City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 1 of 25 January 24, 2022 7 City of Lafayette
Minutes
City Council Meeting
General Plan Advisory Committee
Teleconference Meeting – Watch on the City of Lafayette’s YouTube Channel at January 24, 2022 http://bit.ly/LoveLafayetteYouTube Submit public comments to [email protected] 5:00 p.m. before or during the meeting.
To protect public health, our residents, officials, and staff, and aligned with the Governor’s recent executive order N-29-20, certain teleconference requirements of the Brown Act have been suspended, including the requirement to provide a physical location for members of the public to participate in the meeting. Here is how to participate in the meeting and provide public comment:
1) Watch or Listen: Meetings are broadcast on the City of Lafayette’s YouTube Channel:
http://bit.ly/LoveLafayetteYouTube. An archived, on-demand video of each meeting is maintained on the channel as part of the public record.
2) Submit Comments Before the Meeting: Members of the public can provide public comment by sending an e-mail to [email protected] (for City Council meetings). Those e-mails will be distributed to the members of the City Council, the City Manager, and the City Attorney, and will be posted as part of the public record.
3) Live Remote Public Comments: Members of the public may submit live public comment via Zoom conferencing. You must download the Zoom app or software. Zoom meetings can be accessed by telephone, computer, or smart device. When the Mayor invites public comment for the item on which you would like to comment, please use the "raise hand" feature (or press *9 if connecting via telephone only) to alert staff you have a public comment to provide. Each speaker is allowed three (3) minutes to speak.
Any graphic a speaker wishes to use as part of public comment must be emailed to [email protected] for City Council meetings by 3:00 p.m. the day of the meeting. Zoom Webinar joining instructions will be posted on the meeting agenda prior to the start of the scheduled meeting. 4) Join the Meeting Remotely: Use the links below to join the meeting and provide remote live audio public comment.
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85726869346?pwd=RUVicFRiSk80L2VRYldDMlBKcHNsQT09 Passcode: 066981 or join by phone: Dial 1 669 900 9128; Webinar ID: 857 2686 9346 Passcode: 066981
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 2 of 25 January 24, 2022
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Gerringer called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. via teleconference.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: City Council: Mayor Gerringer; Vice Mayor Anduri; Councilmembers Candell, Dawson and Kwok
Absent: None
Present: GPAC Members: Jim Cervantes, Matt Pease, Namratha Kasalanati Staff Present: Niroop Srivatsa, City Manager; Tracy Robinson, Administrative Services Director; Sarah Allen, Assistant Planning and Building Director; Nancy Tran, Senior Planner; Greg Wolff, Planning and Building Director; Suzanne Iarla, Communication Analyst; Mala Subramanian, City Attorney; Joanne Robbins, City Clerk
3. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Dawson/Anduri) to adopt the agenda. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Gerringer, Anduri, Candell, Dawson, and Kwok; Noes: None).
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS (for items not on the agenda)
LINDA RIEBEL spoke of her success in obtaining signatures for the Our Neighborhood Voices Initiative which would give power back to cities for land use and urged the Council to endorse the initiative.
JOHN BRIGGS spoke of his and volunteers’ efforts to collect signatures to place an Initiative on the November ballot, citing endorsement by SCAG and United Homeowners Association, Livable California, NextDoor.com messages, and he asked for the Council’s endorsement.
LEONARD DORIN questioned the owner(s) of the dead Monterey Pine trees along Hwy 24, voiced concerns with the Big Sur fire and fire risks given it is January, and asked the City to assign one person to contact regarding fire concerns.
5. Special Joint Session 5:00pm to 7:00pm
City Council and General Plan Advisory Committee - Mission Statement Sub-Committee Sarah Allen, Assistant Planning Director and Jim Cervantes, GPAC Chair Presenting Findings and Recommendations for the General Plan Mission Statement Recommendation: Review and approve the draft Mission, Vision, and Values statements as recommended by the General Plan Advisory Committee.
GPAC Chair Jim Cervantes introduced GPAC Subcommittee members Matt Pease and Namratha Kasalanati, gave a background of the work to date, the on-line surveys, meetings, public revisions and working drafts.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 3 of 25 January 24, 2022 Namratha Kasalanati, GPAC subcommittee member, described their charter as approved by the GPAC and Council, outreach via an on-line survey and results, completion of a draft and a second on-line survey conducted, and described additional outreach, meetings with stakeholders, and completion of a final draft in November which was approved by GPAC in December.
Matt Pease, GPAC subcommittee member, reviewed what other cities have done with their mission statements, design of principles and definitions of the vision statement, guiding characteristics from establishing interests, specific developments in revising the statement because of the diversity of neighborhoods, City growth, and volunteers.
Mr. Cervantes concluded the presentation, thanked all citizens in the community for their participation, Councilmembers, City staff, consultants and GPAC members, and he said the subcommittee and GPAC recommends the City Council adopt the final draft of the Mission, Vision and Values Statement.
Mayor Gerringer and Councilmembers prefaced their comments and questions with thanks to the GPAC members and the subcommittee for their extensive work and outreach with stakeholders.
Vice Mayor Anduri had the following initial questions and comments:
• Asked if it was the feeling of GPAC that Lafayette cannot be described as having a semi-rural ambience.
• Mr. Cervantes explained this was one of the concepts they grappled with the most and it struck them that the City has evolved. They thought the City was more complex than that and they wanted to stay away from stating the whole City is semi-rural given there are different looks, feels and characters. A related concept was also the “small-town community” which they did not include in an earlier draft and they believed that “semi-rural” did not currently fit with what is the reality now.
• Questioned if there was discussion of using “hillsides” instead of “hills”. Mr. Cervantes said yes, but they were advised that “hills” and “ridgelines”, in particular, covered the important areas, and they added in “ridgelines” near the end.
• Questioned if “We achieve this vision” could be replaced with “We pursue this vision.” Mr. Pease explained they chose “achieve” to be aspirational and positive, definitive that they are committed to this vision with the idea that they will get there and “achieve” this. • Referred to the Guiding Characteristics of the Community and asked for the history and support was included behind the use of the word “support our distinct residential areas”. Mr. Pease said it is broad and could be anything from volunteer committees that help with sustainability to laws that are passed, monies that are raised to offset pollution to certain groups being responsible for helping with infrastructure. They tried to use words with the broadest definition possible.
Councilmember Candell had the following initial comments and questions:
• Referred to “We achieve this by engaging residents, community groups and business owners” and she questioned the lack of “property owners”, noting the City often does not send things out to business owners but more to property owners. Mr. Pease explained that in the statement before this they talk about “residents and visitors alike”, used them in broad terms, and did not want to exclude anyone. It was more about limiting the length of the document and not excluding anyone.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 4 of 25 January 24, 2022 • Cited emails about “semi-rural”, stating even if the word does not apply it seems people want to avoid having the downtown like Walnut Creek. She knows the City is going to grow and asked if there was a way to retain the term. Mr. Pease said the issue is defining it in a way that will stay with them for years to come. They used the term “preserving the natural beauty”, noting different neighborhoods are different from one another. They also use “the vibrant downtown”, the “small town community” which are all phrases they thought were more descriptive of the City as it stands today than it did back in 1968.
Mr. Cervantes added that they tried to get to “semi-rural” with the respect for nature and open space which speaks to an appreciation for a more rural setting, using various phrases to acknowledge there are semi-rural neighborhoods but they felt it did not apply in the broader sense.
