations and maintenance, and encouraging Google to rely on public services rather than its own private shuttles
• Emphasizing access and safety for bicyclists and scooters, in addition to pedestrians
• Connection between Diridon and the airport
Online Feedback Form
About 520 people reacted to the Desired Outcomes for Transportation and Transit using the Online Feedback Form. Agreement for these outcomes ranged from 71% and 92% (based on selecting “Agree” or “Strongly Agree”), making this the topic area with the most agreement. The outcome with the highest level of agreement across all Desired Outcomes, not just for this topic, was “There are pedestrian-friendly streets with small blocks, safe crossings, wide sidewalks, and amenities such as street trees and benches.” The outcomes with the next highest levels of agreement include: “There are direct street, trail, and bike connections to Diridon Station, Downtown, adjacent neighborhoods, and the regional network – with emphasis on improved east-west links” (91%) and “The various modes of transit that intersect at Diridon Station are inter-connected” (90%).

Of the 1,092 write-in comments through the Online Feedback Form, about 20% were related to improving transit, providing more pedestrian/bike facilities, and/or reducing parking. This was the most common focus of the write-in comments. In addition, about 9 percent were related to concerns about increasing traffic congestion and/or insufficient parking.

Refer to the end of this chapter for a summary of the Online Feedback Form results across topics and to the Appendix for the full results.

Conclusion
The SAAG generally sees the project as an opportunity to improve existing problem areas and advance city goals for alternative modes of transportation.

The public input generally aligned with the SAAG’s desire to take advantage of the Station Area as a transit hub to reduce car travel and promote a walkable neighborhood. The Desired Outcomes reflect the shared concern among the SAAG and general public about the quality of transit service, with emphasis on first and last mile connections to the station and links between modes. The public, however, was more likely to raise traffic congestion.

The Desired Outcomes in bold indicate the top outcomes, based on responses to the Online Feedback Form (highest level of agreement and/or lowest level of disagreement).

Environmental Sustainability
This section addresses natural resources, green building, and environmental impacts. There is overlap between this topic and Land Use, Design, Public Spaces, Creeks, and Trails. For example, a previous Desired Outcome is to enhance riparian habitat.

Desired Outcomes
The following outcomes mainly apply to development within the Diridon Station Area.

New development minimizes adverse environmental impacts, including contributions to global climate change.

The Audubon Society, Sierra Club, and California Native Plant Society, among other community members, called for reducing vehicle emissions, protecting environmental resources, and integrating nature into the new development.

New development serves as a model for eco-district planning, design, and implementation.

Community members suggested many ways to design the entire neighborhood for sustainability, such as by providing district-level utility systems (e.g., energy), green infrastructure (e.g., stormwater management), and urban agriculture. It should serve as template for other projects of this size and for areas like Diridon. Google has demonstrated a commitment to environmental sustainability in Mt. View, and this is an important opportunity for San José.

New development adheres to pillars and strategies (see figure below) and LEED Gold or Platinum standards for green building.

There are high expectations for a Google development to achieve a high level of environmental sustainability. This includes energy conservation, water reuse, use of permeable pavement and green materials, and other measures.

Creeks and other natural resources are integrated early into projects, using principles of healthy ecosystem design.

The intent is to ensure that the design of new development and infrastructure projects consider the opportunities and constraints presented by Guadalupe River and Los Gatos Creek, as important and defining aspects of the area.

Design should minimize impacts on creek corridors and enhance habitat for wildlife and humans, such as through creek setbacks, native plant landscaping,

and bird-safe design. Integrating nature into the urban environment would benefit public health, in addition to the ecosystem. The Audubon Society and Sierra Club suggested that the Diridon Station Area Plan should incorporate the Urban Habitat Design Guidelines.

Conclusion
This section was added after the Draft Report was released for public review, in response to comments. There was strong agreement among the SAAG to more explicitly reflect goals for environmental sustainability. Some members of the public also want this topic to be a top consideration in the planning and design of new development in the Diridon Station Area. There is optimism that Google can be a leader in innovative green building and EcoDistrict planning.

This section summarizes the Online Feedback Form results (see Appendix for full results). Figure 3-2 shows the seven Desired Outcomes with the highest agreement/lowest disagreement and the seven with the lowest agreement/highest disagreement. The top seven outcomes fall within two topics area: Transportation/Transit and Parks, Public Space, and Trails. Most of the bottom outcomes fall under Housing and Displacement, with one under Parking and one under Jobs, Education, and Economic Development. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Desired Outcomes with Highest Agreement/Lowest
Disagreement
Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree

