City Council Meeting Page 1 of 41 May 13, 2024
7 City of Lafayette
City Council Minutes
Lafayette Library and Learning Center – Don Tatzin Community Hall May 13, 2024 3491 Mount Diablo Boulevard, Lafayette, California 6:00 p.m.
As a courtesy, and technology permitting, members of the public may participate virtually. However, the City cannot guarantee that the public’s access to teleconferencing technology will be uninterrupted, and technical difficulties may occur from time to time. Unless required by the Brown Act, City Council/Board meetings will continue despite technical difficulties for participants using the teleconferencing (Zoom) option. To participate virtually in the City of Lafayette’s public meetings and provide public comment, please follow these steps:
1. Watch or Listen: Meetings are broadcast on the City of Lafayette’s YouTube Channel:
http://bit.ly/LoveLafayetteYouTube.
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 no later than noon the day of the meeting. Those e-mails will be distributed to City Council, the City Manager, and the City Attorney, and will be posted as part of the public record.
3. Live Remote Public Comments: Technology permitting, members of the public may submit live public comment via Zoom conferencing by using the link below. 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.
4. At the time and date of the meeting, please click this URL to join the webinar:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89008805648?pwd=ODQxRGxzaGNHSWVITUVFalFuUHBIZz09 Passcode: 426199 Or join by phone: Dial 1 669 900 9128
Webinar ID: 890 0880 5648 Passcode: 426199
City Council Meeting Page 2 of 41 May 13, 2024
Mayor Dawson called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Dawson, Vice Mayor Kwok; Councilmembers Anduri, Candell, and McCormick
Absent: None
Staff Present: Niroop Srivatsa, City Manager; Tracy Robinson, Administrative Services Director; Lt. Ben Alldritt, Police Services Manager; Mike Moran, Engineering and Public Works Director; Patrick Golier, Transportation Program Manager; Jonathan Katayanagi, Parks and Recreation Director; Greg Wolff, Planning and Building Director; Mala Subramanian, City Attorney; Joanne Robbins, City Clerk
3. Disclosure and/or Take Action on Remote Participation due to Just Cause or Emergency Circumstances Pursuant to AB 2449 (Gov. Code section 54953(f).)
4. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/Candell) to adopt the agenda. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Dawson, Kwok, Anduri, Candell, and McCormick; Noes: None).
5. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Led by Mayor Dawson.
6. MAYOR DAWSON
Land Acknowledgement Statement
We acknowledge that Lafayette is part of the unceded, ancestral homeland of the Bay Miwok people. The Bay Miwok and neighboring Ohlone people have lived in and moved through this place for thousands of years. They stewarded and shaped this land for hundreds of generations. We express our appreciation and gratitude for this profound legacy, which enhances and contributes to our lives to this day. We will strive to honor this land and strengthen our ties with the Indigenous communities that continue to live and work in our East Bay region as our neighbors and community members. We acknowledge and honor them and their ancestors, elders, and next seven generations.
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS (For Items not on the agenda).
LISA DISBROW said she is leading the rallies across from Lafayette Elementary School since March 18th and they will continue through May. Their motto is to first do no harm and they began rallies because of the decisions of the school district in supporting Transgender Awareness Week for students 4-13 years old.
They think this is harmful. She believes that children age 4-13 are impressionable and being fed a study diet of harmful ideas which include: 1) You can be born in the wrong body; 2) Hormones can change a girl into a boy; 3) Kids can consent and understand sterilization; 4) Puberty is a harmful, unnecessary process; 5) A natural body can be the wrong body; 6) Puberty blockers are reversable and safe; 7) Surgery can produce your authentic body; and 8) Transition can cure depression.
City Council Meeting Page 3 of 41 May 13, 2024
What they have found is that gender affirmation care produces life-long medicalization, and sterilization and fertility, cancer susceptibilities, blood conditions, brain conditions, reduction of cognitive growth, weakening of the skeleton leading to osteoporosis at younger and younger ages. What is fascinating is that all of these treatments are worth about $1.3 million per patient. Students/children have become a commodity. She suggested what is missing in Lafayette is open dialogue with experts on multiple aspects of this so that the communities can be informed and so they are not dealing with secrets and policies that do not address how controversial all this is, and she would like to see the Council take part in that.
LUZ GOMEZ introduced herself as the City’s new EBMUD Ward 2 Director, said she is following in John Coleman’s footsteps and is very excited she has his support. Ward 2 has been her home for over 40 years, and they are incredibly fortunate to have the high-quality water EBMUD is able to provide. Prior to her appointment, she worked in Contra Costa Public Health for 25 years managing programs that improved community health and prevented disease, including the lead poisoning prevention program. She also managed a program called Building Healthy Communities where they worked with local jurisdictions to ensure communities are planning for health. She collaborated with the Lafayette team on the Vision Zero plan.
She previously worked at the BAAQMD and was managing their community engagement team, served as Chief of Staff for County Supervisor John Gioia for a number of years, and she currently chairs the County’s Sustainability Commission where they are helping the Board of Supervisors implement their Climate Action Plan. She looks forward to collaborating and partnering with the Council on any EBMUD related issues and is looking forward to being a liaison between the Council, their team, and the community, and distributed her business card to staff. She also brought information about their Community Assistance Program in case people need help with their water bills.
8. City Manager’s Update
City Manager Niroop Srivatsa gave the following update on department activities:
• Regarding the meeting with the Mayor and Chief Alldritt and she had with Senator Glazer, CHP, and Caltrans on May 3rd to discuss the enforcement of the State’s regulations regarding gatherings on the El Curtola overpass and the postings of signs and flags. Caltrans has posted signs on the overpass on the fence stating that signs cannot be affixed to the fence. They have also submitted a letter to the City Council indicating their concerns about distraction to motorists on Hwy 24.
Enforcement has not followed through so staff reached out to Senator Glazer’s Office and he scheduled this meeting. They held a conversation with CHP and Caltrans representatives. The Senator had asked CHP to send a letter explaining their position on enforcement.
Since that time, the CHP Chief has reached out to the Senator and asked for another meeting which has not yet been scheduled and the Mayor, Chief Alldritt and she will attend that meeting and provide the Council with a follow-up.
• From emergency preparedness, she thanked Contra Costa Fire Protection District for partnering with the Police and Public Works Departments last week. They cleared brush and overhanging limbs along some evacuation routes, including portions of Happy Valley, Taylor, Pleasant Hill, and St. Mary’s Road.
City Council Meeting Page 4 of 41 May 13, 2024
• From Planning, the City is updating its tree protection ordinance and there is concern about striking a balance between saving the trees and recognizing that trees could pose a fire hazard.
Staff has established a survey that people can take on-line on lovelafayette.org/trees. Staff encourages people to take the survey and share their opinions with the City.
The Housing Element has been submitted to HCD as directed by the Council and the City hopes to receive a letter shortly, anticipating the City will meet State requirements.