He said the City Council can decide whether it will look like Walnut Creek or Danville or Alamo. The mission statement will not dictate policy, and they wanted to leave this up to the City Council and voters on how they decide the details of how the City looks. In a couple of weeks they will start their RHNA discussions and dealing with densities which the Council will see later in the spring.
This is the policy side of this and if there is a preference not to have 10-story buildings in the downtown that is where that gets enacted--on the land use policy side which is outside the framing of a mission statement.
Councilmember Dawson had the following initial comments and questions:
• Referred to the “excellent schools” reference and thought it was out of the City’s purview but rather the relationships with their school districts. She questioned whether it should be included and also cited its positioning before their downtown and open spaces. In terms of what came back from responses, she noticed there is also a different positioning for that. Ms. Kasalanati said they saw this mission statement not just for the City and general functions, but also for the community as a whole which includes schools which people value.
Mayor Gerringer opened the public comment period.
ELIOT HUDSON spoke about his work to analyze the survey results regarding the issue of “semi-rural” and disagreed with the statement that the Mission Statement does not dictate policy. It is an introduction to the General Plan, and it should and does state the policy of the City. For decades, no value has been more important than the City’s semi-rural character and maintaining it to the absolute extent they can and thinks it is accurate to describe Lafayette as semi-rural if it is even partially semi-rural.
Councilmember Kwok and Vice Mayor Anduri questioned Mr. Hudson as to what changes he would like to be reflected. Mr. Hudson agreed with the final sentence of the statement to state, “work together with our City government, make Lafayette a highly desirable small town community, with a semi-rural ambience where people can live, work and visit.”
Mayor Gerringer stated her understanding that by legal definition Lafayette is a city and not a town. Mr.
Hudson said his desire is to state “town” to keep with the theme that Lafayette retains the character of a small town.
JAY LIFSON, Chamber of Commerce, spoke of the Chamber’s letter indicating that their Board of Directors endorses the current Vision and Mission statement GPAC is presenting tonight, urged the Council to vote to support this version to allow GPAC to guide them as they move into additional areas of the General Plan, and asked to include downtown businesses and property owners in all discussions.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 5 of 25 January 24, 2022 JOHN BRIGGS asked that the original statement remain which he believes is brilliant, echoed Mr. Hudson’s statements, opposed the wording of the second sentence which omits the word “volunteer”, and noted the City has limited services and conservative fiscal policies.
JANET THOMAS feels this is an example of civic engagement at its best, thanked GPAC members and all others for their work in development of the mission statement, and voiced support of the statement as proposed.
DAVID CLARK spoke of interpretation of a book’s title and referred to the word “protected” in the second line of the Vision and Mission Statement which applies to open spaces the way it is written. If the word is to apply to each of the items in the list he suggested using “and” in front of “protected”. If not, he thinks it is fine.
Mr. Pease stated it is meant to be protected among all of those, and he thanked him for suggesting the grammatical revision.
ROBERT LAVOIE thanked GPAC for their hard work, cited the importance of “semi-rural” in describing the town, thinks the old mission statement is clear, concise, timeless, aspirational and brilliant and asked the Council to consider the revision incorporating the semi-rural history and setting in the current mission statement proposed.
JANINE CROWE voiced support of retaining “semi-rural”, agrees with the Council’s compromising statement which Mr. Hudson agreed to, and thanked GPAC and others for their extensive work.
GWEN thanked GPAC and others for their work, is supportive of Mr. Hudson’s comments, and said she was involved initially and remembers the word “semi-rural” was put aside despite those in favor of it. She gathered signatures for the petition mentioned earlier and hundreds of people thanked her for the petition who did not feel they were being listened to. She asked to go back to the original statement and thinks her downtown neighborhood is more rural than many other areas of the City.
MICHAEL GRIFFITHS thinks it is important that residents are listened to, agreed with Mr. Hudson’s comments and thinks Lafayette is still semi-rural and asked to include it in the mission statement with suggestions from Vice Mayor Anduri, or use the old mission statement.
Councilmember Dawson said she thinks the mission statement helps guide policy, asked for clarification on the guiding characteristics as to whether these were the things that would guide the Council’s discussion about policy.
Mr. Pease stated yes; this isthe context they thought about them. Mr. Cervantes added that they viewed this as a whole, noting that in an earlier draft they had a separate vision and mission statement and they consolidated it. There are three parts to this which all work together and are important to the community.
Mayor Gerringer asked if the item is time-sensitive if moved to the next meeting, and Ms. Allen said it is a separate task of the General Plan, but they could be on parallel tracks.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 6 of 25 January 24, 2022 Mayor Gerringer voiced support in the way the schools have been incorporated, thinks it is inter-related in who they are as a mission and a vision because often people move here for Lafayette’s excellent schools and green hills even though the City does not oversee the schools.
Vice Mayor Anduri agreed and one of his suggestions is that the phrase read, “…with excellent schools and a commitment to life-long learning” which he said is a core characteristic of Lafayette and a vision to always keep in mind.
Councilmember Candell commented that this came up and those in charge of life-long learning with schools said they did not think it was appropriate to be included in the mission statement.
Vice Mayor Anduri said he does not see the Council adopting this tonight, thinks everyone has done a fantastic job and it is in a much better state than it was in. Often times when wordsmithing documents they need to sit for a while and be thought about before finalizing. He therefore recommended discussing this further, possibly coming to a preliminary conclusion and giving the public an opportunity to comment and continue it to the next meeting to finalize.
Mayor Gerringer recognized there was concurrence from other Councilmembers and discussion ensued.
Vice Mayor Anduri said he agrees with Mr. Clark that there needs to be another conjunctive in the first sentence after “backgrounds, and” because otherwise it runs together. He thinks hills include ridgelines so he would rather it be “hillsides, ridgelines”. He was happy with the explanation given about why using “achieve” versus “pursue” and he would like to add after “small town community” the words “with a semirural ambience.” Regarding the “city” versus “town”, it is correct the way it is. The city is a noun and small town is an adjective. In terms of brevity, he would suggest not including the Guiding Characteristics because almost all of those are included in the Vision and Mission Statement. This would shorten it considerably.
Councilmember Dawson asked if Vice Mayor Anduri wanted to not include the listing under guiding characteristics or did he want to incorporate it into the Vision and Mission paragraph.
Vice Mayor Anduri said he suggests not including it because it is included in other areas. He suggested removing “support a vibrant downtown core and change “active” to “vibrant” in the Vision and Mission Statement, said he was not sure he sees how “support our distinct residential areas” as a guiding characteristic, and the only one not in there to “maintain a fiscal responsible and transparent City government” could be added to the sentence. Councilmember Dawson confirmed she supported these.
Councilmember Candell said she hesitates to bring in the life-long learning only because of the conversation they had at one GPAC meeting. Otherwise, she supported Mr. Clark’s thought about being clearer about protecting the open spaces and hillsides and ridgelines. She knows Mr. Lifson wants to work with property owners but questioned if they need to be called out or not and also thinks the list is nice but not quite complete.
She toyed with adding the word “business and property owners to work together”, likes removing the guiding characteristics and pulling them into the mission and vision because it is a far stronger statement than to have them separated out. She definitely likes “Make Lafayette a highly desirable small-town community with semi-rural ambience where people can live, work and visit.” City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 7 of 25 January 24, 2022 Mr. Cervantes said they had that framing in an earlier draft as one of the guiding characteristics. In talking about it, some individuals were involved on the library side or continuing education side who commented they do not do a lot of that here as compared to some other communities around Lafayette. So given that, the feeling was to drop it and to try to keep the word count down. Honestly, he likes that framing but the sense GPAC was not quite there among those most active in that space is why the text went out which was during the November discussion they had.
