Summary not yet generated for this topic.
Community sentiment
At a glance
- Public comments
- 14
- Last 30 days
- 0
Last discussed Jun 25, 2026.
Public comments (15)
The appellant argued the SB 9 lot split was void due to a fraudulent owner-occupancy affidavit and urged the commission to deny the care facility permit.
Planning Commission — June 25, 2026 · 21:21 →The applicant described her family's senior care experience and asked the commission to deny the appeal.
Planning Commission — June 25, 2026 · 30:56 →The applicant, a San Jose firefighter and EMT, said the family will build and operate the home themselves and asked for support.
Planning Commission — June 25, 2026 · 33:37 →The project architect argued the project meets all zoning and design standards and that traffic impacts are lower than a single-family home would generate.
Planning Commission — June 25, 2026 · 30:05 →A longtime friend of Hal Pham spoke in support, saying the facility would enhance the neighborhood.
Planning Commission — June 25, 2026 · 38:53 →The next-door neighbor raised parking and visitor-access concerns, arguing the appointment-only visitor condition conflicts with state resident rights law.
Planning Commission — June 25, 2026 · 41:16 →Argued the Phams are non-resident real estate investors ineligible for SB 9 and asked that the project be scaled back to six beds or denied.
Planning Commission — June 25, 2026 · 43:30 →Spoke in favor based on his own struggle to find care for his dying father, citing a similar neighborhood care home that caused no problems.
Planning Commission — June 25, 2026 · 45:31 →Raised concerns about three residents per room and the level of services aging residents require.
Planning Commission — June 25, 2026 · 47:33 →Lives on the corner and counted 94 cars in 11 minutes; says traffic is horrendous and 15 beds is too many, though he supports assisted living in principle.
Planning Commission — June 25, 2026 · 49:52 →A chaplain who has known the Pham family nearly 30 years vouched for their character and spoke in favor.
Planning Commission — June 25, 2026 · 51:05 →Lives catty-corner; says neighbors aren't NIMBYs and would accept a six-bed facility, but questions the timing of the new traffic counter.
Planning Commission — June 25, 2026 · 53:15 →A developer and neighbor who says the applicants misled adjoining neighbors about their plans; opposes the 15-bed scale but would accept six beds.
Planning Commission — June 25, 2026 · 54:43 →Coached Hal Pham in high school wrestling; spoke in support, citing the aging population and housing benefits of care facilities.
Planning Commission — June 25, 2026 · 56:27 →A caregiver with 15 years of experience said smaller facilities provide better care and visitation fears are overblown; asked the commission to deny the appeal.
Planning Commission — June 25, 2026 · 57:53 →