This month, the City received 26 development applications. Year-to-date, the City has received five SB 9 applications and 11 applications for ADUs.
• From Engineering, this Thursday, May 16th is the 30th anniversary of the Bay Area Bike to Work Day and as they do every year, City volunteers will be at Lafayette Plaza in the morning, from 7 to 9 a.m. People are invited to join them at the Plaza. Volunteers will talk about the benefits of biking and not using cars. There will be snacks, drinks, and the annual tote bag.
There is an on-line survey open for the Connecting Lafayette project which includes safety improvements around Stanley Middle School and Lafayette Elementary School. Anyone interested should visit the City’s website to Connecting Lafayette and complete the survey. • From Parks, Trails, and Recreation, the City is looking for volunteers to serve on the Senior Services Commission. The City Clerk is available to speak to anyone about these opportunities.
There are supported memberships available for Lamorinda Village for seniors who qualify.
Members have free access to Lamorinda Village’s free programs and free services at the City’s expense.
The Public Arts Committee is accepting submissions for exhibitions in the downtown galleries, both at the Town Hall Theater and the gallery outside this room. This information can be found on the City’s website.
Mayor Dawson opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
9. PRESENTATIONS
A. Lisa Strange, Northern California Outreach Manager for Insurance Commissioner Lara Insurance Update
Recommendation: Receive and file.
Lisa Strange, Northern California Outreach Manager for California Department of Insurance’s (DOI’s) Commissioner Lara, gave a PowerPoint presentation regarding updates on homeowner insurance. She shared the roles of the department and commissioner, and addressed the recent announcement by State Farm General that the company will be non-renewing approximately 30,000 homeowner policies which raises serious questions about its financial situation as well as concerns by homeowners. The Department of Insurance deals with companies that are national and multi-national in scale. To be effective, they joined forces with other states to better understand the basis for insurance company’s decisions and how they plan to recover financially. In this situation, they have worked with State Farm’s home state of Illinois to get a full picture of its financial condition and plan for improvement.
City Council Meeting Page 5 of 41 May 13, 2024
She shared that there is a misconception that when insurance companies pause or restrict new business, consumers will not be dropped immediately unless without coverage. They will have time to explore options before they are non-renewed. If someone is receiving a non-renewal notice without a 75-day notice, the DOI is here to help with that.
She said stress on the insurance market has been created by natural disasters and global inflation across the country with increased costs for rebuilding, labor shortages, and as risks increase, insurance companies are protecting their obligations to current consumers and limiting new business. When they limit that new coverage because of major losses, this affects everyone, even some people who are in lowrisk areas. When looking at the market, there are 12 insurance groups that control 85% of the California insurance market. Since 2022, 7 of the top 12 groups have paused or restricted new business, despite rate increases approved or pending with the DOI. Because of this, they have been consistently monitoring and analyzing the status and direction of insurance availability trends.
The Fair Plan has doubled to 3% of the market, becoming the insurer of first resort for many Californians, not the last resort as it was designed. The Fair Plan is not a State agency, but a fire insurance pool comprised of all insurers licensed to conduct property and casualty business in California. Critical to know is that unlike public utilities which are required to provide coverage to all residents and businesses, under Proposition 103, insurance companies can legally refuse to write insurance unless they are able to meet 100% of consumers’ claims, cover their expenses, and earn a fair return.
Ms. Strange then stated the Safer From Wildfire regulation was approved in October 2022 and then implemented through 2023. In an effort to reduce the risk of major losses in the industry, the DOI introduced the Safe from Wildfire framework which is a 3-step system to protect homes, surroundings, and community which, in turn, provides consumers with discounts and transparency about your risk rating. Under the regulation, they are seeing more businesses, homeowners, and communities making investments in wildfire safety, greater community resilience, reduced losses from wildfires, and more insurance coverage for mitigated properties. This regulation is helping them attack the root cause of some non-renewals which is wildfire risk and will make Californians safer.
It is a 3-step process. Step 1 is where you can do things to your home or business, like Class A fire-rated roofs, enclosed eaves, fire-resistant vents, multi-pane windows, and other items. Step 2 is to protect your immediate surroundings by doing things like clearing vegetation and debris from under decks and other movable combustible materials from within 5 feet of the building being evaluated. Step 3 is an effort to obtain a community-level mitigation designation. This will likely involve at least one local government agency. The community-level mitigation designations include a fire-risk reduction community by the Board of Forestry and a Firewise USA site in good standing.
When completing these steps, a person’s insurance company will provide a discount. Regarding the Fair Plan and its role, it is not subject to these mitigation regulations; however, they are still participating. They have actually offered up to a 10% discount on policies in participating Firewise communities since May 2018. Now, with this regulation, they are offering two more hardening discounts; one for Step 1 and another for protecting the immediate surroundings of the dwelling. When applied, these discounts could reduce the wildfire portion of your policy’s premium by up to 14.5%. If a person is on the Fair Plan, homeowners should contact their broker to find out how to qualify and when they could receive their discount.
City Council Meeting Page 6 of 41 May 13, 2024
She then shared that the DOI and the Fair Plan reached an agreement late last year to increase the commercial coverage limit to $20 million per location. They found that this addresses some of the greater needs for additional coverage for recreational youth camps, some of their HOAs, wineries, and agribusinesses. Additionally, the business owner policy limit was also increased to $20 million.
Also, most people did not know insurance companies assign a risk score to a home or business. It is important to know what that score is because if they get the score, people will know the risks on their property, and they can take action to reduce them and make themselves and neighbors safer. This regulation requires insurance companies to give homeowners that score, and they must tell the homeowner what factors went into creating it. The score must be given at the time when homeowners apply for a policy within 15 days, before renewing a policy which would be 45 days, and before a homeowner is non-renewed which is at least 75 days, or when a homeowner completes mitigation on their property and request a revised score and they must provide this within 30 days. This regulation also created a right of appeal. Once getting the score, if a homeowner is not in agreement with it, they can appeal that with the insurer. If still not satisfied with the response, the DOI can help with that.
Ms. Strange said in addition to this and improvements to the Fair Plan mentioned, the DOI embarked on another package of regulatory solutions, and it is the California Sustainable Insurance Strategy which is a comprehensive plan to modernize the insurance market. She listed 5 executive actions and reforms they are taking through this strategy:
1. Increase availability of insurance in wildfire distressed areas. They will use their prior approval rate authority. Insurance companies will write no less than 85% of homes and businesses in wildfire distressed areas. This is a historic agreement between the DOI and insurance companies.
This will reverse the trend of a growing Fair Plan and close that insurance gap.
2. They will return Fair Plan policyholders back to traditional insurance with first priority given to hardened homes and businesses following the Safer From Wildfire regulation.