Councilmember Kwok said he is happy this process was initiated a year ago, thinks it is healthy to look at their mission statement periodically, thinks it is the right thing to do. The process has been challenging because the views of the community are diverse and he commended what is very hard work of the three subcommittee members and the GPAC as a wider group to synthesize comments and figure out ways to incorporate views.
He also thinks the structure is well thought out and is comfortable with the way it is presented which is to have the combined mission and vision but also to state the guiding characteristics because many on the list. While they could be inferred by the statements above, they are very specific community asks regarding environmental sustainability, safety of modes of travel, or vibrant downtown core.
Mayor Gerringer said if some of the characteristics are not clear the Council can review it again and tweak it or thought the majority of the Council may want to include them. She thinks the way the life-long learning was worded in the original first round was a bit more school-reliant. She has gone to all meetings and did not remember anyone from the library specifically saying they do not do life-long learning in Lafayette, having been involved with the library and partners. During COVID there may have been a perception that they do not have those programs, but she would like to see life-long learning stay in. If the Council decides it will make edits and then put them back out, those with concerns can weigh in again.
She thinks “business/property owners” or “business and property owners” is important because they are not captured in the other areas. She also thought that the sentence which states groups of business, property owners “to work and volunteer together with our City government to make Lafayette a highly ….” This definitely brings up the volunteer goals and how the City achieves things is through volunteers and commissions/committees, so it is part of that mission.
Lastly, regarding moving all of the lists from the guiding characteristics into the vision and mission statement, to look at “value everyone” says something more concretely than “all ages and backgrounds”.
Therefore, she would support keeping the guiding characteristics of the community and asked for other Councilmember comments.
Vice Mayor Anduri asked if they could efficiently include the items in the guiding characteristics in the vision and mission statement in some manner that eliminates the duplication and makes for a more powerful vision and mission statement.
Mayor Gerringer suggested Ms. Allen display the changes proposed by Councilmembers.
Councilmember Dawson suggested creating the mission statement as a stand-alone if the Council is going to edit it. As an example, she suggested including why Vice Mayor Anduri wants the characteristics incorporated.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 8 of 25 January 24, 2022 Mayor Gerringer said she thinks the guiding characteristics are stronger and supported having them included.
Vice Mayor Anduri voiced the following edits:
• Second line; “Be a commitment to life-long learning;
• Next line; he would like to see “a vibrant downtown” since this is usually used as the adjective. • Make the “hillside” edit;
• Reverse the “work” and “volunteer” because first you volunteer and then you work; • Add the “semi-rural ambience”;
• The way to put value in is to change “for all ages and backgrounds” in the first line to “that values everyone” but this sounds a bit clunky, but it does eliminate the duplication/redundancy.
Mayor Gerringer suggested that between “welcoming” and “family-friendly inclusive” and still have “for all ages and backgrounds”. She questioned how to not support or being open to the downtown mixed use, single, or all of the other pieces that may not be captured in “semi-rural ambience” and leaving guiding characteristics to the whole statement.
Councilmember Candell said it seems a vibrant downtown is great, and they are going to support a vibrant downtown, noting the downtown is already mixed use and commercial.
Mayor Gerringer then referred to “safety for all modes of travel” and asked if they are then saying a “safety community for residents and visitors alike” perspective which is also fire preparedness, transportation, police, etc.
Councilmember Kwok asked if “support environmental sustainability and effective infrastructure” could get worked in somehow, as he did not see it inferred.
Vice Mayor Anduri said he was not sure that was necessary. In one draft he has he has “welcoming, sustainable, family-friendly city”.
Councilmember Dawson agreed with Councilmember Kwok, as that is a driving characteristics or direction of the City, with focus on sustainability. The vision and mission statement is going on-line and in documents and it is parallel to the GPAC process and separate from what they were putting in their Housing Element. She questioned if they could achieve this as opposed to guiding characteristics. These items are what they work to achieve and their mission, so she is not sure putting it all in one sound bite is necessary.
Councilmember Kwok echoed these comments and said he was happy to integrate them in the process.
He does not object to having it presented as GPAC has, which is to have it in a paragraph form above and then to have the succinct statements below as helpers. He thinks the goal is clarity and not necessarily brevity. If they can do both he is also all for that. But, if they find it has not become better he would like to offer they revert back to what GPAC has presented and then more edits along that structure.
Councilmember Candell suggested doing both--present them and work through them separately. Once they all think about it and reflect they can return and decide which is better. She likes Vice Mayor Anduri’s suggestion to add “sustainable” which would be done. They could then look at how to modify the mission and vision keeping the guiding characteristics.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 9 of 25 January 24, 2022 Council discussion ensued as to what the subcommittee and GPAC discussed, guiding characteristics, interpretations of certain wording, format and structure, reasons for the draft vision and mission statement developed as it has been, speaker comments, GPAC’s work to use “protecting and enhancing parklands, trails, hills, ridgelines, open spaces and creeks” versus the application of the word “semi-rural ambience” and its definition
Mayor Gerringer summarized that based on discussion Councilmembers supported looking at both; the Vision and Mission Statement with and without the guiding characteristics and request staff rework the statement for review at the next Council meeting and/or send it back to the GPAC subcommittee.
Councilmember Candell said if they remove the guiding characteristics, they should add “trails” into the mission statement. Councilmember Dawson also suggested including “infrastructure”.
Vice Mayor Anduri suggested replacing “We achieve this by” with “pursue this vision by engaging residents”. He also supported the three-week deliberation period, did not support adding “infrastructure”, and in addressing the semi-rural definition, he thinks semi-rural ambience should be included because of Lafayette’s small-town feeling. This may mean a variety of things but not Walnut Creek-type buildings. He would not want this to affect something like building an apartment building because it is not viewed as semi-rural.
Mayor Gerringer asked staff and the subcommittee to bring back edits, consider keeping guiding characteristics through potential wordsmithing or removing it.
City Manager Srivatsa summarized that staff will return with two versions; one version would be the edited piece where guiding characteristics would be folded into the mission statement and the other would be keeping the guiding characteristics as presented but making the other changes to the mission statement.
Mayor Gerringer stated based upon items for the agenda at the next meeting she will make a determination of whether to start the meeting early. She and Councilmembers again thanked the GPAC Subcommittee and staff for their efforts.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Candell/Anduri) to continue discussion and consideration of the draft Mission, Vision, and Values statements to the February 14, 2022 City Council meeting. Roll Call Vote: 5-0 (Ayes:
Anduri, Candell, Dawson, Kwok and Gerringer; Noes: None).
BREAK
Mayor Gerringer called for a break at 7:19 p.m. and, thereafter, reconvened the meeting at 7:25 p.m.
6. Presentations (7:00 p.m.)
A. Management Partners Organization Assessment of the City’s Planning, Public Works/Engineering, Administrative Services, Parks, Trails and Recreation, and Police Departments
Recommendation: Receive and file.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 10 of 25 January 24, 2022 City Manager Niroop Srivatsa gave an overview of the item, stating staffing resources have not kept pace with the demands for City services or increase in the number of unfunded State mandates. The City Council approved funding for an organizational assessment of all departments which has been completed by Management Partners. She introduced and gave a brief background on Dan Marks and Rick Haydon who will be presenting.