There were 1,092 unique write-in comments to the open-ended comments. These comments reinforced the top Issues described at the beginning of this chapter and provide insight on the levels of agreement and disagreement for the Desired Outcomes. The frequency of comments by subtopic provide an indicator of the range of overall opinions held by community members. For example, of the writein comments:
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Desired Outcomes with Lowest Agreement/Highest
Disagreement
Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree • About 15 percent were related to the opportunity for revitalization of the Downtown/Diridon area (Issue #2).
• About 14% were related to housing and displacement concerns (Issue #1). • About 9 percent included the word “homeless” or “homelessness” (Issues #1 and #8).
• About 8 percent were related to safety (Issue #8).
• About 8 percent were related to job opportunities and/or social equity (Issue #3).
• About 5 percent directly expressed support for the potential Google development, while 1.6 percent explicitly stated opposition for the project. 4 Through the Engagement Process, community members identified a range of aspirations and concerns related to a potential Google development in the Diridon Station Area. The top issue is the fear of displacement from San José due to rising housing prices. The top opportunity is for the revitalization of the Diridon area and expansion of the Downtown. Other top issues and opportunities were related to social equity, job and educational opportunities, safety, homelessness, high speed rail impacts, and environmental sustainability. The effect on San José’s identity was an underlying theme of many comments, and expectations related to Google’s role and the possibility for “community benefits” were prominent discussion topics.

Input was synthesized into “Desired Outcomes”, based on initial input, to collectively reflect the most frequent goals and aspirations expressed by community members. Together, the top Issues and Opportunities and the Desired Outcomes reflect the Key Themes of the civic engagement process. The Desired Outcomes for development in the Diridon Station Area are divided into six topics:

1. Housing and Displacement

2. Jobs, Education, and Economic Development

3. Land Use, Design, and Parking

4. Public Space, Creeks, and Trails

5. Transportation and Transit

6. Environmental Sustainability
There are also Desired Outcomes for how any extra resources generated by the Google project could be used at the citywide level to minimize impacts and maximize benefits related to Housing and Jobs.

The community engagement phase conducted in September and October largely reinforced the Key Themes described in the first draft of this Report, although reactions to the preliminary Desired Outcomes surfaced some specific disagreements and new ideas. For example, several comments pointed out the lack of environmental sustainability goals reflected in the outcomes, and this topic was since added to the Report. All other ideas not listed in the set of Desired Outcomes (Chapter 3), including specific actions and policies for achieving Desired Outcomes, are listed as Potential Solutions in the Appendix.

As described in Chapter 1, Introduction, the input gathered through the engagement process has been and will continue to inform a variety of decisions related to the Diridon Station Area, including but not limited to agreements with Google; initial development concepts and design thinking; private development proposals by others; updates to the Diridon Station Area Plan and other applicable plans; and transit improvements and Diridon Station modifications.

The input can also inform Citywide efforts. The three “buckets” under which the input may be considered is shown in Figure 4.1.

The next steps in the Google project are described in Chapter 1 of this report. To summarize, City Council is tentatively scheduled to consider the MOU and PSA in on December 4, 2018. The development review process is anticipated to begin in 2019 and last at least two years, and construction could take another 10 years beyond project approval. Community engagement will continue throughout this process, including negotiations of a Development Agreement with a specific Community Benefits Plan. This could include regular updates and discussions with the Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG), among other engagement methods.

Figure 4.1: How Input May be Used
Current work efforts related specifically to the Downtown/Diridon area that have already drawn upon or could consider feedback in this report includes the Diridon Integrated Station Concept Plan (“Concept Plan”), Downtown Transportation Plan, and the Downtown Design Guidelines. The Concept Plan is a joint effort by the City of San José, VTA, Caltrain, and the California High Speed Rail Authority to collaboratively plan for a new, expanded intermodal station that

integrates existing and future transit services at Diridon. Work began fall 2018 and the initial phase is expected to be complete by summer 2019. The City is leading the public outreach and community engagement process for the Concept Plan, and intends to utilize the project website www.diridonsj.org as the primary venue for sharing information.

Applicable citywide efforts may include affordable housing, anti-displacement policies, workforce development programs, climate change mitigation and adaption, civic innovation, and parks and trail projects, among other focus areas.

For example, the City Council recently adopted a Housing Crisis Response Workplan and Affordable Housing Investment Plan, which together outline strategies for reaching housing production goals. The City is also participating in PolicyLink’s “All-In Cities Anti-Displacement Network” and Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s “Committee to House the Bay Area” (CASA) to learn from peers and understand best practices. Information from both of these workgroups is anticipated to inform the development of an anti-displacement strategy for San José. The creation of the City’s anti-displacement strategy and implementation of equitable housing development strategies will consider and build upon the input received through the civic engagement process. Many of the SAAG members and community members that have participated in the process have also been active in advocating for housing and anti-displacement strategies in other City forums. The City will continue to engage these residents, leaders, and organizations as it advances strategies to address the housing crisis.

In the coming years, the City intends to convene the Diridon Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG) on an as-needed basis and to conduct other community engagement activities. The City greatly values the time, energy, and thoughtful input from the SAAG and other community members. As the Google project, Downtown planning, Diridon Station improvements, and citywide efforts for equitable and sustainable development evolve, the San José community will continue to have an important voice in the process.

South San Francisco City CouncilAugust 28, 2024

South San Francisco City Council
August 28, 2024