3. The next item directly addresses the climate crisis. The DOI introduced utilization of forwardlooking catastrophe models which prioritize wildfire safety, mitigation, and transparency. Some of the benefits for consumers through this regulation are that these models must recognize the clear benefits of investments the State is making in wildfire safety, including home hardening, fuel reduction, and prescribed fire. Insurance companies will increase their writing because they can better anticipate future losses rather than non-renewing higher risk policy holders or pausing writing altogether. She noted they held a public workshop on April 23rd to hear from the public, and on record, Allstate said once this regulation goes into place, they will begin writing policies again in California.
4. They will allow California-only reinsurance costs. Reinsurance is insurance for insurers to help insulate themselves from part of the risk from a major claims event. Under this agreement, companies wishing to use these new risk assessment tools must agree to increase and maintain their writing in the wildfire distressed areas which was the 85% requirement. This will increase writing and removing people from the Fair Plan. This agreement states California-only net reinsurance costs and rates to ensure Californians do not pay for east coast hurricanes or midwest tornadoes.
5. They will continue modernizing the Fair Plan by expanding commercial coverage limits to $20 million per structure. This will go further and expand the ‘per location’ to ‘per structure’ which will further close coverage gaps for the HOAs, affordable housing, and agri-businesses.
City Council Meeting Page 7 of 41 May 13, 2024
She shared on-line tools from the DOI website that help people scour the marketplace while looking for insurance. They have a Top 10 Tips for Finding Residential Insurance which is a summary of information and options available. They also have a Home Insurance Finder tool which can help identify those insurance companies writing in high-risk regions to help narrow the search. It gives contact numbers for licensed agents and brokers in the area. Someone can type in their zip code and there is a box at the bottom to check so it will search for companies in high-risk regions that are licensed to sell insurance.
She reminded everyone they are available to answer questions about any line of insurance. Sometimes when they receive questions about non-renewals, they need to look at the specifics so someone will be asked to file a complaint so they can write to the company and obtain their renewal guidelines to see if the non-renewal is compliant with their own guidelines. When talking about filing a complaint, all of this information can be found on the DOI website. They also have a consumer hotline number at 1-800-927- 4357 which spells “help.” Or, they have a live chat feature on their website: www.insurance.ca.gov.
Mayor Dawson thanked Ms. Strange for her presentation and update on the work of the DOI.
Councilmember McCormick echoed thanks and referred to Allstate and their potential willingness to come back through stabilizing the insurance market. He asked if other companies such as State Farm or others who have indicated they will re-enter or write new policies once this plan is implemented.
Ms. Strange stated Allstate said it during the public workshop that they have for the catastrophe modeling; however, the Commissioner has an agreement with insurance companies to begin writing once this is all in place. Their part is scheduled to be done in December 2024. They received an Executive Order from the Governor last year to get this done in one year, so their part is scheduled for December. But, once this is done, a couple of months in the following year will be the implementation by the insurance companies.
Councilmember McCormick asked if it could occur before December, given people are losing insurance now and telling them that next year there might be some relief is a tough message. Ms. Strange agreed, and said each piece is its own regulation. They already have draft regulations and have another piece of the strategy which is to improve and speed up the way they do their rating plans. When insurance companies submit any rating plans to them, there is a lot of paperwork and review, and often they will need to go back to the company and ask questions or obtain clarification back and forth. She was remiss in saying this, but the first piece was to streamline that whole process of them filing their rating plans.
That regulation has already been drafted and they already had a public workshop on that. So, it is moving right along. They also have draft regulations for cap modeling. So, they are working on everything, but she was not sure which parts might be done before December. She is hopeful all of this helps speed this up.
Councilmember Anduri said he understands the DOI is aiming for December to have this set of regulations in place, and it will take time for the insurers to implement it. Then, when they make application he asked if it will still be the 85 days or 60 days for approval of the rates. He is trying to get an idea of when an insurer will be able to come back in and start writing coverage. It clearly will not be December and he asked if Ms. Strange could identify when it would be, given progress being made now.
City Council Meeting Page 8 of 41 May 13, 2024
Ms. Strange said this question is one that is into her executive team, but she does not have an answer yet.
If feasible, she would like to get back to him in a few days. She does not know and does not want to overpromise.
Councilmember Anduri said his concern is that the date out there in all materials is December. As Ms.
Strange said, this is the work of the Insurance Commissioner getting that package in place, but for the public, there may be the perception that they then might be able to get new coverage in December. But this is not the case, and it will take longer before insurance companies will return to writing policies. He asked if the Governor’s Order is that the approval timeframe for a rate change be reduced from 85 to 60 days.
Ms. Strange said she is not entirely sure about that and, again, they have their draft regulation done so she would need to look at the draft they did. They held a public workshop for that in March. It is important to know that insurance companies do not need to wait until this is done to begin writing insurance again.
If they find themselves in a space where they reduced some of their wildfire risk exposures already in some areas, they can write now and do not have to wait until this is done. It is just that some are because of the ability to then be able to use the cap modeling and reinsurance tools.
Councilmember Anduri asked Ms. Strange to get back to the Council and let them know. Assuming an insurance company is gone, and they are not coming back until there is clarity on the re-insurance, he said it would be good to know what is the earliest they could start writing policies. Ms. Strange agreed to follow-up.
Councilmember Candell thanked Ms. Strange and said the presentation in the agenda was very different from the one Ms. Strange presented here. She asked when are the Fair Plan changes happening and asked if that was also in December.
Ms. Strange said yes, the only new Fair Plan change is the one changing commercial limit to $20 million per structure. It is only for commercial and business owners. The dwelling coverage limit went up to $3 million from $1.5 million in 2022 or 2023, but all limits have been increased over the last couple of years through agreements with the DOI and the Fair Plan. The limit on homes is $3 million right now.
Councilmember Candell referred to the strategy page about how the DOI will modify the methods, she said they did not explicitly include the ability for these insurance companies to use the forecasting that is allowed in other states. It was not on the slide, and she thinks this is the stumbling block for almost all insurers. She asked why this is not on the slide and she asked if they are planning to put that in the December changes.
Ms. Strange asked if Councilmember Candell was referring to the catastrophe modeling or forwardlooking tools versus using historical losses to rate the premiums. Councilmember Candell confirmed.
Ms. Strange said she talked about that under the third bullet on the sustainable insurance strategy and this would be the forward-looking catastrophe model regulation.
City Council Meeting Page 9 of 41 May 13, 2024
Councilmember Candell said what Ms. Strange said on that slide did not talk about forecasting. It was some other words, and she is concerned this is probably the biggest sticking point, and this is what the insurance companies will wait to see until they return. She asked if there is any plan to at least let them know the DOI is going to address that and be more like other states so they can plan to start coming back earlier.
Ms. Strange said maybe she did not do a good job explaining it tonight and she apologized, but they held a whole workshop around that. This is where Allstate said great, once this is in place they will be able to write again. She has a Q&A page on the cap modeling regulation she can send as well, but it definitely is the forward-looking tools so that the rates will also take into consideration all of the wildfire risks and prescribed fire work they are doing versus using historic losses to rate and sell insurance.