Rick Haydon, Management Partners, gave a background of their services and expertise, an overview of their work with staff on their workloads, review of documents, interaction with County staff on contract services they provide, and interviews with stakeholders. He also reviewed 8 comparable cities and their support staff, boards, commissions and committees, made several observations and 34 recommendations, and he described these in 4 major categories.
Mr. Haydon then described observations made and a variety of suggestions, recommended policies relating to staff work, recommendations for hiring of staff, changes in operational duties, consolidation of commissions based on the Stanford report, and technology recommendations for a development permitting tracking process, a customer service module and GIS system.
Councilmember Candell questioned and confirmed with Mr. Haydon and Mr. Marks that performance metrics can be developed by individual department staff and is also not currently part of their contract and they described ways of measuring performance to meet goals and objectives.
Councilmember Kwok referred to technology and asked how Lafayette’s use of technology compares with other cities. Dan Marks explained Lafayette needs a strategic plan for its IT. IT needs to be better integrated throughout departments with updated software and hardware systems, and he recommended hiring a consultant to better integrate what the City already has. They can recommend consultants and/or manage that process.
Councilmember Kwok commented that he was surprised that goals and performance metrics are not documented, and he questioned what aspect of the comment is not being done. Mr. Haydon replied there are goals and objectives for the City Council and individual employee goals, but no departmentspecific goals and objectives.
Vice Mayor Anduri questioned Mr. Haydon’s reply, noting there is an adopted Work Plan for the Planning Department. Mr. Haydon stated there are 16 identified items in the 2022/23 Work Plan, but not a similar type of document for any other department.
Mr. Marks added they found there are no metrics to measure the status of the Work Plan and they found staffing resources are such that they cannot get to any of them except for the General Plan update. There is no schedule, no sense of when the items will get done, given limited staff resources. Therefore, metrics are needed for these items and other departments.
Vice Mayor Anduri noted each Committee/Commission sets priorities each year, highlighting their accomplishments and new goals, and these bodies are staffed by the various departments.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 11 of 25 January 24, 2022 Mayor Gerringer stated the City Council has also seen CIP projects which are identified in the City’s budget and Work Plan. Mr. Haydon said they are accustomed to seeing a listing of capital improvement projects, their anticipated start and completion date, their budget and at the end of the year the status of when they began, completed and costs. They could not find any clear documents that specified the status or fiscal year of the projects, and many projects showed as being carried over, and this has to do with staffing capacity issues.
Mr. Marksstated typically CIPs are 3 years out. They show the entire budget, how they will expend money over the 3-5 years on capital improvements and there was no plan they could find.
Mayor Gerringer opened the public comment period.
ABIGAIL FATEMAN said as a member of the community who has served on multiple committees and commissions, the City is growing and some issues they have been asked to deal with exceed the expertise of residents to opine on them effectively. She asked if the consultants would consider narrowing the scope of some commissions/committees so what they are considering and providing input on is something within an appropriate level of expertise. She also thinks the City has a bit of a recruitment problem and, as a result, they are lacking in full commissions/committees.
DAVID CLARK said as a member on the Creeks Committee there have been a number of times where projects have taken longer than expected. However, there are many unknowns which impact capacity and he asked how to account for those. He cited the multiple housing laws, RHNA, traffic safety programs, and more all of which required a tremendous amount of time. He asked if they could even try to anticipate these unknowns.
Mayor Gerringer stated under Item 9B, the Council will break up some of the recommendations, and things like review of commissions, specific recommendations made regarding the Council and how actions are taken or direction is given will be done during the Goal Setting in early March. She asked if Mr. Haydon or Mr. Marks know how cities have narrowed the scope of commissions/committees and planning for unknowns.
Mr. Haydon said one of the things that jumped out is the number of boards, commissions and committees Lafayette has, especially for a city the size of Lafayette. There are 17 advisory committees, 12 additional subcommittees, the Council has 8, 2-person committees, and this totals 39 bodies which someone must help support and staff and there are only 40 full-time employees and not all of them are supporting commissions. They are fortunate to have an engaged volunteer community in helping form policies and procedures. However, they were not able to look into the boards, commissions and subcommittee areas other than the Stanford report which had a number of recommendations, many of which were not fully vetted at the time and this was also under a different City Council. This is why they recommend revisiting the Stanford report.
Regarding Mr. Clark’s comments about setting aside time for the unknowns, the rule of thumb is that 90% of time is spent doing day to day functions. 5% is set aside for strategic, long-range planning and goal setting, and another 5% for those unknowns. Often times, those unknowns are urgent which take over the priority matters and consume someone’s entire day.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 12 of 25 January 24, 2022 Mr. Marks added that one recommendation is to have a clear document as to what the roles and responsibilities are for commission and committee members. This way, this sets forth the fact that their job is not to substitute for expertise in staff but to provide guidance in certain ways, so they do not drift into areas not in their expertise. Also, when unknowns come along, it is staff’s role to come to the Council and indicate what types of resources would be needed, and ask what priorities are not going to be undertaken and identify those things that will slip. The way to deal with that is by having clear work programs.
Mayor Gerringer and Councilmembers thanked Mr. Haydon and Mr. Marks for their presentation and assistance in developing their priorities in their March goal-setting workshop.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Gerringer asked if there were any requests for removal of items or public comments or requests for removal of items, and there were none.
A. Minutes – January 10, 2021
Recommendation: Approve.
B. Design Services Agreement for Land Surveying and Civil Engineering Services for the Lafayette Community Center Playground Renovation Project
Recommendation: Authorize staff to execute the Design Services Agreement with LCC Engineering & Surveying Inc. for the Lafayette Community Center Playground Renovation Project.
C. Resolution 2022-04 2nd Extension of Families First Corona Virus Response Act (FFCRA) Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2021-04 to extend the EPSLA provisions of the FFCRA administratively as part of the City’s Coronavirus Compensation Policy retroactively from June 30, 2021 until such time as the California state of emergency has ended as outline in Compensation Policy Update #7.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/Kwok) to adopt Consent Calendar Items A, B and C. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes:
Gerringer, Anduri, Candell, Dawson, and Kwok; Noes: None).
8. OLD BUSINESS
A. Joanne Robbins, City Clerk
Review Policy for Issuing Proclamations
Recommendation: Continue with the current practice routing all proclamation requests to the City Clerk.
City Clerk Joanne Robbins gave the staff report which identifies the City’s current practice, as well as options to consider, and said she was available to answer Council questions.
Councilmember Candell said her understanding is there is not a way for a member of the public to request a proclamation. She asked if the person would go directly to the Mayor for their request.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 13 of 25 January 24, 2022 Ms. Robbins replied that she would first seek the Council’s direction for this, but if a leader of a Boy Scout or Girl Scout troop emails her and asks for a ceremonial proclamation she would have the Council’s permission to prepare those for the Mayor’s signature and presentation. Staff is trying to prevent having a member of the public request, for example, an awareness month each month and instead adopt an annual calendar for organizations, people, or events to be recognized.
Vice Mayor Anduri said at the beginning of the report there are 3 different types of proclamations. The first are those which come to the Council from recognized organizations. The third option which is recommended is to continue the current practice which he thought means they continue with number 1.
Ms. Robbins confirmed.
