City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 1 of 21 May 9, 2022 7 City of Lafayette
City Council
Environmental Task Force
Meeting Minutes
Teleconference Meeting – Watch on the City of Lafayette’s YouTube Channel at May 9, 2022 http://bit.ly/LoveLafayetteYouTube Submit public comments to [email protected] 6:00 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/89714586098?pwd=bmtleVBBMkpjd1lSdlE1NEdENUc1dz09 Passcode: 784156 or join by phone: Dial 1 669 900 9128; Webinar ID: 897 1458 6098 Passcode: 784156
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 2 of 21 May 9, 2022
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Gerringer called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. via teleconference.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: City Council: Mayor Gerringer; Vice Mayor Anduri; Councilmembers Candell and Dawson
Absent: Councilmember Kwok
Present: Environmental Task Force: Chair Hu; Vice Chair Shafizadeh; Members Gastelumendi, and Meronek
Staff Present: Niroop Srivatsa, City Manager; Greg Wolff, Planning and Building Director; Joshua Muller, Planning Technician; Suzanne Iarla, Communications Analyst; Mala Subramanian, City Attorney; Joanne Robbins, City Clerk
3. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Mayor Gerringer amended the agenda to agendize additional public comments following presentations at 7:00 p.m. for those people who did not speak at 6:00 p.m.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/Candell) to adopt the agenda, as amended. Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Gerringer, Anduri, Candell, and Dawson; Noes: None; Absent: Kwok).
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS - (for Items Not on the Agenda)
BILL HOGLAND proposed Resolution 2022-25 adopted at the last meeting be amended to include SL-2 and asked that SL-9 be withdrawn.
TADD SIBLEY thanked the Council and the Transportation Circulation Commission for staging a meeting on School Street and walking them through the attributes of what is planned. It was apparent that SL-2 is needed for safety, said SL-9 is not needed, asked not to remove parking and asked for enforcement of pickup and drop-off zones.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Tim Haile, Executive Director, Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) Update on CCTA’s Programs, Projects and Vision for the Future Recommendation: Receive and file.
Tim Haile, Executive Director, CCTA, provided a PowerPoint presentation and highlighted CCTA’s programs and projects. He described increased work from home situations, more people walking, biking, and changes in transportation systems, results from a travel behavior study, Vision Zero, prioritizing transit, countywide connected signal system, EV infrastructure, accessible transportation, update of the Transportation Plan, and work to improve transportation policies.
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 3 of 21 May 9, 2022 Mayor Gerringer and Councilmembers questioned and discussed abilities to tap into grant funding, advocating for Moraga Road and Moraga Way as routes of regional significance, coordination between the City’s Commissions and CCTA staff to talk about specific programs to access, funding for EV ready in multi-family projects and in senior transportation, the Street Smarts program for schools in the fall, and the possibility for a measure in the futures, given Measure J sunsets in 2034.
Mayor Gerringer opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
Mayor Gerringer and Councilmembers thanked Mr. Haile for his presentation.
B. Environmental Task Force
Update on Goals and Accomplishments
Recommendation: Receive and file.
Chair Hu provided background of the task force and recognized Planning Technician Josh Muller for his support to the task force. She then introduced Environmental Task Force members Vice Chair Shafizadeh and members Gastelumendi, Meronek and incoming Task Force Member Louisiana . She and task force members gave a PowerPoint presentation on subcommittees, projects, grant funding, accomplishments of 2021 and future goals.
Chair Hu and Vice Chair Shafizadeh both highlighted the task force and subcommittee’s work on a building electrification ordinance, events held, feedback collected, electric leaf blowers, food ware ordinance, Green Awards which will occur in the fall, education, water conservation, GHG emissions inventory, update of the City’s Environmental Action Plan, and drafting and adoption of a charter for the task force.
The Task Force request $10,000 to purchase non-book electrification education materials to be donated to the Contra Costa Library for their program called, “The Library of Things”.
Councilmembers voiced support of measures and recommended the Task Force provide information on budget requests prior to budget adoption.
Mayor Gerringer opened the public comment period.
ROBERT LAVOIE asked not to limit people’s options with electrification, with building, leaf blowers, energy use and force certain products to be used in restaurants, and referred the task force to the book, “Unsettled” by Steven Koonin.
Mayor Gerringer and Councilmembers thanked the Environmental Task Force for their presentation.
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENTS - (for Items Not on the Agenda) JEREMY LEVINE said this is at least the 20th meeting related to the Housing Element and he thinks it becomes hard for anyone who does not have a lot of free time to participate. Those speaking tonight will be a very small cross section of the community, and he suggested the Council hold a meeting just to talk about the Housing Element.
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 4 of 21 May 9, 2022 ELIOT HUDSON referred to his letter, asked the Council to consider requesting the State Assemblymember or Senator introduce legislation that exempts the BART lot from AB 2923 requirement for development, and said there is no other lot in the BART system that has the characteristics of the Lafayette BART lot, which he described.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Gerringer asked if there were any requests for removal of items or public comments. Vice Mayor Anduri requested removal of Item F, and there were no public comments.
A. April 25, 2022 Minutes
Recommendation: Approve.
B. Downtown Parkland Acquisition Fund
Action: Approve the Memorandum of Understanding by and between the City of Lafayette and the Lafayette Community Foundation regarding the Lafayette Downtown Parkland Acquisition Fund (MOU) and direct staff to execute the MOU with the Lafayette Community Foundation.
C. Fees for the Lafayette Little League’s use of Buckeye Fields for 2021 Recommendation: Approve a use fee of $39,898.48 for Lafayette Little League’s 2021 use of Buckeye Fields per the conditions in the Lease Agreement with the City.
D. Resolution 2022-31 Designating Voting Delegates to the Contra Costa County Municipal Risk Management Insurance Authority (CCCMRMIA)
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2022-31.