Councilmember Candell said Ms. Strange also mentioned the fire risk reduction communities, and she asked how one gets certified for that. Lafayette has Firewise so the fire risk reduction communities is something new.
Ms. Strange said this is through the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection. It is only every other year, so the application period to become a fire risk reduction community for 2024 ended on April 1st. They would need to wait another year and one half for the next round for 2026 additions. There are cities and the County as identified as FRRCs right now which are Butte, Los Angeles, and Santa Barbara. She can send a link on this as well.
Councilmember Candell referred to the wildfire risk score and said it sounds like someone can contact their insurance company and they can give a person their score and methods. Ms. Strange stated they are required to provide it to people and also what factors went into the score. Equally important is that if someone does not agree with it, they have the opportunity to appeal with their insurer. And, if someone is still not satisfied with the outcome, the person should contact the DOI so they can figure out what is going on as to mitigation efforts done and home hardening, etc. which would provide a fair score.
Councilmember Candell said her house was canceled by State Farm and if she ends up going with the Fair Plan, she asked if she will have the same protections under the Fair Plan to get her wildfire risk score and also be able to appeal. Ms. Strange confirmed.
Mayor Dawson referred to the wildfire risk score and asked if it is uniform across insurance companies or she asked if each one would have a different risk score.
Ms. Strange said there are a couple of different companies that they use. She is familiar with Fire Life, and they rate on a score of 0-30. There is another company called Core Logic that rates on a score of 1-100.
These are two common names she is familiar with and again, when someone gets their score they can determine what factors went into it and where that is.
City Council Meeting Page 10 of 41 May 13, 2024
Vice Mayor Kwok thanked Ms. Strange for being here tonight. Since Lafayette has many residents in a very high fire severity zone, this is a topic that is hot in the community, as many people are talking about their cancellations. He said he appreciates hearing that the State is encouraging people to harden their homes, work on defensible space, and work with insurers to ensure they reward those homeowners for the efforts and money they are putting into mitigating their own homes. They should be rewarded for that risk reduction and hopefully not just to the tune of 1% or 2%, but meaningful reductions so they can encourage more participation. He is also encouraged in seeing the educational outreach and also the new programs in place to challenge one’s score.
On the other hand, he would say other concerns he heard with regard to the Fair Plan, and Ms. Strange said this was supposed to be a plan of last resort, yet in the last few years more and more neighbors are having to do that as the only resort. Some things he is hearing from the community is that it has taken a very long time for an application for a Fair policy to come through. Ms. Strange said there is a 75-day notice required of non-renewal, which is only 2 ½ months a resident would get a warning they will not be renewed. He is hearing people are not having enough time in 75 days to find another insurer and the last resort plan or Fair Plan is actually not responsive within those 75 days. He is wondering whether the Fair Plan has actually been maxed out. He asked if there is any more money left which is not available and this is what is taking so long.
Ms. Strange said since the Fair Plan was designed as the insurer of last resort, in fact it was created in 1968 to meet the needs of homeowners that were unable to find insurance after the Watts riots and it has been the insurer of last resort for a long time up until a couple of years ago. Their computer system was not designed to handle this volume and so they got a new system in 2023 to handle the volume and hired 76 new people but obviously there is a learning and training curve with those folks. All of this happened in 2023.
In addition to that, they are not subject to this mitigation regulation and these discounts, but they are still giving them. But, with their old system that did not handle the volume, it also only can allow two or three discounts. They get the Firewise community discount which was Step 3 of the Safer from Wildfire Regulation and then Steps 1 which are protecting the house, and Step 2 was protecting the structure.
Those are the other two discounts their system lets them key in. They must do all or nothing for those first two discounts, and they want to be able to do all of what the traditional companies can do, which is do more-save more.
The update to their system as well as letting them handle more volume will also let them give discounts like the traditional insurers do. There has been a lot of growing pains. They expanded their hours to Saturdays so folks could have a better chance of getting through on the phone, and they are hearing that the hold time went from 7 or 8 hours and then the phone would hang up on the customer to a reasonable amount of time for this calendar year because the new system worked out the growing pains, hired and trained new people, and so they are not receiving near the complaints they were about the delays.
Therefore, if folks still are getting the long wait times, she would love to hear about it because they have Assembly and Senate oversight hearings and got to hear from the Fair Plan President in March who reported wait times are down and they are able to turn around quotes, and people are not falling out of escrow.
Mayor Dawson opened the public comment period.
City Council Meeting Page 11 of 41 May 13, 2024
DONN WALKLET said he lives in an area on the north side of Hwy24 which is now designated as one of the higher risk areas in the State among the top 2% or 3%. Those living in this area are quite concerned. For the last 30 years, he has been working with universities and government agencies in developing an early detection rapid response capability which started with NASA and shortly after, the Oakland Hills Fire. It has progressed slowly but surely. There is an issue called NIH (Not Invented Here) which has plagued this situation. Fortunately, they have two individual capabilities; one at UC Berkeley and one from a group that has just launched a methane satellite and they are following up with a fire set which would detect wildfires within minutes of ignition. If combined with a command-and-control system which is derived heavily from military experience, it is plentiful and quite reasonable that any fire that starts in the State can be detected and have on-seen tanker capabilities within 30 minutes. Naturally, this does not come cheaply. When considering the value of the assets that are lost in some of these fires, such as the value of the homes north of Hwy 24 here, they are talking about $100 million to protect billions of assets and protect lives.
He would think if the State would embrace that through the insurance department, the DOI would have a lot of leverage with the insurance industry to say if they deliver this capability state-wide, they have to reciprocate both in terms of what they offer and what you pay for. It is a bit of a chicken and egg situation, but it has to be embraced by the State and it must be done in a way that coordinates with Cal Fire and all of the different departments throughout the State. He would like to encourage the DOI and Ms. Strange to think about this as another way to tackle this problem. The phrase they use is “early detection rapid response.”
Councilmember Candell asked if Mr. Walklet could send this information to the Council and they can pass it onto Ms. Strange. Mr. Walklet agreed and said he also shared it with the County.
Mayor Dawson and Councilmembers thanked Ms. Strange for her presentation and likened the situation as being in a crisis mode as people’s insurance policies are being dropped, experiencing problems with people getting on the Fair Plan, and once this occurs they also need wrap-around insurance, financial, housing, and escrow issues, etc. They asked to do whatever can be done for expediency, urged the DOI to follow-up, and appreciates the work happening.
Ms. Strange asked the Council to not hesitate to reach out further and she agreed to circle back on followup items this week.
B. Lt. Ben Alldritt
Overview of the City’s Nixle Practice
Recommendation: Receive and file.
Police Chief Lt. Ben Alldritt gave the staff report and overview of the City’s Nixle practice. He said they want to ensure the safety and well-being of the community through communications. Improving communications has been on their ‘to do’ list for a long time.