Councilmember Dawson asked and confirmed that the Council recognized the National PTA calendar via the DEIB recommendations which will be on the City’s DEIB website page, and while this was not necessarily a proclamation, they pick up months and recognitions moving forward.
Vice Mayor Anduri asked and confirmed with the City Clerk that there could be one resolution the Mayor would bring to the Council identifying the months or weeks the Council will recognize during the year and it is possible to bring forward a schedule for the next 2 years so people could plan further out.
Mayor Gerringer asked and confirmed that proclamations for ceremonial purposes could also be for retiring personnel.
Mayor Gerringer opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
Vice Mayor Anduri said he likes the two-year approach because it gives organizations and the Vice Mayor and Mayor time to plan for what will be celebrated.
Councilmember Dawson agreed, but asked what is the process for individuals requesting proclamations.
Ms. Robbins stated they have had public requests via public comments in the past, and Councilmember Dawson asked to clarify this for the public. Ms. Robbins stated she can post the policy on the City Council’s web page.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/Candell) to determine that 1) Proclamations requested by recognized organizations will continue to be placed on the City Council agenda with the exception that proclamations requested by individuals are not considered; 2) Ceremonial proclamations will continue to be prepared by the City Clerk but not placed on the City Council agenda; 3) The Mayor and Vice Mayor will choose events from the National Multicultural PTA calendar to be recognized for two sequential years on the City Council agenda in January of each year. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Gerringer, Anduri, Candell, Dawson, and Kwok; Noes: None).
9. STAFF REPORTS
A. Tracy Robinson, Administrative Services Director
Resolution 2022-02 Adopting the Final FY2021/2022 Municipal Budget/Workplan; Appropriating Revenue and Expenses; Confirming the City’s Investment Policy; Determining Fees for all City Services and Authorizing Transfer and Expenditures Including the 2022 Capital Improvement Program
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 14 of 25 January 24, 2022 Recommendation: Receive the Final Municipal Budget/Workplan for FY2021/2022 and Adopt Resolution 2022-02.
Administrative Services Director Tracy Robinson stated this is a continuation of the discussion started in December on the final budget for FY 2021/22. She gave a PowerPoint presentation highlighting items discussed. She described and presented the reserve standard and cash position, revenue variations, property tax transfers, grants, fees for service, revenue trends, sales tax, franchise fees, interest rates, the City still in recovery mode, the first tranche of ARPA funds and funds from a Palos Colorados settlement, adjustments carried forward from the prior year, the 5-year budget forecast, challenges and opportunities in the budget, stated goals and priorities, and staffing study recommendations. Staff’s recommendation is that the Council approve positions and approve the budget, as presented.
Vice Mayor Anduri referred to a slide on staffing and asked if there would be a fourth position occupied by a consultant in the hopes for a permanent position for a Traffic Engineer.
Ms. Robinson stated the City has a Traffic Engineer open which is under current recruitment. The Senior/Associate Engineer would probably help in specifically implementing any Vision Zero capital projects, as well as implementing the PTR CIP. She confirmed there is a Traffic Engineer position already in the budget and included in the 5 -year forecast.
Vice Mayor Anduri then referred to a previous slide and he confirmed that the $880,000 ARPA reserve funds have not been applied to 2023, 2024, 2025 and 2026. If applied, Ms. Robinson noted this almost eliminates the deficit.
Vice Mayor Anduri said if the Council approves the 4 staff positions this evening he asked if there is a revised number for the projected 2021/22 budget.
Ms. Robinson stated 2021/22 would be impacted slightly because the City is recruiting for several positions, many of which would not start until after the first quarter. Therefore, this would not truly impact FY 2021/22, but staff would work to getting all positions hired by June which would impact FY 2022/23. If the $880,000 is used to eliminate some portion of the $289,000 deficit, they would add an additional $570,000.
Vice Mayor Anduri asked if part of the $570,000 would be wiped out by the $1.75 million put in a reserve fund for a Traffic Engineer.
Ms. Robinson said if the Council would like to apply some of the $1.75 million to it, it could be applied to the Senior/Associate Engineer of about $185,000, so there would be an approximately $400,000 deficit.
Mayor Gerringer stated Item 9B has a recommendation to approve the positions, and she asked if both items were being combined.
City Manager Srivatsa said she could provide a brief staff report on Item 9B, focusing on the new staffing positions and take questions. Mayor Gerringer then moved up Item 9B to be discussed in combination with Item 9A.
B. Niroop Srivatsa, City Manager
Organizational Assessment of City Departments
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 15 of 25 January 24, 2022 Recommendations: (1) Approve four new, currently unfunded positions (Senior/Associate Engineer, Senior Planner/Long Range, management Analyst, Personnel Analyst, (2) defer recommendations on Council and Commission practices to the March goals setting workshop, and (3) direct the City Manager to provide an update on the remaining recommendations in three months.
City Manager Srivatsa stated Management Partners have presented 34 recommendations and she and Ms. Robinson have identified 4 recommendations that lie completely outside the purview of the City Manager. These are recommendations the Council needs to discuss and decide upon which include policy matters relating to how to ask staff for additional work, as well as 3 recommendations focusing on commissions and committees. Staff is requesting the Council postpone these 4 recommendations to the goal-setting workshop in March.
There are other recommendations associated with communications, technology and best practices, and all are worthy of consideration. However, staff has not spent a considerable amount of time going through each one. Technology might require the assistance of a consultant to identify some best tools and practices. Therefore, she will work with staff and return with an update in three months, which would coincide with the Council’s budget preparation efforts as well.
Finally, regarding the 4 currently unbudgeted new positions, she said the Senior Engineer is a person who will be ready to implement the Vision Zero plan, the plan’s short- and long-term projects, complete streets and green infrastructure projects and this individual along with other Senior Engineers will help the PTR Department deliver on their CIP. In the long-term they will look at the Citywide CIP rather than an Engineering CIP and a Parks CIP.
The Planning Department has not been able to complete long-range tasks which include code amendments and addressing some of the State mandates. The long-range Planner would focus on those projects and her goal is when staff returns, they will have a more robust Work Plan for each department, one that is realistic and one that identifies resources and a timeline. Part of getting the Planning Department’s Work Plan completed is to hire the Senior Planner.
Finally, regarding the 2 positions in Administration, the Personnel Analyst is needed because currently Ms.
Robinson and Ms. Wakeman spend a lot of time on other tasks and human resources is one of several tasks they undertake on a day to day basis. A dedicated person is needed for training, creating the internal City staff website, establishing individual goals and doing the many things current staff does not have time to do which goes a long way towards retention and training staff.
The Management Analyst can immediately start on legislative advocacy, the DEIB efforts the City Council has established as a priority, schools/city collaboration, and also staffing the Gas Safety Alliance. Staff from various departments have absorbed these roles over the last few years and this person can spend dedicated time implementing the Council’s vision and priorities. Staff is recommending the Council approve the currently unfunded positions as part of an addition to the final budget.
Councilmember Kwok referred to the Senior/Associate Engineer’s salary. He asked if staff analyzed Management Partner’s comment as to whether the salary of $185,000/year is adequate or not and if it is being presented as higher or the same.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 16 of 25 January 24, 2022 Ms. Srivatsa clarified Management Partners was referring to the Traffic Engineer position which is currently budgeted and where the City has not been able to maintain a staff person in that position.
Ms. Robinson explained the Traffic Engineer position is actually pegged at an Associate Engineer salary level. It is a better title because they want someone with a degreed traffic engineering and experience.