E. Student Wellness (SWELL) Summer Pilot Program Overview Recommendation: Receive and file.
G. E-mail from David Peery resigning from the Emergency Preparedness Commission Recommendation: Accept with regret and thank Mr. Peery for 3 years of volunteer service on the Emergency Preparedness Commission.
H. Resolution 2022-32 No Parking Zones on Mt. Diablo Blvd. for Acalanes HS Car Rally May 20th Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2022-32.
I. Resolution 2022-33 Allowing for Video and Teleconference Meetings during the COVID-19 State of Emergency under AB 361
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2022
J. Letter from the Parks, Trails and Recreation Commission Re: Collaborative Parks Opportunities at Leigh Creekside Park and Gazebo Parks
Recommendation: Approve initial evaluation of the Two-Park Collaborative Concept for Leigh Creekside Park and Gazebo Park; Approve $75,000 from Fund 12 for this work; and put the Leigh Creekside Park Amended Master Plan focused Environmental Impact Report on hold.
K. ARPA Update and Additional Funding for the Lafayette Shop Local eCard Program City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 5 of 21 May 9, 2022 Recommendation: 1) Approve $50,000 in additional ARPA funds for the Lafayette Shop Local eCard Program to continue to stimulate the Lafayette economy, to allow additional Lafayette businesses to benefit from the program and to continue provide assistance to Lafayette businesses in the economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. Allocate $10,000 from currently unallocated ARPA funds and temporarily allocate $40,000 of the $100,000 originally allocated to the Small Business Technical Assistance Program. 2) Eliminate the $5,000 benefit limit per business to allow additional Lafayette businesses to participate in the eCard program and to provide more flexibility for eCard purchasers as they continue to support Lafayette businesses. 3) Re-evaluate the eCard program at the end of FY 2021-22 to review program results, and determine the next steps for the program, including: a. Evaluation and/or modification of the 2- for-1 BOGO offer; b. Injection of July 2022 ARPA funding into the eCard program.
L. Mayor Gerringer and Councilmember Candell recommendations on bills of local importance:
AB 2011 (Wicks), AB 2063 (Berman), AB 2656 (Ting), SB 833 (Dodd), SB 852 (Dodd), SB 884 (McGuire), SB 897 (Wieckowski) and SB 1456 (Stern); matrix of active bills with positions taken by the City of Lafayette and complete bill matrix.
Recommendation: Approve the committee’s recommendations and authorize the Mayor to sign and submit letters. Accept the matrix of active bills with positions taken by the City of Lafayette and the complete bill matrix.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/Candell) to adopt Consent Calendar Items A, B, C, D, E, G, H, I, J, K and L.
Vote: 4-0-1-(Ayes: Gerringer, Anduri, Candell, and Dawson; Noes: None; Absent Kwok).
7. OLD BUSINESS – None.
8. STAFF REPORTS
A. Niroop Srivatsa, City Manager
Installation of a Plaque on Plaza Way in memory of Ashley Dias, Crossing Guard at Stanley Middle School
Recommendation: Approve the installation of the plaque on Plaza Way to honor Ashley Dias, for a cost not to exceed $5,000.
City Manager Niroop Srivatsa gave the staff report and overview of the request that the City install a plaque at a public location in honor of Ashley Dias, a crossing guard at Stanley Middle School. Staff recommends the City Council authorize the installation of the plaque on Plaza Way in the planter she had described at a cost not to exceed $5,000.
Mayor Gerringer opened the public comment period.
GLORIA DIAS, mother of Ashley Dias, said September 8, 2021 is forever etched in her heart and mind. She stated she approached the City Manager requesting the City to approve a memorial plaque on behalf of her family to honor her son who courageously sacrificed his life, saving multiple Stanley students from harm. The plaque will have high visibility at the Plaza and she thought it appropriate stating Lafayette families gather at the park to picnic, listen to music, hold holiday events, and her vision is that the plaque be a constant and solemn reminder to all drivers to slow down, drive carefully, and keep children and the community safe. She thanked staff and the Council for their consideration and approval.
Mayor Gerringer opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 6 of 21 May 9, 2022 Mayor Gerringer and Councilmembers thanked Ms. Dias for her request and commented that it is the Council’s responsibility and honor to memorialize Ashley Diaz’s heroic efforts.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Dawson/Candell) to approve the installation of the plaque on Plaza Way to honor Ashley Dias, for a cost not to exceed $5,000. Vote: 4-0-1- (Ayes: Anduri, Candell, Dawson, and Gerringer; Noes: None; Absent Kwok).
9. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Renata Robles, Senior Planner
Draft Housing Element Update – The Housing Element is part of the General Plan, the City’s guiding policy document for land use and conversation. State law requires cities to update their Housing Element periodically to identify sites and programs to demonstrate that the community is capable of accommodating the housing unit quotas established by the State’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process, amongst other requirements. A Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the project.
Recommendation: Hold a public hearing and continue the matter to May 23rd for further review and deliberation.
Director of Planning and Building Greg Wolff introduced the item and gave a background of the Draft Housing Element’s extensive review by GPAC, the Planning Commission and City Council and he turned over the presentation to Housing Consultant Diana Elrod and said Luke Evans with ESA is present to provide an overview of the DEIR.
Diana Elrod, Housing Consultant, gave a PowerPoint presentation and discussed the overview of the Housing Element, timeline, next steps of going through some of the key findings from the select appendices. She asked that the Council provide feedback to staff and continue the matter to May 23, 2022.
Luke Evans, ESA, next provided a presentation of the Draft Environmental Impact Report, described its purpose, its circulation and written and verbal comments, work on responding to comments prior to preparation of the FEIR, and he described the 5 significant and unavoidable impacts found, emphasizing the findings were conservatively drawn.
Ms. Elrod then continued her presentation and spoke about components of the Housing Element, quantified objectives where they believe 1400 units will be developed during the 8-year period of which 448 units will be affordable. She briefly described the appendices, constraints, AFFH requirements, action areas for the Fair Housing Action Plan which address requirements that feed into policies that then feed into programs, and said she was available for questions.