City Council Meeting Page 12 of 41 May 13, 2024
There are three levels of communication that are used by the Police Department to the community versus what the City’s PIO and other City resources put out: 1) Community Warning System which they have continued to push heavily over the last decade. They continue to have a high number of registrations for this service. The system is operated by the Sheriff through the OES and they have staff on duty 24/7. An example was at the Tri-Cities meeting, there was a representative from CWS in the audience and she was the on-call person and had her equipment with her. If they need to put out an evacuation warning order or a shelter-in-place this is the system all jurisdictions in the county utilize.
Below that, the City has utilized Nixle. They began using Nixle in 2010 and continue to use it. This is an area he has begun doing basic research to see if there is another platform or more cost efficient in his opinion that might also allow them to use the resource more effectively in the future.
Below that is their social media. They have Nixle, NextDoor.com, Instagram, and Facebook. He put them in the hierarchy of CWS at the top, Nixle at the mid-level, and social media at the bottom. If they have a CWS alert that goes out, they try to re-share those things on Nixle and to social media, and vice versa. For Nixle, it is nice to have their own system he can manage directly. The CWS has certain criteria before they utilize it. It does not come at any cost when he does use it. Nixle is a subscription-based service. It has changed hands with different companies over the years. There is Everbridge and a new company that now owns them, but everybody knows it as Nixle.
The City of Lafayette pays the general subscription every year. It is at no cost for a resident to sign up for Nixle. They do not have to live in the City to sign up for it, which might be a question as to the number of people currently signed up which is outlined in the staff report. He has heard examples of people who have family members and loved ones that may live in town or who used to live in town, and they want to know what is going on if their family might be at risk. The subscriber base is large at over 23,000 for Nixle alerts which are text messages people receive. Then, there are other alerts that are at a lesser number subscribed to.
In the staff report, he indicated that every good Nixle should have a beginning and an end. They get charged, which comes out of their base model of $4,500. If he does a beginning and end message for any one incident, it costs around $1,000 that is deducted from the $4,500 subscription. Once they run through those funds, they have to reup the minimum baseline, which is a $3,000 additional charge which is like buying tokens. Therefore, he must consider this. Their City Manager has been fully supportive that if he goes over $4,500 and needs to buy more, she supports that.
City Council Meeting Page 13 of 41 May 13, 2024
Again, there are three different types of alerts. The big one is the text alert. Many people say if they send it to a person via email at a lower level which does not cost them money or rescind it and push it to the app which can be downloaded, many people do not find that user friendly. Folks like the text option, but they try to be considerate as to when they send it. In his experience, other jurisdictions have had to work through issues which they must to, but maybe sending out a Nixle at 3 a.m. on a roadway with a tree down may not be wanted, and then some people think it is over-usage and they turn off alerts. So, there are two different instances—one, they expect there to be a road closure or an incident on the roadway that has the potential effects of a long time and many people, which he described. The other way he uses Nixle is based on the situation coming in and the incident they are currently on where he may need a resident to take immediate action. It may not be the criteria of a CWS alert, but he needs action such as shelter-in-place. If they do not deem there is a public safety threat, they have not used Nixle in the past for that kind of incident. It is again for that long-term inconvenience where emergency services, public works, and other resources will be blocking the roadway for a long time or, where he needs residents to take immediate action.
The feedback he has received as the City’s Police Chief over the last 6 years is, can they do a little more broadcasting of information, sharing of information, and they have been trying to do that. In 2023. Cathy Surges, their Administrative Analyst took this on, and they have tried to become more proactive on social media. He appreciates the support of the community when they have posted a good story or a story about a crime that occurred and outcome. He thinks there are opportunities for them to grow that in the coming years. He thinks much of this stems from the source that drove the Nixle conversation when they recently had a bank robbery downtown. It was a note-passing bank robbery, and no weapon was displayed. The person left.
The clerk at the bank did a phenomenal job of keeping her cool and passed a packet of money, and he described the pursuit of the suspect, multi-jurisdictional assistance, and said the question of Nixle came up. They had all resources dedicated at the time to the robbery. The supervisor on duty’s focus was establishing a perimeter, coordinating units, and working with the tracking of the money. They did not send out a Nixle because they did not believe at the time they had an immediate threat to the public but in hindsight in reviewing that and in the feedback received from the community, he thinks this as an opportunity for possibly not Nixle, but later that day or first thing in the morning, putting out a social media post and alerting to people of the incident and outcome, which is something he is dedicated to and trying to do better, and is available for questions.
Councilmember McCormick said given the constraints officers were working under, they did a fine job.
One of the challenges is, if you look at what communication is now versus what it was in 2016, Chief Alldritt took over in 2010 and Nixle was there, and he gets alerts from CNN or a sale at their favorite retailers, or just gets noticed about everything. So, he is working under a strict hierarchy, but the public is getting inundated, and the procedure just has to evolve based on where they are today in their communication landscape. Also, when software companies are acquired by other software companies, you typically get higher fees and lower service, so it makes him nervous as a long-term goal we are challenged, so the world has changed.
City Council Meeting Page 14 of 41 May 13, 2024
Chief Alldritt said there was a recent discussion at the Sheriff’s Office about expanding the use of their Twitter accounts which could apply here. He can discuss this moving forward. If they were to send out a Tweet and get away from Nixle, and they get residents comfortable with it as an effective method for instantaneous communication, one of the challenges from the law enforcement side and even some of the other third-party vendors out there that work to provide those services to the community that they want is constructing a full story.
He said they can send out a Tweet that says, “Police activity in the area-avoid it.” The question is whether they include more information, and his instinct is to give more if he can and so there is room to continue the discussion, try to look at ways to do it with more ease, and sometimes the subject of helicopters are in the sky overhead and whether people should be worried. So, if he is not sending out either a CWS or a Nixle, they feel confident they have it in control. If they do not feel that way, they are elevating to the levels of the CWS and Nixle. A recent example was the CHP had a pursuit onto westbound Hwy 24. The suspect exited on Pleasant Hill Road, foot bailed out of the vehicle on the off-ramp, CHP air resource was in the area and two Lafayette officers on duty responded to assist, and quickly apprehended the suspect.
He acknowledged that where he lives, if the fire truck shows up or police cars show up, he wants to know what is going on.
Mayor Dawson asked everybody to register under CWS Alerts if they are not registered and thanked Chief Alldritt for his report.
Chief Alldritt said if they do come up with other solutions in the future or find a new platform that they believe is more advantageous, he would be happy to bring that back for the Council’s consideration and support in getting people to migrate from Nixle to the new platform.
Mayor Dawson opened the public comment period.