The last time the City recruited for the position only 16 candidates applied, and it was difficult for her to know whether it is a salary issue or not. It is a very competitive position with a very specific set of skills required. The City is also competing with many regional agencies and other cities. Therefore, it may be a combination of salary and competition.
Councilmember Candell questioned funding for the IT recommendation.
Ms. Robinson explained the City does not have a budget for buying the software or a consultant. This area is complicated and will require money and time and likely they would need a consultant to help them through the process and then an implementation process and assistance, as well as on-going licensing costs, etc. and staff has not begun to determine the costs for this.
Mayor Gerringer asked and confirmed this would return to the Council in three months.
Councilmember Dawson noted one comment in the report identified not much opportunity for departments to pursue grants and she asked if this might be something the Management Analyst could pursue for the City.
Ms. Srivatsa stated staff can assign that task and she will be bringing an item to the Council next month with Townsend Public Affairs that helps the City with grant-writing. They definitely want to make the most of federal funds; however, these are not guaranteed funding sources. She confirmed that an Analyst is an appropriate person to pursue grant funding options.
Mayor Gerringer opened the public comment period.
ROBERT LAVOIE voiced concerns with adding staff with a structural deficit and asked if there were any recommendations for saving money, said he did not believe the City Hall lease would necessarily experience an increase, asked if the Vision Zero project is a temporary and not a long-term project and asked that the Council approve projects that are nice for the City and any pet-peeve projects be privately funded.
JESSICA LORDAN said she thinks funding the positions is necessary and will allow the City to operate more efficiently, thinks it is important to continue with the current momentum, and strongly encouraged hiring engineering and planning positions.
ABIGAIL FATEMAN spoke in support of staff’s recommendations to add positions and fully fund them, spoke about the importance of Vision Zero and safety, cited increased population and traffic, trends to encourage people to walk and bike more which are experiencing conflicts on City streets which are liabilities. She asked the Council to prioritize items and dedicate funding and thinks the community will be rewarded as a result.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 17 of 25 January 24, 2022 GRACE DIXON voiced support of the added positions, thinks the City is on the precipice of growth and needs to invest in staff, questioned and confirmed with staff that average position openings per year is about 2 to 4 which is sometimes due to reasons not necessarily affecting salary levels and examples of employees moving on with larger agencies.
Councilmember Dawson questioned planning for positions, and Ms. Robinson described the ability to defray costs from the Palos Colorados settlement money, the second tranche of ARPA funding, competing needs, and time needed to identify longer term streams of revenue.
Vice Mayor Anduri stated after April 1st the Council will be able to backfill the $500,000 the Council approved for the Park Theater, as well. He asked and confirmed with Ms. Robinson that salary savings from vacancies are not included in this draft, believes staff support to committees is essential, thinks it is unfortunate that grant opportunities are missed because of the lack of staffing, reiterated the need for shovel-ready projects, and voiced full support of the recommendations in Items 9A and B.
Councilmember Kwok said he also supports the recommendation to hire 4 additional staff, believes existing staff is stretched and this will help. For a $570,000 increase per year, in going back to the October 25th revenue presentation he gave, he noted the City could raise this revenue through a one-quarter percentage sales tax increase for about $500,000 a year, implement a $50/year parcel tax or a $50/million dollars of assessed valuation per year as an Ad Valorem tax.
Councilmember Candell voiced her support for staffing, thinks the City sits in a good spot with comparison cities with this additional staffing, said she is hesitant to rely on a new tax, and looks forward to reviewing the combined CIPs.
Mayor Gerringer echoed comments about missing out on grant opportunities, thinks it is clear that the City must look at a revenue study and determine whether the City is spending its money most efficiently and how to fill gaps, which can be further discussed in February. She voiced support of the new positions and thanked staff for their work.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Dawson/Anduri) to receive the Final Municipal Budget/Workplan for FY2021/2022 and adopt Resolution 2022-02. Roll Call Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Anduri, Candell, Dawson, Kwok and Gerringer; Noes: None).
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/Candell) to (1) Approved four new, currently unfunded positions (Senior/Associate Engineer, Senior Planner/Long Range, Management Analyst, Personnel Analyst, (2) deferred recommendations on Council and Commission practices to the March goals setting workshop, and (3) directed the City Manager to provide an update on the remaining recommendations in three months. Roll Call Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Gerringer, Anduri, Candell, Dawson, and Kwok; Noes: None).
BREAK
Mayor Gerringer called for a break at 9:34 p.m. and, thereafter, reconvened the meeting at 9:40 p.m.
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Nancy Tran, Senior Planner
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 18 of 25 January 24, 2022 DR16-20 Peter Schadek (Owner), C-1 Zoning: Request for Design Review for the construction of 9 multi-family rental units within two 3-story buildings with a maximum height of 35' at 3458 Mt. Diablo Blvd and 1005 2nd St., APNs 243-011-042 and 243-011-056. The project qualifies for an infill exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act and includes State Density Bonus concession and waiver requeststo not apply the required 10-ft side and rear yard setbacks and the 50-ft. setback for the third story, and to allow 3 stories, without being granted a Land Use Permit, where 2-1/2 stories are permitted by right.
The applicant is not seeking to utilize the density bonus to increase the maximum number of dwelling units per acre.
Recommendation: Review the proposed project, conduct a public hearing, and adopt City Council Resolution 2022-03 finding the project exempt from CEQA and approving the project, subject to conditions.
Senior Planner Nancy Tran gave the staff report, PowerPoint presentation, and comprehensive overview of the request for design review for construction of 9 multi-family rental units within two, 3-story buildings at 3458 Mt. Diablo Boulevard and 1005 2nd Street in the east end of Lafayette. She described project specifics of parking, previous joint and separate DRC and PC hearings, and tonight is the 4th of 5 maximum hearings on the project and can only be approved by the City Council. She then presented a summary of waivers from development standards under State Density Bonus law, redesign of the project to address comments from the Fire District, trash collection modifications, and staff recommends the Council conduct the public hearing, take public comment and adopt the resolution finding the project exempt from CEQA and approving the project. She introduced Tony Valadez from Coast Architecture to present the project.
Vice Mayor Anduri referred to Slide 8 and asked if this project borders immediately upon the Lafayette Lane project so that the west façade of these buildings will be looking into the retention area of the neighboring project. Ms. Tran confirmed part of it will.
Vice Mayor Anduri asked if the other part farther north on the street will be removed as part of either of these projects. Ms. Tran stated no; this is a separate property.
Councilmember Kwok said he did not see additional written comments and he confirmed there were none since publication of the staff report.
Councilmember Dawson asked Ms. Tran to clarify the remedies for the Fire District comments, particularly emergency access.
Ms. Tran displayed the slide and stated one was apparatus access and the applicant has provided a diagram they meet requirements for ladder access. The other was revision to the minimum street width for the Fire trucks to go through. The parking spaces would need to be red curbed, resulting in a loss of 4 spaces. An alternative the applicant has proposed is to cut into the project site to provide the minimum width and to maintain 3 on-street spaces.
Mayor Gerringer opened the public hearing and called upon the applicant to make a presentation.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 19 of 25 January 24, 2022 Tony Valadez, Coast Architecture, applicant, gave a PowerPoint presentation on the project as proposed, recognized the improvements made to the project, thanked the DRC and PC for providing their feedback, displayed and described various features of the project, and stated he was available for questions.