BREAK
Mayor Gerringer called for a break at 8:07 p.m. and thereafter reconvened the meeting at 8:13 p.m.
Vice Mayor Anduri referred to timing and asked and confirmed the schedule for submitting the draft to HCD has shifted from June 16th to June 30th in order for the Council to sign off on comments made.
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 7 of 21 May 9, 2022 Vice Mayor Anduri referred to page 2 of 6 which states “More detail on both the recommendations and the reasoning behind each shall be provided prior to the May 23rd Council meeting.” He asked how far prior is anticipated. Mr. Wolff said it would go out the normal Council packet timing or the Wednesday prior to the meeting.
Vice Mayor Anduri voiced concern that he does not think it is possible for the Council to receive an update on the inventory beyond what they have now a few days before the Council meeting and complete consideration of the inventory on the 23rd. He suggested a special meeting before May 23rd to discuss the inventory or hold a meeting on June 13th.
Vice Mayor Anduri referred to page 3 of 6 of the staff report and confirmed that staff plans to return to the Council at the June 27th meeting to consider adoption of the FEIR.
Councilmember Candell said when the item is brought back on May 23rd she asked and confirmed that the Council can discuss everything at the next meeting and that staff will focus on manageable pieces and then have the Council’s support and direction to submit on June 27th.
Councilmember Candell said if the public hearing is continued she asked and confirmed full public comments will be taken at the next meeting.
Councilmember Candell asked if it is possible for the Council not just to have the worksheets in PDF of the sites inventory for the next meeting. She asked that the Council receive them in Excel format so they can modify them during the meeting, similar to GPAC.
She also said scenarios presented as part of this agenda item did not include the Yorba Linda ADU scenario and how they got their Housing Element certified with a different model. She asked if it this could be included as another scenario for the next meeting to look at. Mr. Wolff said the Council is not limited to scenarios that have been previously discussed and he confirmed the scenarios can be modified.
Councilmember Candell asked how the Council will be going through each appendix item where comments and concerns can be voiced with staff taking concerns and comments. Mr. Wolff deferred to the Mayor but said staff did not anticipate a line by line review of each of the documents that make up the Housing Element and Appendices; however, he thinks it would be appropriate to take each document and then solicit questions and comments.
Councilmember Candell questioned page C-11 of the sites it talks about San Mateo and not Lafayette, and staff apologized and will correct this.
Vice Mayor Anduri said he would like the ability to ask questions on Appendix C; the Housing Inventory tonight so he can have answers as he considers the draft.
Mayor Gerringer was having computer difficulties, but soon returned to the meeting and opened the public comment period.
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 8 of 21 May 9, 2022 ELIOT HUDSON said what the Council has been given is a shocking betrayal of the town, asked that the Housing Element be accurate and fair regarding the community, said it falsifies the priorities of the community as proven in the GPAC survey and selectively presents so-called community stories that completely disregard the true weight of those stories which all needs to be corrected. The PC recommendation for zoning utterly sells out Lafayette. He thinks two miles of upzoning downtown will have heights the town has never seen and stated this can be avoided.
He thinks the City should use more favorable yields, buffers, counting of ADUs and additional opportunity sites, thinks none of the alternatives are unreachable and reasonable yields and buffers are all within HCD guidelines. The ADUs are similar to what HCD has allowed, additional opportunity sites are available and offer the realistic potential to avoid all downtown upzoning. There is time and he asked for the path consistent with the Vision and Mission Statement, which is to use the reasonable arguments available, present reasonable alternatives to HCD, obtain feedback and find out what is allowed and what is negotiable.
JIM CERVANTES noted that his comments are not on behalf of the GPAC tonight, said he will be away for the next meeting and shared that GPAC performed extensive work on the sites inventory, gathered significant public input and spent additional time examining additional possible sites to be included in the sites inventory. They went through an exhaustive process parcel by parcel to come up with a spreadsheet they passed onto the PC. He noted that parcels on the spreadsheet have been vetted multiple times and with this, he suggested the Council focus on the bigger picture which is zoning of the EIR map areas and not get into re-examination of specific parcels. This is a rabbit-hole which will be hard to exit.
Secondly, some suggested last year their RHNA obligation could be satisfied without upzoning, GPAC’s work shows it is not the case and upzoning needs to happen to meet RHNA. The PC followed GPAC’s recommendation to include the BART site, GPAC voted to include the southern portion of the DeSilva site on a 6-5 vote acknowledging the alternative was to upzone a part of the downtown. The PC opted for the latter option. All choices have their challenges and none of it is easy. GPAC recognize a buffer was needed especially for low and very low-income units and felt this approach would provide the City with a credible response to HCD. In conclusion, the City has devoted more attention to RHNA and has solicited more public input than any other city he has observed and staff and consultants have done good work on behalf of this community, and knows the Council has a challenge and he wished them the best in getting through this.
JEREMY LEVINE said a few weeks ago Inclusive Lafayette wrote a letter and it outlined several areas they thought the Housing Element could be improved. He echoed Mr. Cervantes statements and agrees GPAC worked hard and listened to many people in the community and came up with a plan which is a good attempt at a Housing Element. They deserve credit for trying to represent the community and putting in a lot of work.
Regarding BART parking lots, Inclusive Lafayette has endorsed upzoning the BART parking lots; however, as an opportunity site the BART lots have concerns about whether they are going to count. He pointed out HCD’s sites inventory guidebook which states “If more than 50% of the sites used to accommodate lower income household RHNA are non-vacant, then there is a higher standard of proof that cities need to meet in order to demonstrate something is an opportunity site, specifically substantial evidence that the use will likely be discontinued during the planning period.” He has substantial evidence that BART is not going to develop during the 8-year cycle and unless the City has official documentation stating otherwise, he does not think it will count.