LAUREN HERPICH said she wanted to follow-up, so it is on public record regarding the email she sent Chief Alldritt this morning. She is glad this conversation is happening and thankful he brought up points. She is thankful he brought up using social media because many people go immediately to social media to find out what is happening. As a resident in the downtown, it is always a question of why a helicopter is flying around for 30 minutes. In thinking more about using social media it is another tool, especially in light of using more free tools, and finding the balance is important. She receives many Nixle reports from Moraga PD and averages about once per week. They are messaging about prescribed burns, so it is finding the balance. Moraga likely has a lower subscription rate than in Lafayette, but if all of these messages cost a certain amount, if is being aware there is this juxtaposition between what Lafayette residents see of the budget spend, but also them getting messages from Moraga about a prescribed burn, and between getting a message about an armed suspect within running distance from her home. Personally, she lives on the Las Trampas Creek, and they have sliding doors, so this is a potential hiding spot and would definitely want to know that they need to stay inside and keep everything closed. She thanked the Chief and thinks half of the world’s problems can be solved with good communication and half can be created with bad communication.
City Council Meeting Page 15 of 41 May 13, 2024
Chief Alldritt said there has been a healthy discussion with their Lamorinda cities and they looked at Nixles put out by the other cities. They were on pace with them in looking at advisories, messages, and Nixle alerts. He knows MOFD has more prescribed burns in the area, so he definitely understands those. As far as other messaging, he reached out to 5 other police chiefs in writing the staff report: Concord, Walnut Creek, Danville, Moraga, Orinda, and Pleasant Hill. He heard back from all 5 as to when they are using Nixle, how they use it. Concord does not use Nixle. They use other platforms. In his assessment, Lafayette was consistent of when they use it and the reasons for it. He did not compare numbers beyond Moraga and Orinda, but again, he thinks there is an opportunity to use social media.
Mayor Dawson said in addition to social media, the City works in tandem with the Police Department and Con Fire. The evacuation route was a good example of using social media to do that as opposed to something else used by Police.
ROB LAVOIE said after listening in hearing problems with the Nixle alerts, he suggested using Nixle for the primary distribution and have a link to another City or other website where staff could post follow-up information so as not to spend the money on things that do not add a lot of value. Residents get many notices on I-680 and Hwy 84 and this is a free service. If the City feeds them the information, they would disseminate it as news. There might be a section to have a Police blotter on the City’s website where people could look in date order, the location, and the result. He thanked the Chief for the update, and he hopes he can come up with some good solutions.
Mayor and Councilmembers thanked Chief Alldritt for his presentation.
C. Mike Moran, Engineering and Public Works Director
Capital Projects Assessment Committee (CPAC)
Annual Update and the 2025 Capital Improvement Projects Recommendation: Receive and file.
Engineering and Public Works Director Mike Moran invited members of the Capital Projects Assessment Committee (CPAC) here this evening to join him. Unable to attend tonight is the current Chair, Ann Farrell and Past Chair, Gary Huisingh. Present are Mike Lohman, Lee Thompson, and Bob McClain. The Committee typically meets once or twice a year. Its focus is very specific on their capital improvement program, public works infrastructure maintenance, and new projects. All members of the team are very well-educated in that area. He also said at their last meeting, they honored Lee Thompson for over 28 years of service on CPAC. What is important about that is he literally went door to door and campaigned for the City’s road and drain bond that Lafayette passed in the mid-1990’s. It was because of that road and drain bond that the City was able to increase Engineering staff from one person to three people and do more paving.
Mr. Moran said the discussion held this year was very similar to the previous year. They have been raising street conditions up from the mid-1990’s when they were in horrid condition. They got the PCI up from the high forties and lower 50’s to 76, which is a very good condition. It is still at 73, which is still considered very good. This literally took 20 years to touch all streets one time. Now, they must be maintained, and part of the discussion was how to continue to maintain them. The hard part is they have certain revenue sources used for street maintenance and public works projects and those revenue sources are not growing at the same rate as construction costs. They are getting farther away from being able to break even.
City Council Meeting Page 16 of 41 May 13, 2024
He previously was before the Council five or six years ago and indicated the City needs to spend $2.65 million a year, and the Council authorized that, and they have been spending that each year, with the exception of last year. They have been able to mostly hold even. But they are now closer to $3.7 million versus $2.65 million of money that needs to go just to the streets. He still has the fixed revenue sources, but if the City does a pathway project or the Complete Streets because they must update an ADA ramp or section of storm drain that has failed, all other ancillary items are not part of the money that counts towards maintaining the streets. Unfortunately, the theme tonight is, we need more money if the Council wants to hold the pavement condition index at where it is now or somewhere in the range of very good which everyone wants to do.
He reviewed the projects they are working on, the on-going projects, those projects they have completed similar to a report that will be presented later this evening, and then it goes to the Planning Commission to find it is in compliance with the General Plan before bringing the further report to the Council hopefully to establish funding and receive the blessing to go ahead with next year’s projects. They are talking about 2025 projects and beyond, and there is a paving maintenance list that goes through 2028. Similar to the report, this group reviewed the map and street list as well, and he and the Committee are open to questions from the Council.
Mayor Dawson thanked Mr. Moran and the CPAC for their work, which is very important.
Vice Mayor Kwok said as they think about capital improvements and expenditures, one thing he has heard in the City from 20 years ago was the idea that if you let the roads decline in quality, it becomes more and more expensive to fix them and bring them to the level the City wants. The most cost-effective and financially sound method of dealing with the capital budgets is to spend money regularly and early and prevent a decline. He did not see this in any of today’s materials, so he wondered if that argument does not exist any longer or he asked to clarify whether or not it is prudent to attack problems earlier rather than later.
Mr. Moran confirmed it is definitely prudent to attack earlier rather than later. There may be a nuance which will come up when he is asking for an award of their surface seal project later this evening when he needs a lot more money to fund it than they had budgeted. Typically, the most cost-effective treatment on streets in good shape is a surface seal. He is not sure that is holding true in Lafayette. He wrote a sentence or two to that effect in that report, and all five reports are inter-related because he is asking the Council to award two projects tonight and also do the SB 1 project for next year which requires a resolution so the City can get its SB 1 funding each year from the State.
City Council Meeting Page 17 of 41 May 13, 2024
What they have found on the surface seal which is programmed into the Street Saver is that nine different counties in the Bay Area use, but it does not mean that it is as cost-effective as the program thinks it is.
Honestly, it is more cost-effective in Concord than it is in Lafayette. There are so few contractors providing this service that they are seeing very high costs. That, associated with smaller streets, hills, closures, traffic control, etc., is very expensive and it may be more cost-effective to not let the streets degrade to where they need to be reconstructed entirely which is what happened the first time through when he was hired in 1997. The City had streets that were 50 years old that had never been repaved and were failed, and the City had to reconstruct them. They could repave, do an overlay or an inlay, but maybe the sweet spot in general for Lafayette is that the 2025 program is strictly overlays and inlays. The 2025 program does not have surface seals and they will have about 1 ½ years to research this better. But it comes down to the question of whether it is better to maintain them now, which is “yes,” but they do not know how to exactly maintain them the best. It might be that they just patch pave, some crack filling, then wait until their 20-year life, mill off the street and do an inlay. So, this may be the cheapest thing to do for a 40- to 50-year life cycle for streets than what the program has been trying to tell them. The program and the reality of the bids are not matching up exactly.