Councilmember Candell referred to the public art display and asked if this counts as the project’s public art or she asked if this is a separate entity. Mr. Valadezstated the percentage of art is a separate approval process and all they are providing tonight is the infrastructure for a rotating art display.
Councilmember Candell asked how high the fences are in the back of the project. Mr. Valadez said they are standard 6-foot fences but the reason they are shorter when going up the elevation is there is a level change between the street and the backyards.
Councilmember Candell referred to the summary table which included the DRC and PC comments and thanked staff for including this. She questioned the front area with short clear fencing. She asked if the office front door was made of glass or did it have windows, noting that people will walk by and look straight down into the office.
Mr. Valadez said it is transparent because there was a comment early on to have the ground floor mimic some of the retail spaces in the neighborhood so it picks up on the fabric of retail storefront, even though they are private residences. He thinks the units could be obscured with film, so daylight is let in without direct visual connections.
Councilmember Candell asked if there was thought to mimic the backyards to make it a private space for each one where the public would not look into them because of a fence. Mr. Valadezsaid they considered this but the comments from the PC/DRC was for transparency and not an opaque barrier. This is why the fence design in the frontage is transparent to have eyes looking out on the street.
Councilmember Candell disagreed and voiced her feelings that it is very awkward, but otherwise said she likes the project.
Vice Mayor Anduri questioned what will be proposed for the art requirement, and Mr. Valadez stated there was an idea proposed that the art project would live in the plaza, perhaps in the planting area but they want to work with a local artist and not yet determine what that art project would be.
Vice Mayor Anduri referred to page 4 of 8 of the staff report which states, “The DRC offered additional direction that could be handled as conditions of approval.” He asked and confirmed these are included as conditions that are before the Council.
Vice Mayor Anduri said the picture at the bottom of page 4 of 8 shows the grill work on the corner and it is referred to in other diagrams as an “art wall” and he confirmed this is a lattice wall where art can be put on.
Vice Mayor Anduri said in terms of the EV capability of parking spaces, this was addressed in conditions.
He asked and confirmed that their intent is one parking space in each garage would be EV-ready for the owner to install an EV charging station. He also questioned the sidewalk on Mt. Diablo Blvd. which varies in width but is made to be ADA-compliant.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 20 of 25 January 24, 2022 Mr. Valadez added that they are mimicking the existing dimension of the sidewalk, which is 5 feet wide, but it could be made to be wider if needed. They would do it at the expense of the planting space on the other side of the sidewalk.
Vice Mayor Anduri referred to COA #34; “The property owner shall investigate the feasibility of requiring the 9 residential units to operate with electric appliances versus gas and will share the final outcome with the Planning and Building Department staff.” He asked if the applicant was open to an all-electric building, and Mr. Valadez said they have discussed this with the land owner but they do not have a decision on it yet; however, this is the trend they are moving toward.
Vice Mayor Anduri referred to the one diagram of the west façade of the south building which is totally blank without any fenestration. It looks over to what is a green space, and he asked why this decision. Mr.
Valadez said the site narrows on the south side and in order for them to get the 4 units they needed on the that side, they needed to move the building tight to the property line on that side and they would rather put the open space in a more public area. There are no windows on that side because it is a zerolot line condition, and Vice Mayor Anduri commented this is a perfect surface for a mural.
Vice Mayor Anduri referred to Sheet A-4.03 which shows the steps down from Mt. Diablo. He asked if the applicant anticipates that the public will come down the steps for the eastern unit and walk in front of the unit over to the corner patio or corner square area. Mr. Valadez said they do not anticipate the public using it to access the plaza. They would walk directly from the sidewalk, but they think visitors to the units could use the steps directly into the ground floor of the units.
Councilmember Dawson questioned the location of the affordable unit, and Mr. Valadez replied it is the second unit on the south side west from the corner. He confirmed it legally cannot differ from the other units.
Councilmember Dawson questioned solar panels, and Mr. Valadez said they will be using PV cells, but he would hesitate to confirm they are self-sufficient on solar panels.
Councilmember Kwok said on top of the handicapped parking space there is the small plaza and one comment was to have an elevator or stairway access, and he questioned the status of this. Mr. Valadez said they decided it was not feasible because of the amount of space a stairway and elevator would take up, and it would make the plaza a lot less desirable. Once you have a public second story space it also requires full accessibility, so they decided to exclude that. He confirmed the space is a patio space of the rental property adjacent to it.
Mayor Gerringer referred to the EV ready to each unit and asked what is the EV status for guest parking.
Mr. Valadez confirmed this will have an EV station.
Mayor Gerringer opened the public comment period.
GRACE DIXON said she has been a neighbor of this property for 25 years and lives two blocks away, said she likes this project and thinks this could serve as a model for buildings going forward, hoped there is a restaurant for the first floor, likes the art and would love a sculpture there, hoped for tree planting, and voiced support for approval.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 21 of 25 January 24, 2022 CHERYL MCDONALD echoed comments of Councilmember Candell regarding transparency and awkwardness of the views into windows of a bedroom and worried about widening of the sidewalk.
ROBERT LAVOIE said he agrees with Ms. Dixon’s comments, commented that the allowance to go to a 10- foot setback is a big concession, but the design helps ameliorate the condition. He stated his continued opposition to the forced electrification of buildings, thinking building owners should control what energy they use and it not be forced upon the builder or City, disagreed with Councilmember Candell regarding the lower floor and loves glass, noting that blinds can be installed and asked for approval.
Rebuttal – Applicant
Mr. Valadez thanked those who support the project, thinks the issue of the setback is one they have remediated by pushing the third floor back on Mt. Diablo in addition to burying them into the hillside which minimizes the overall height of the building.
Vice Mayor Anduri asked Mr. Valadez the situation regarding trees along the Mt. Diablo frontage, noting he was not sure what is intended. Mr. Valadez stated there are existing street trees that are healthy.
Similarly, on the north side of the project there is a healthy Live Oak they are maintaining as well.
Vice Mayor Anduri referred to the issue regarding the glass and asked if there is anything that would prevent someone from putting up curtains or blinds. Mr. Valadez said no and thinks blinds is a good solution. Another idea would be a film on the glass.
Vice Mayor Anduri noted that the film goes against what the DRC recommended, and he would like to ensure this does not happen because it would take away from the look of the building.
Councilmember Dawson concurred and thinks if done it could be standardized for the building. She said State law is moving towards building all electric by next year, and she asked if people wanted to go this route they could do this.
Mr. Valadez said if they went to all-electric, it would have to be all in from the beginning as it would be hard to convert from gas to electric. It is not yet off of the table, but it is a point well taken.
Mayor Gerringer closed the public hearing and called for deliberation.
Councilmember Candell asked for a way to make sure the front units are uniform and suggested a condition by the developer to add a uniform system of blinds for those units on the street.
Ms. Tran said she was not sure this could be conditioned.
City Attorney Mala Subramanian said the only way for a long-term requirement is through the CC&Rs and she was unsure if the project will have CC&Rs.
Vice Mayor Anduri said this is a rental project and he asked if the rental agreements could require the tenants will use the provided window covering. Ms. Subramanian said she was unsure of what the plan is and if they are blinds, this would make sense. If it is curtains, she was unsure as to require a specific product to be used and whether the developer would be comfortable with this.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 22 of 25 January 24, 2022 Vice Mayor Anduri said he thinks this is an important issue because it is the way the building looks onto the street. Councilmember Dawson suggested that objective standards would fall into this as part of the façade.