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 9 of 21 May 9, 2022 CHERYL MACDONALD asked if Colin Elliott’s scenario can be one of the proposals brought for the next meeting on May 23rd and said she supports holding a special meeting.
PATTY BATTERSBY voiced concern with the need to focus on the City’s Mission Statement of maintaining the City’s semi-rural residential climate and character. She is representing herself and the Glen neighborhood and wants the Council to consider not doing any upzoning in the downtown to add more housing than is required given the existing density and bonuses and waivers developers are using. She is also concerned about the State audit of HCD and pending lawsuits that may result and the City should not upzone or increase at this time because they cannot change it. She is also concerned that BART is in a very high fire severity zone and it is not an ideal place for dense development. Safety and evacuation must be considered, and she noted she could not even get to her house and had to park and walk because of traffic.
She also voiced concerns with ADUs and said she wrote a letter with figures showing they have been under-counted which needs to be adjusted. She thinks upzoning downtown is a grave mistake, developers are already taking advantage of the density bonus, and the City does not need taller buildings. She asked that the Council consider the work of Colin Elliott, Eliot Hudson and Robert Lavoie on their models.
ROBERT LAVOIE suggested a philosophical framework for making the difficult decisions on the different sites. He and Colin Elliott have spent time on solutions and their goal is to try and minimize any upzoning for downtown with basic changes to the PC model. BART should be kept at 75 units/acre with 100% yield, no upzoning for downtown, DeSilva and ADUs are a good alternative, thinks the corrected rate should be 182 units versus 112 units for the cycle as a bare minimum which is using the average of the last four years, said HCD allowed Yorba Linda to use the current run rate instead of a four year old average which is irrelevant, and thinks ADUs have a nice benefit to use a better mix allowing very low and low income units.
Regarding yields, the City does not have to be overly conservative as HCD does not allow the City to use the 50% bonus density as they are actually seeing 116 yield on recent projects and said he will send more information for the next meeting.
COLIN ELLIOTT said HCD keeps moving the goal post on many things which is part of the problem, said they realized with ABAG’s new studies the allocation of ADUs can be different than what has been in the model for quite a while which was a game changer for the City. He thinks there needs to be further study of the real number to use for ADUs rather than a four-year average, but Mr. Cervantes mentioned some upzoning is necessary which he disagrees with. They are down to how much of a buffer they want for the low and very income units and right now they would probably be in a 21% buffer in those categories, but staff would like to see that higher.
The City is being conservative, knows the ADU numbers are low in the model, knows yields they have to use because of HCD, and they all know they need to help affordable housing and protecting what exists is important, so he asked for no upzoning as has been suggested.
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 10 of 21 May 9, 2022 LIBBY HENRY echoed support for some of the things proposed by Rob Lavoie and Colin Elliott, said her concern is the PC’s disregard for Lafayette’s mission statement in their decisions, thinks they should be looking at the Mr. Lavoie and Mr. Elliott’s work done more seriously, appreciates all work of the GPAC and staff but thinks there is a way to do this without upzoning. HCD requires a 10% buffer and she thinks 21% would be appropriate. In remembering and supporting the mission statement she wants Lafayette to be the one they love.
DAVID CLARK said he heard a comment during the GPAC process not heard tonight which is that upzoning downtown incentivizes the development of residential property and throws off a residential and commercial mix. He thinks this was one of the rationales GPAC took in deciding not to upzone downtown and to focus on the DeSilva property south of Mt. Diablo. This made sense to him and he likes Jim Cervantes’ outlined approach.
Vice Mayor Anduri disclosed that the second COVID booster shot eliminated 24 hours of his planned work time over the weekend. What he is prepared to go through today is most of the Housing Element itself, but he has not looked at any of the Appendices except C which he has questions on.
Mayor Gerringer said before they begin their questions she posed the idea of scheduling a special meeting and asked if the Council is willing. City Manager Srivatsa stated some of the Transportation Circulation Commission’s recommendation might come to the Council on the 23rd as well, and she confirmed this date will be a long agenda.
Vice Mayor Anduri questioned the June 13th agenda, and City Clerk Robbins said the meeting is too far out to project.
Mayor Gerringer suggested adding it to that agenda rather than holding a separate meeting, and afterwards the Council may decide to add an extra meeting, if needed.
Vice Mayor Anduri voiced support for May 23d and June 13th; and noted he will not be around for a special meeting between those dates. He suggested a process on going through the Housing Element and proposed submitting his nit-picky comments in writing, and Councilmembers agreed, as well.
City Attorney Mala Subramanian suggested the Council talk tonight about borderline and substantive comments tonight which might require new analysis and welcomed typographical comments via correspondence.
Vice Mayor Anduri voiced the following questions and comments:
• He referred to page H-5 and said his comments relate to organization. He firmly believes that when laying out bullet points then they should be addressed in that order or explain where they are being addressed.
• Under page H-10, 2.2.2; Physical, Economic and Regulatory Characteristics, 5th line down talks about “the City has accelerated in housing production approving more than 500 units for development.” He asked if this included the Terraces.
Ms. Elrod said staff can research this and said this was the language approved by GPAC.
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 11 of 21 May 9, 2022 • He referred to page H-12 and the first story. He asked at either the GPAC, PC or staff level if there had been analysis of any type done of what our need is in the City for developmentally disabled housing. When they considered Lafayette Lane, there was an outpouring of residents who said they could use it.
Ms. Elrod said there are data further on in this segment having to do with people with IDD issues.
Staff is hampered a bit by data provided but they definitely have the data included. • He referred to page H-13, second bullet which deals with aging in place. He asked what the second sentence means, which states, “On the one hand, the idea of down-sizing sounds appealing but homeowners may face substantial challenges because concerns over depleting a household’s assets.”
Ms. Elrod said she would have to go back to GPAC’s notes on this.