When CPAC had met, they had not opened their two bids and literally written into their report is that this plan is dependent upon the City receiving favorable bids, but they did for one project but not for the other.
So, they need to look and learn from that and look at what happened last year where they saw the same trend. Also, they have cities around them that are doing the same type of treatments and are getting their costs as well.
Vice Mayor Kwok said in talking about the history 25 years ago, the City invested a great deal in bringing all roads up to speed and a 40- and 20-year life, but as they hit the 25-year point of this project, it seems like they had great roads for a decade, then put money into maintaining them the next decade, but now all of them are in need of service. He asked if the City is forecasting a larger capital expense in the years ahead.
Mr. Moran said this is where that $3.7 million comes in. One thing the program does try and do is it tells you how much to spend to maintain them forever, but that is in today’s dollars. If construction costs go up 7% next year and then 11% the next year similar to what has been seen over the last 5 years as opposed to 2% or 3% where the City’s revenue sources went up, they are getting farther away. Literally from the last month’s running of their program and analysis, if you could spend $3.7 million a year starting this year in today’s dollars with an inflation index tied to it, they should stay at least in very good condition forever which is the intent. So, at some point some streets have to be completely reconstructed again but there is always some that need some minor maintenance and some that need something in between. So, it is taking all factors into effect but giving the City the best program for the money they can spend. If the City only can spend $2.7 million because that is their revenue source and 10 years from now they want to look at where they are at, they will start at some point to rapidly decline. It may hold even and go down 1-3 percentage points, but at some point they will be in the 60’s which is not too far from the 50’s if they continue that trend for five more years. Then, it will cost even more to catch up than had they spent the $3.7 million every year in today’s dollars.
City Council Meeting Page 18 of 41 May 13, 2024
Councilmember Anduri said in addition to the history, in 1995 when it was approved there was enough money to basically repair half the roads. So, it is not as if all the roads will come to their useful end at a certain period. Roughly half the roads got repaired and then they had three unsuccessful ballot measures to try to fund the other half. Then, they got other sources of funds, and the economy was good, so they were able to do the other ones. So, he thinks there are two tiers of streets in terms of the timing. The only other thing he would mention is there is a great chart that shows how there is a steeper curve in terms of the decline of the roads if not maintained.
Mayor Dawson opened the public comment period.
ROB LAVOIE said perhaps the City is going to have to make some hard choices either not to spend money on certain projects or if there are many add-on requirements to pave the road and doing lots of things for ADA or drainage. It seems like they must weigh the need in that case. The law of diminishing returns shows that the City needs to focus on priorities it can afford with their limited budget. If something is being added into the project he thinks you should weigh those benefits with the cost. He knows the EPA has been cranking down on storm drainage requirements each year. If they said they only needed to put drinking-water-quality water in the storm drain, that would be prohibitively expensive. This is an extreme example but there is not an unlimited amount of money in the world and if someone gives the City requirements higher than what they have the ability to spend, they have to either push back or say they are grandfathered in on certain things. They are a low service, low infrastructure city by design and road funds should be used on the road and not on a sidewalk that either did not exist before or maybe needs some modifications to make it perfect for ADA.
Mayor Dawson commented that many of these improvements are really unfunded mandates because there are things that are regulatory. It is not necessarily a choice of whether they pursue these projects and must follow the law. She thanked CPAC members and Mr. Moran for their presentation.
10. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Dawson announced a request to remove Item 10.B from the Consent Calendar. There were no other requests or speakers for remaining items.
A. Minutes April 22, 2024
Recommendation: Approve.
C. Tract 9540 950 Hough Avenue, APN 243-190-003 Authorization to Record Final Map and Execute Subdivision Agreement
Recommendation: Authorize execution of the standard subdivision agreement and approve the final map for recordation.
D. Quarterly Financial Report – 3
rd Quarter, Fiscal Year 23/24
Recommendation: Receive and file.
E. Bills of Local Importance and Bill Matrix
1. AB 1886 (Alvarez) Housing Element Law: Substantial Compliance: Housing Accountability Act
Recommendation: Oppose.
2. AB 2485 (Carrillo) Regional Housing Needs Determination City Council Meeting Page 19 of 41 May 13, 2024
Recommendation: Support.
3. SB 1031 (Wiener) San Francisco Bay Area: Local Revenue measure: Transportation Improvements
Recommendation: Provide comments.
4. SB 1060 (Becker) Property Insurance Underwriting: Risk Models Recommendation: Support.
5. AB 1779 (Irwin) Theft: Jurisdiction
Recommendation: Support.
6. AB 1794 (McCarty) Crimes: Larceny
Recommendation: Support.
7. AB 2943 (Zbur) Crimes: Shoplifting
Recommendation: Support.
8. AB 3209 (Berman)Crimes: Theft: Retail Theft Restraining Orders Recommendation: Support.
9. Legislative Bill Matrix
Recommendation: Receive and file.
Recommendation: Authorize the Mayor to sign and send letters to authors of the bills.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (McCormick/Candell) to adopt Consent Calendar Items A, C, D, and E. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Dawson, Kwok, Anduri, Candell, and McCormick; Noes: None).
MOVE UP ITEM 10.B:
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Candell/Kwok) to move up Item 10.B on the agenda to be heard after Item 11. Roll Call Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Dawson, Kwok, Anduri, Candell, Kand McCormick; Noes: None).
11. OLD BUSINESS – None.
14. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT
B. 2023 Traffic Calming Program: Traffic Calming Projects that Include Speed Humps Recommendation: Authorize staff to construct the proposed traffic calming projects on Acalanes Avenue, Condit Road, Glenside Drive and Los Palos Drive, using the Traffic Calming sinking fund.
Recused: Mayor Dawson recused herself from participating in the item due to the proximity of her residence for one of the projects in her neighborhood. She turned over the gavel to Vice Mayor Kwok and left the room.
Vice Mayor Kwok asked for a staff presentation.
City Council Meeting Page 20 of 41 May 13, 2024
Transportation Program Manager Patrick Golier gave a summary overview of the staff report relating to the 2023 Traffic Calming Program. He described the backlog of applications, the evaluation process per the guidebook, acceptance of six projects into the program, and the Council is seeing four of the six approved projects where speed humps have been recommended to address traffic calming, with the final two projects that will come to the Council in a few weeks. The four projects have gone to the Transportation Circulation Commission with hearings held. The program remains a resident-driven application process, which he described, and there is broad acceptance of projects on the streets as a result of public hearings held a few weeks ago.
Vice Mayor Kwok opened the public comment period.
WAYNE BRENDT, Los Palos Drive, asked that the speed hump suggested for outside his home be relocated.