Vice Mayor Anduri said if the applicant is amenable, he would ask that the rental agreements require the applicant install blinds in each of the units and that the agreement require tenants to maintain them and not use other window coverings. Mr. Valadez said he did not see this as a problem.
Councilmember Kwok asked if Mr. Valadez meant the glass in the office needing to be non-opaque. Mr.
Valadez said the direction from the DRC was they wanted transparency on the ground floor windows and fencing went along with that, and this is why fencing is cable railed.
Vice Mayor Anduri referred to 5 foot versus 6 foot sidewalks and referred to G-0.2, stating it looks as it would be possible to go to 6 feet, and he described reasons noting it makes a big difference for people to be able in both directions to walk, and he suggested a condition for this.
Mayor Gerringer agreed with a condition for a 6-foot width sidewalk along Mt. Diablo Boulevard, but asked if this pushes it too close to the live/work office spaces. It also sounded like the applicant was amenable, but it would take away from the planter box. She asked and confirmed with Councilmembers they were supportive of increasing the sidewalk width.
Vice Mayor Anduri said his second issue is on Sheet A-3.02; the west façade on Mt. Diablo Boulevard. It is a big blank wall which he is uneasy with and suggested a requirement for the wall to have a mural as the public art consideration.
Mayor Gerringer noted the blank wall was a requirement for approval because of the zero-lot line, and she asked if the Council wanted to require a mural.
Ms. Tran requested the applicant to provide more information on the open space. It is noted on the plans it is public open space, but it is truly open space, they would need to grant an easement to the City.
Otherwise, it will be privately owned public open space.
Mayor Gerringer asked for the applicant to be brought back into the meeting.
Mr. Valadez explained that he was unsure as to whether an easement needs to be granted or whether it is privately owned publicly accessible. He asked if this could be deferred as this is not an issue they have discussed yet.
Vice Mayor Anduri asked if Mr. Valadez was talking about the east end, and Mr. Valadez said he believes Ms. Tran was speaking about the plaza on the corner on the east end of the project.
Councilmember Dawson said this would be important because it is something they should confirm.
Mayor Gerringer re-opened the public hearing.
Mr. Valadez said their intent is to always have it publicly accessible, but a mechanism to do this is not yet determined.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 23 of 25 January 24, 2022 Peter Schadek, owner, said he would like to defer this and have a conversation regarding their options before he makes a decision on this item.
Ms. Subramanian stated if it does not show as a condition of approval there is no real requirement, but the Council has one more meeting and can continue the matter.
Director of Planning Greg Wolff commented that it could be handled through a condition of approval and through a mechanism acceptable to the City and applicant for the area to be accessible to the public. The mechanism need not be decided tonight, provided it is a mechanism that allows the public to access it as it has been represented by the applicant and mutually acceptable to the City and property owner.
Ms. Subramanian said when they are more vague about the condition she finds they are arguing over whether it is an easement or not and she would prefer to have this confirmed.
Mr. Wolff said if the decision is to bring it back, staff would recommend the hearing be closed and the matter be assigned to the applicant and staff which could be reflected in the resolution which can be returned on the Consent Calendar.
Vice Mayor Anduri questioned the west wall, and Mr. Valadez said because it is on a property line they are not allowed to have openings on the wall; however, the idea for a mural is excellent. He believes the façade looks over the stormwater treatment planting area of the Lafayette Lane project so visually a mural could serve as a nice complement to that.
Mayor Gerringer stated the Council does not normally set the public art requirement and asked if the Council preferred what is proposed or something at the other corner.
Vice Mayor Anduri suggested adding a condition of approval that the applicant will work with the Planning Director on a plan to add visual interest to the west façade. Mr. Wolff agreed.
Councilmember Kwok said there is a grassy area on the west façade and asked if this will permanently stay grass or could someone build a structure with a zero-lot line. He confirmed this is part of the stormwater treatment area for Lafayette Lane so it will remain empty.
Mayor Gerringer asked for any comments or revisions from Councilmembers for the resolution and Councilmembers had no revisions or comments.
Regarding conditions of approval, Mayor Gerringer and Vice Mayor Anduri summarized that staff will add the following conditions the Council requested which include: 1) provide for a 6-foot sidewalks in the front on Mt. Diablo Blvd., 2) add a condition regarding units to have uniform window coverings that are included in the rental agreements for the first floor windows, 3) the applicant shall work with the Planning Director to add visual interest to the west facade; and 4) to make the southeast corner accessible to the public in perpetuity. The item will return on the Consent Calendar for approval.
Vice Mayor Anduri referred to COA #33; “The property owner shall submit revised floor plans identifying each garage to include one EV ready hookup.” He recommended changing “identifying” to “that provide for.” Councilmembers concurred.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 24 of 25 January 24, 2022 Councilmember Dawson asked about a condition regarding landscaping and retention of trees. Mr. Wolff stated this is a standard condition as COA #26. When the DRC mentioned some of the conditions, she asked and confirmed with Ms. Tran that this was COA #29.
Vice Mayor Anduri said he found this staff report to be very well done and easy to go through and pick up all points, and Councilmembers agreed and thanked Ms. Tran and Mr. Fox of the planning department, as well as the applicant and owner.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/Dawson) to close the public hearing; direct staff to return Resolution 2022- 03 and the Conditions of Approval with amendments to the Consent Calendar on February 14th. Vote:
5-0 (Ayes: Gerringer, Anduri, Candell, Dawson, and Kwok; Noes: None).
11. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR – None
12. COUNCIL/COMMISSION REPORTS
A. Councilmembers report on activities and consideration of matters a Councilmember wishes to initiate for placement on a future agenda.
Councilmember Kwok reported he is attending the League of California Cities’ 2022 New Mayors and Councilmembers Academy, a virtual conference held last week and this coming week. Mayor Gerringer stated she participated as well.
Councilmember Dawson voiced appreciation of the Friday training workshop.
Vice Mayor Anduri asked if the training is available on the City’s website, and Ms. Srivatsa replied Dr.
Watson owns the presentation and as such, it will not be uploaded to the website. However, she is aware Vice Mayor Anduri could not attend and staff will forward him the presentation.
Mayor Gerringer reported that she and the City Manager are working to find a date and facilitator for their study session. Also, at the next meeting they will bring back the mission statement discussion and Townsend will return with a report. She and Councilmember Candell will have a meeting on Wednesday to meet with Townsend as the Legislative Committee in the hopes they can bring the Legislative Platform back at the next meeting. They hopefully will also be discussing propositions that are in the works right now by residents.
Councilmember Candell stated she understands the Council may be reviewing the AB 2923 item at the February 14th meeting and she heard from neighbors they would prefer not to have it on Valentine’s Day.
Mayor Gerringer said they will take this under consideration.
Councilmember Dawson questioned the work relating to commissions and committees referenced by Management Partners. Mayor Gerringer stated the recommendation is to bring this back as part of the Council’s goal-setting and prioritization study session in March.
B. City Manager’s Update
Recommendation: Receive and file.
City Council and GPAC Meeting Page 25 of 25 January 24, 2022 City Manager Srivatsa reported staff is looking for a facilitator for the workshop in March and looking at dates for a Saturday morning, March 5th as the first choice, March 12th as a second choice. Staff will contact Councilmembers to finalize the date.
13. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS – None.
14. ADJOURNMENT – 10:58 p.m.
APPROVED:
__________________________________
Teresa Gerringer, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Joanne Robbins, City Clerk