Councilmember Candell voiced the following questions and comments:
• Regarding cost burdening she said in so many of these items they compare Lafayette to the County and region. She sees the numbers for cost burdening and over-crowding as just statements of Lafayette. She would like to include how those relate to the rest of the County and region because she does not know how to read it otherwise given the lack of perspective.
Vice Mayor Anduri continued his comments:
• Regarding questions on the material that starts on page H-27, these are detailed actions for the Fair Housing Action Plan. He asked if this is adopting a form prepared for the County or he asked if this is specifically crafted for Lafayette.
Ms. Elrod said it is specifically crafted for Lafayette in conjunction with Root Policy which was the consultant who did the bulk of this actual work. There is another firm that works on behalf of the County to do some rudimentary work which was included in the appendices, but the actual actions were provided by Root Policy in working with staff. Root Policy works closely with HCD and these are actions that specifically address the findings in the AFFH requirements. • On page H-27, Action 1.2, “Design a regional forgivable loan program for homeowners to construct an ADU that is held affordable….” He asked if this is one the City will collaborate with other cities.
Ms. Elrod said yes, hopefully all cities will collaborate on this particular project. • On page H-28, Action 2.1, “piloted by right approval for low density attached housing that meets the BMR affordability requirements, modeled after Austin’s affordability….” He asked if this was specifically discussed by GPAC or by the PC.
Ms. Elrod said the PC had all this information and did not comment on it. This information was not available to GPAC because they had to hire someone at the last minute to provide this material. This would be a program that would be a countywide effort and other jurisdictions would be involved, and the City would work with the C4 facilitating group to make this happen.
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 12 of 21 May 9, 2022 Councilmember Candell said this struck her that the City already has SB 9 objective standards and the League just came out with their recommendations about SB9 and how cities can on their own attach affordable requirements to these kind of projects. She thought Lafayette could be even more pro-active and since they will go over SB9 which covers single family duplexes, they could put their own affordable requirements into their SB 9 final ordinance. She suggested expanding Action 2.1 such that Lafayette could do more.
City Attorney Subramanian said they would need some sort of study to justify it and would need to hire a consultant to do that.
Vice Mayor Anduri said he has a similar comment:
• Regarding programs on pages H-29 and H-30, he asked if those were discussed explicitly by the PC because the responsible party on each of those is the City of Lafayette.
Ms. Elrod confirmed the PC adopted these as part of their action to move it forward to the City Council and she recalled it was not explicitly discussed. • Vice Mayor Anduri asked why 4.1 is there on H-31 since it states earlier in the report that there are no affordable units that will expire in the next decade.
Ms. Elrod said it is because there will be units that will expire beyond the next decade, including BMR units. The City does not have an over-arching policy to address those expiring contracts.
Something is needed so when things come up the City can be mobilized to do something about them. She confirmed this covers post-2030.
• Regarding page H-32, he asked if “including farm workers” intentional at the top on the 4th line.
Ms. Elrod said yes, because the laws have changed, studies have shown, and the state requires them to talk more in detail about farmworker housing even though they may not have evidence of farmworkers specifically living in Lafayette. They need to allow for farmworker housing for permanent and seasonal housing because research shows farmworkers will travel up to 75 miles from their place of residence to work in farms.
• Vice Mayor Anduri said he will forward an email asking staff to show him where the IDD further data is.
• Vice Mayor Anduri asked if there is relatively precise data on unmet senior housing needs, and he asked if either the GPAC or the PC explicitly discuss affordable senior housing. He asks this because the City has already upzoned the downtown for senior housing. They have an overlay district and if they develop senior housing in the downtown you can get 45 units/acre and as done with Belle Terre which is the densest property, they also granted a density bonus.
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 13 of 21 May 9, 2022 Ms. Elrod said the GPAC and PC talked about housing needs for special needs groups in general and because the needs of all those groups far outweigh any resources or ability to accommodate them it was more of providing documentation, which staff did, about senior housing needs in terms of senior housing households that are lower income, the mismatch between senior housing and where there are units that are affordable to them, so all data is in there. But, in terms of a specific discussion about any particular special needs group was discussed generally rather than specifically.
• Vice Mayor Anduri referred to page H-33, policy H.8-2, it states, “Establish building height requirements that are sensitive to neighborhood context.” He thought the advice they got was that they really cannot do anything with height requirements.
City Attorney Subramanian said that could be an issue for SB 330 if they are trying to reduce height requirements.
Councilmember Candell added that people get unlimited waivers and concessions for height anyway. Therefore, she questioned why they even need to address it because it is not an issue developers have to worry about.
Ms. Elrod said she believes there was a statement made in a number of meetings with GPAC about the concern and sensitivity with making sure there wasn’t an abrupt change between really high buildings next to single-family residences.
Mr. Wolff confirmed and said they would need to be cognizant of any change and SB 330. If there is a reduction, there would need to be a commensurate increase in another area to have no net loss. Commenters have also spoken about existing conditions where there is a topographic change, so the height of those up to 35-foot buildings in the downtown is exacerbated as perceived by the single-family further south which are a lot lower. • Vice Mayor Anduri referred to Policy H.6-11 it states, “Allow placement of manufactured housing units.” He asked if this came from the GPAC, PC or staff.
Ms. Elrod said she knows it is on the State’s requirement that the City has to allow manufactured housing, and this was an item to ensure compliance with that, and she was not sure if it was in the ADU context or SB 9 context.
Mayor Gerringer asked if Councilmembers Candell and Dawson wished to provide input on Appendix A or B. Councilmember Candell said she has nit-picky items she will email staff.
Councilmember Candell had the following questions and comments on Appendix B:
• She referred to page B-10 at the bottom and asked why the City is not including new state laws that eliminate the ability of cities to deny projects that circumvent CEQA, add limits to 5 meetings and density bonuses. She asked if those are reasons why they got a surge to 111% densities and they are not mentioned. It seems they ought to mention that all state laws have changed, and this is why they are seeing increased densities.
Mr. Wolff said staff can elaborate on this.
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 14 of 21 May 9, 2022 • Regarding page B-15 on the bottom, which starts with “These factors both indicate….” and said the reason they did not reach their goals is because they did not zone high enough, and she does not agree with that. The City is not meeting them because developers are choosing not to build VLI and LI. The City cannot tell them to build these and they do not have the money to encourage them to build them. So, she definitely does not agree that zoning is the issue. • Regarding development fees, there is a thought the City would look into the development fees on Page B-21 at the bottom, saying the costs are higher per square foot on multi-family as compared to single-family. This is true and part of her thinks that the impacts from a unit are not based on the size of the unit but the number of people in a unit and she thought a nexus study was going to be done to understand all fees and this seemed like it was taken out from left field. She asked where this came from.
Ms. Elrod said it came from guidance from HCD. She explained that in the presentation today she gave they took out that particular item as a constraint. It will be changed in the narrative because it has been requested by HCD. It is in statute by square foot and the research done in the past three or four days has indicated that none of the jurisdictions that have certified Housing Elements have provided it by square foot. So, it was based only on all these other jurisdictions on a per unit basis so this is what they will include, and staff will edit this section appropriately. • Regarding page B-29, the conclusion seemed like they did a lot of great work and then there are the conclusions which fell flat. She thinks there is so much more that could be stated. She referred to one that states, “The proposed density increases in various parts of the City” which may not happen, and this implies they are going to. Also, the second paragraph is the per unit development fee which will be redone. She suggested relooking at these conclusions on the constraints.
Councilmember Dawson said most of these constraints are non-governmental which needs to be reiterated here. There is only so much the City can do and the constraints need to be spelled out where basically cost and expense are not in the City’s control.
Mayor Gerringer noted that for this conclusion about proposed density increases the plan the PC has recommended does assume, so the Council should come back to this conclusion section depending on what is ultimately decided, and Ms. Elrod agreed and said staff is aware of this.
Mayor Gerringer suggested going through Appendices D, E, F and G and then return to C. She asked if there were any questions or comments for Appendix D.
Councilmember Candell had the following questions and comments:
• She said she has a hard time with page D-3 calling out a current lawsuit, noting “The tension around Lafayette’s ownership character has continued and there is a lawsuit.” She would hate to conflate this Housing Element with the lawsuit over the Terraces in the way it is here and recommended it not be included, as it does not relate to their 6th cycle.
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 15 of 21 May 9, 2022 Vice Mayor Anduri said at a minimum, he would not describe it as a battle between housing advocates and existing residents. He thinks there are residents on both sides of that issue.
Councilmember Candell agreed, and recommended it be left out.
Councilmember Dawson had the following questions and comments:
• In Section 3.1 on page D-5 under contributing factors under the segregation/integration, and said the last sentence is a signal to renters that they are not welcome in Lafayette based there is organized opposition against apartment communities. She thinks there is a difference between people saying they do not want multi-family and saying they are not welcoming, and this should be more objectively stated
Vice Mayor Anduri asked what was the basis for including this and asked how that conclusion was drawn and said it was also in the AFFH section of the element.
Ms. Elrod said yes, and she will talk with the consultant who completed this work. These were the findings of the consultant who is well-versed in this issue. She is happy to make a note and followup.
Councilmember Candell continued her comments:
• She referred to page D-6, first paragraph, “The concentration of LMI renter household vouchers in the downtown is a lack of affordable housing options. Rental housing or exclusionary behavior among landlords throughout the remaining areas of the City”. She said they are seeing a boom of ADU production which is the only way for the City to get affordable housing in areas outside of the downtown. She sees this as going in as part of ADUs as actually the opposite statement being made here. She thinks people are enjoying the fact they can put in affordable housing.
Ms. Elrod said the people who specifically are voucher holders are very low and low income and there is data provided that shows a number of landlords that specifically say in their ads “no Section 8 allowed” which is against the law. So, this is referencing that. If someone shows up and says they have a Section 8 voucher they will refuse renting to them. There are two primary ways in which people are discriminated against based on the fact they have a housing voucher, or they have a disability and they have requested a reasonable accommodation which the landlord refuses to provide it. The City has to conduct and work with Echo Housing and other providers to do mandatory training for landlords in the community, so they learn what the requirements are, which is a great way to get landlords on the same page. Regarding enforcement, if the City requires landlords have a business license with the City, this could be a mechanism for a requirement to go through the training.
• Councilmember Candell referred to page D-34, Map 11, and said there was a large red region in the map and asked what this is, stating it looks like it is Orinda and Lafayette.
Ms. Elrod said this is concentrations of households that have a Section 8 voucher. There are a fair number of units in Lafayette in the downtown that have vouchers. Primarily those are in apartment buildings up against the freeway or tucked in places you might not see. The percentage is between 5% and 15% of households that have a Section 8 voucher which is a significant number.
She thinks the red region is just outside Lafayette, but just Orinda and she assumes these are apartment buildings. It could be senior housing, as well.
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 16 of 21 May 9, 2022 • She referred to page D-40 and asked what RCAA’s are.
Ms. Elrod said these are areas of affluence. There are two areas; one is recap areas which are areas that have a lot of poverty. The other areas are areas of affluence. They have minimal data on this, and they are required by law to include it if it has been provided, which it has not. Mr.
Wolff said RCAA is a Racially Concentrated Area of Affluence. • She referred to page D-50 and said the schools did not seem right and thought there were more than what she thought. It states they have 18 preschools and 15 elementary schools, 6 middle schools, and 4 high schools in Lafayette.
Ms. Elrod said she was not sure if it was a combination of public and private schools and will make a note of this.
Mayor Gerringer asked for comments on Appendix E; Review of prior Housing Element.
Ms. Elrod commented that the State has specifically requires them to include only action items that are actionable, timebound and that have specific metrics. If it is something on-going like code enforcement, it can be included but they are trying to include those at the end of the analysis because those are the things a housing accountability unit is not going to be looking at.
Vice Mayor Anduri pointed out Appendices E and F are on the agenda for the next meeting.
Mayor Gerringer asked for comments on Appendix G.
Councilmember Candell had the following questions and comments:
• She referred to page G-1; Special Tax Districts, and it states it will be in 2030 and she asked why this couldn’t be part of their nexus studies.
Ms. Elrod said the Council can consider different timing, but they had to figure out ways which they could string things on throughout the 8-year cycle and not upfront load everything. Between staff and costs, they just don’t have the bandwidth to do it. They have tried to prioritize these, and they are open to suggestions.
• She referred to the DSP and the completed timeframe is 2031. She assumes the DSP is the new Downtown Mt. Diablo Corridor Specific Plan and thinks it should be moved up because they will go into this next.
Mr. Wolff confirmed and said it would be moved up.
Mayor Gerringer said GPAC went through all of these, but she asked if the PC make any edits or change these goals, policies and programs.
Mr. Wolff said he believes there were some word edits but no shifting of timeframes. • Regarding page G-5, Action 1.1, Councilmember Candell asked what is publicly subsidized and naturally affordable market rate multi-family.
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 17 of 21 May 9, 2022 Ms. Elrod explained this means housing on the market but that is naturally affordable because it is not in the best condition, people have lived in it for a long time so it might be below actual market rate. She thinks the wording is wrong and she can fix that. It is trying to get the idea that there are existing units in the community that are slightly under market rate that could be supported in some way for example by a developer buying up a market rate development and then freeze the rates so over time they would become below market rate.
This is the kind of idea as to how to preserve units that may be right at the brink of market rate but contain lower income households. If you freeze their rents, they over time become “affordable.” She will work on wordsmithing this one.
• Regarding the regional forgivable loan for ADUs she asked who would do that.
Ms. Elrod said they have put in the responsible party being C4 which is the collaborative for the County as well as EBHO which is an East Bay housing organization or an umbrella group. This is something being floated by a variety of jurisdictions in Contra Costa County. • Councilmember Candell said on the ADU front, they only eliminate fees for the one level of ADUs.
She looked at other Housing Elements and in order to encourage more production, they limited fees and got pre-approved designs, and she asked if this is a place to add that.
Ms. Elrod said she cannot remember if they have ADU actions elsewhere in the Housing Element.
Mayor Gerringer noted that there were discussions about the timing being too far out but developing pre-approved plans, etc. which are included. Councilmember Dawson noted it is under page 6.3.
• Councilmember Candell referred to Action 1.2 and contributing factors of lack of affordable housing, prevalence of large single-family lot developments and zoning restrictions. Under the lack of land zoned to allow moderate or high-density housing, she asked how that relates to ADUs.
Ms. Elrod said she will reach out to Root Policy which was a finding they did on their analysis. • Regarding page G-6, Action 2.2, she thinks they are going to create a scalable BMR scale. She thinks it would be clearer instead of just saying “look at it to allow smaller unit contributions” to say, “scalable market unit contribution”.
Ms. Elrod said she can work on that wording.
• Regarding Action 4.1, bottom of the page it states, “Develop a plan to preserve the City’s affordable units which expire in the next decade to keep them affordable long-term.” It seemed like the contributing factors to preserve has nothing to do with preservation.
Ms. Elrod said she will ask Root Policy about this, as well.
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 18 of 21 May 9, 2022 • Regarding page G-7, Goal 6.1.A, conditions of approval for multi-family, number 3 states, “The owner applicant will provide documentation the tenant was offered first right of refusal pursuant to SB 330 prohibitions prior to issuing a building permit.” Ms. Elrod said is correct. There is another action that talks about that. There are requirements the first right of refusal has to be required in certain instances. There is a law that says if a housing development is demolished that already has contained lower income households, whether income restricted or not, in the past 5 years they have to do replacement units, and this is related to that. Councilmember Candell said this is a big problem here and she asked to get this right.
Mr. Wolff said it has occurred such as the Madisen Park project where there were existing market rate but also affordable and they were not deed restricted at the time. The inclusionary ordinance does not deed restrict 15% of the units but because of their rent levels, they had to replace them in-kind. So, as a condition of approval the next step would be for them to pull a building permit and demonstrate they have met that obligation for first right of refusal to those tenants. The tenants would need to be relocated during construction in any case but usually that is seen as early in the process.
• Regarding Section 6.3.B on page G-9 are the ADUs and permit-ready units. She asked if this is a place where they should look to expand and waive the fees to help people get into ADU production.
Mr. Wolff asked if the Council would like to have a draft program come back which would waive fees. Councilmember Candell said other cities have done this which helps. They are AFFH, cities are getting real housing units that are inexpensive in Lafayette, and so this would be a real bang for the buck she would encourage.
Vice Mayor Anduri said they will discuss how many ADUS they will put in the plan later, but this is a good point. He said if they waive fees and do other things to make it easy and they have great ADU production, he would ask in what way does the City get credit for that. He assumes they would include it in the annual housing report to HCD, but if they were to have higher ADU production than put in as RHNA he asked if they would be able to use that to avoid having to rezone later if their buffer was too thin.
Mr. Wolff said yes, this could be done so as not to have to upzone mid-cycle. Staff will bring back a program reducing or waiving fees for ADUs and one strategy could be to initiate that sooner than later, incentivizing permitting of those units, with the owner pulling a permit which has lagged behind approvals for a variety of reasons. It would be an incentive to pull a permit and the Council could consider a pilot program and then that would increase the ADU permit count and make it more justifiable to HCD for an increased projection over the cycle.
Mayor Gerringer asked if there were any other comments on Appendix G. • Councilmember Dawson referred to 10.6; conversion of a legally converted residential unit. She said it is saying residential units converted to commercial and she asked how is that tracked if they are illegal.
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 19 of 21 May 9, 2022 Mr. Wolff said this was in the last Housing Element as well and through an investigation that was conducted by staff, they identified two properties in the downtown that had residential and some units were converted to non-residential inconsistent with what the code required which was a land use permit. One of the properties has been resolved and is producing new housing. The other remains unresolved and it is small for a total of 4 units at most.
Councilmember Dawson asked if the City has had experience with ADUs non-permitted and asked if staff would work with owners on an amnesty program. Councilmember Candell said she is thinking of including this in the ADUs as well.
Mayor Gerringer then returned to Appendix C and asked for comments and questions. Councilmember Candell asked if the Council could discuss this as they said they would not.
City Attorney Subramanian said she is concerned because they made it vocal that they were not planning on discussing it and discouraged comments. If there are brief items the Council would like staff to bring back for the next meeting this would be appropriate.
Vice Mayor Anduri voiced disappointment in the way this is set up, so the Council does not discuss opportunity sites until the last meeting planned for the Council.
Mayor Gerringer asked for any additional items and/or asked staff to comment on any outstanding items.
She reminded the Council they can submit nit-picky questions via email to staff.
Vice Mayor Anduri asked and confirmed with Mr. Wolff that Councilmembers could submit substantive questions about Appendix C and staff will try to make that clear for the public and the remaining Councilmembers in the staff report for May 23rd.
Mayor Gerringer asked if it was possible to get the opportunity sites in the spreadsheet format requested to be able to make changes in assumptions which GPAC had done as soon as possible. Mr. Wolff said staff will try to get this out as soon as possible and will provide the Council with modifiable worksheets.
Councilmember Candell asked if staff could present and include the Yorba Linda ADU scenario using their projections and not the average of the last 4 years. Mr. Wolff said he believes they can do that for the next meeting.
Vice Mayor Anduri said the Council will have individual conversations with staff members and will be sending minor changes to staff. He asked if it would be correct to say that if they finish the Council and community discussions on May 23rd they would then get an updated draft of the Housing Element on June 13th or would staff prepare a final draft for June 27th. Mr. Wolff said if the Council holds a meeting on June 13th he thinks it might be feasible to reflect the edits made to date.
Councilmember Dawson asked if Colin Eliot’s spreadsheet could be included and presented in the packet for the Council because it has been described many times. Mr. Wolff said yes; it has been submitted as public comment, is part of the record and staff can share that.
Mayor Gerringer and Councilmembers thanked staff and consultants, GPAC and the community members.
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 20 of 21 May 9, 2022 ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/Dawson) to continue the public hearing to May 23rd for further review and deliberation. Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Gerringer, Anduri, Candell, and Dawson; Noes: None; Absent Kwok).
10. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR
F. Letter from Karen J. Maggio resigning from the Planning Commission Recommendation: Accept with regret and thank Ms. Maggio for 12 years of volunteer service on the Planning Commission.
Vice Mayor Anduri said he wanted to recognize Karen Maggio for her 12 years of service on the Planning Commission, which is a long time to serve, given it is a very hard-working commission. She has worked on the hillside ordinances, DSP, Housing Element, and many other projects and he thanked her for returning to the Commission. She is looking forward to her new Master Gardeners opportunity and he wished her well.
Mayor Gerringer and Councilmembers agreed and echoed sentiments.
Mayor Gerringer opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/Dawson) to accept with regret and thank Ms. Maggio for 12 years of volunteer service on the Planning Commission. Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Gerringer, Anduri, Candell, and Dawson; Noes: None; Absent Kwok).
11. COUNCIL/COMMISSION REPORTS
A. Councilmembers report on activities and consideration of matters a Councilmember wishes to initiate for placement on a future agenda.
Vice Mayor Anduri offered thanks to Sustainable Lafayette for organizing the Earth Day Festival which was fantastic. The Council had a booth and those who were there had a great time. Many new residents of the community came up to talk and the booth Project Earth was getting great traffic and the event was wellattended. Mayor Gerringer and Councilmembers echoed comments.
Councilmember Candell reported receiving a request from two people, noting that in the wake of the Los Gatos mother who was throwing under-age parties, she was asked why the City does not have fines for this.
Mayor Gerringer stated she believes in 2007 this was reviewed, and she asked the City Manager to comment. Ms. Srivatsa stated she can research and discuss this with the Police Chief as she thought there was something already written into law that applies and will return to the Council.
Mayor Gerringer referred to Lafayette Community Day and said the website is up at www.Lafayettecommunityday.org. People can sign up for 6 or 7 projects to help spruce up various areas in town, and she described activities for the day which starts with raising of the Pride Flag, a rally at Plaza Park and return for a BBQ, with music provided. The event is sponsored by the Lafayette Community Foundation in partnership with the Chamber of Commerce and City.
City Council & Environmental Task Force Page 21 of 21 May 9, 2022 Mayor Gerringer proposed having some sort of a Vision Zero Town Hall or special session to discuss the policy and projects, and she will work with the City Manager for time to do that. She reported meeting with Rob Sturm and Dee Rosario, Boardmember to EBRPD and they will work with staff on who owns the pieces of property of the parking lot at Briones and being able to open the back gate and have it accessible for drop-off and pickup, taking pressure off of the front parking lot, and addressing the parking and pedestrian conflicts along Pleasant Hill Road.
B. City Manager’s Update
Recommendation: Receive and file.
City Manager Srivatsa said she had no update.
12. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS – None
13. ADJOURNMENT – 10:30 p.m. n memory of Michael “Mickey” Ganitch, a Navy veteran, Pearl Harbor survivor, served in World War II and the Korean War.
APPROVED:
__________________________________
Teresa Gerringer, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Joanne Robbins, City Clerk