Many homes on Los Palos Drive have their bedrooms far from the street and his bedroom is only 36 feet from the proposed speed hump and installation as proposed outside his window would definitely affect the quiet enjoyment of his home and sleep. After several residents raised the issue of the humps at a recent hearing, the Transportation Circulation Commission required that a new petition be submitted with the proviso that anyone signing the petition agree to the placement of signs and speed humps outside their homes. With a number of signatories, there should be ample possibilities to place the speed humps near those persons’ homes.
In addition, Mr. Golier indicated he would work to accommodate those who did not want the speed humps near their homes, but in reading the staff report, he was surprised it did not include this proviso information and some of the objections. He wants to be on record as requesting that the City Council stipulate that the City Engineer will not place speed humps outside resident’s homes that object to having speed humps near their homes or, at the very least, that no speed hump be placed near 729 Los Palos Drive.
Councilmember Candell asked if Mr. Brendt was told by the Engineering Department that they would not place a speed hump of anyone’s house that did not want it. Mr. Brendt said the Transportation Circulation Commission explicitly added this in the requirement for the initiative that was signed. So, by implication the placement would be in front of those people’s houses since they were voting for the speed humps.
Mr. Golier has said he will work with him on that, but he felt uncertain of this just being turned over to engineers without an explicit statement saying this should be a priority and should be communicated to them.
MEGHAN CURTIS, Los Palos Drive, said on behalf of the 24 families who signed this petition to get these speed humps implemented on their street, they are very grateful to the Transportation Circulation Commission, Mr. Golier, fellow community members, and the Council for supporting them. This has been something a number of residents have been working towards for five years now. While the process got slowed down, unfortunately the speeding has gotten worse exponentially. With delivery drivers and people cutting through, high school students, etc. there are a number of residents with small children 4- 18 and none of them feel safe having their children walk on the street as is, given there are no sidewalks, and all data has shown speeding. She will have a speed hump outside her house by her front window where she sleeps, and she is of the opinion that anything they can do to slow people down will help.
City Council Meeting Page 21 of 41 May 13, 2024
LYNN WANG echoed Ms. Curtis’s comments, said her family lives at on Los Palos Drive, said when they met at the Transportation Circulation Commission, they had a spirited conversation. She learned they do have a speeding problem with 49% and 43% depending on the direction exceeding the speed limit, and 9% go over 3 mph. They had at least one dozen neighbors ranging from a 4th grader who bikes to others with concerns about the elderly walking on the street, as well as dog walkers. Two main themes emerged which is everyone loves the street and living and strolling on Los Palos Drive, that there is excessive speeds on the street, and the desire to avoid a catastrophic event. They heard of speed-related car accidents, one of which occurred outside her house, recycling bins getting knocked over by speeding vehicles, and a number of near pedestrian misses. They learned from Mr. Golier’s report that speed humps are effective at eliminating excessive speeds over 30 mph which would address the key concerns shared by neighbors.
The feedback they received was this could be approved contingent upon a majority of the residents supporting the speed humps. She personally appreciated that feedback and is glad they had a chance to collect the opinion of the block. They had 35 homes eligible to cast an opinion and, of that, 24 homes signed in support of speed humps which is 69% or over a 2/3 majority. So, she strongly recommends the Council approve the speed humps on Los Palos Drive.
Mr. Golier responded to Mr. Brendt’s comment that Engineering will commit to working with him to try to place the speed hump not adjacent to his house, which is common practice. This is done with all projects in the past and they have been successful in doing that, but they have limitations to where speed humps can go. Without going out to the site, he can say staff is committed to working with him, but they have to avoid driveways, utilities, and there is enough site distance for drivers. So, there are some engineering limitations and requirements in order to place speed humps successfully.
Vice Mayor Kwok asked to comment on the different types of speed humps out there, as some are more pronounced, and some are more gradual.
Mr. Golier said their standard design today is what might be seen in Burton Valley. These were installed 3-4 years ago. The height is between 3 and 3 ½ inches high with a gradual ramp design. It is not jarring like a parking lot speed bump. These are designed so if someone is going the speed limit, it is not intended to be jarring.
Vice Mayor Kwok asked about noise reduction and asked if it is less invasive for this design compared to a parking lot speed bump.
Mr. Golier said staff has not received negative feedback from the community in Burton Valley where 11 speed humps were installed over the past year. With that said, they still will try and accommodate requests for placement.
Councilmember Candell said if, for some reason, in the worst-case scenario, staff cannot find a good solution between Mr. Brendt and where staff wants to locate it, she asked what is the process if Mr.
Brendt is not happy with it.
City Council Meeting Page 22 of 41 May 13, 2024
Mr. Golier said again, they will do their best. He will stay in close communication with Mr. Brendt as well as his neighbors. He has received a few emails since the Transportation Circulation Commission meeting from people who have opted to have that hump in front of their houses and people who have recommended it not be placed in front of their houses. So, he will work to address all requests. For Los Palos, there are three clear sub-segments of the long stretch between two Glensides, and his recommendation is to put a hump in each of those three sections, but he thinks they should be able to accommodate the request given where Mr. Brendt’s house is located.
Councilmember Anduri thanked staff for an excellent staff report. It was very clear, reflected a lot of work on staff’s and Transportation Circulation Commission’s part, cooperation from the neighborhood, and he made a motion.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Candell/McCormick) to authorize staff to construct the proposed traffic calming projects on Acalanes Avenue, Condit Road, Glenside Drive and Los Palos Drive, using the Traffic Calming sinking fund. Roll Call Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Kwok, Anduri, Candell, and McCormick; Noes: None; Absent:
Dawson).
Noted as Present:
Mayor Dawson returned to the dais and was noted as present.
BREAK
Mayor Dawson called for a break at 8:02 p.m. and reconvened the regular meeting at 8:10 p.m.
12. STAFF REPORTS
A. Mike Moran, Engineering and Public Works Director
1. Capital Improvement Program Update and Proposed 2025 Projects and Five-Year Pavement Maintenance Program.
Recommendation: 1) Defer approval for the St. Mary’s Road Bank Stabilization and razing the Campana Building until the full budget is considered in June. 2) Use $460,00 in ARPA funds to cover the shortfall for the 2025 Pavement Maintenance Project. 3) Adopt proposed 2024/2025 Capital Improvement Program (excepting St. Mary’s Road Bank and Campana) and allocate funding per staff’s proposed funding sources. 4) Authorize staff to file a Notice of Exemption for the 2024/2025 capital program projects and for the added storm drain project to be completed this year.
Engineering and Public Works Director Mike Moran gave the staff report and overview of the CIP update and proposed 2025 projects and Five-Year Pavement Maintenance Program. He highlighted various projects, unplanned projects and a FEMA reimbursement submittal for the slide at the Batwing project, on-going projects, new projects which include a five-year paving program which is a program that gives the City the $2.6 million because this is the funding the City will have unless additional funding can be found.
On Sheet 13 of the report identifies the 2025 paving repair project which includes St. Mary’s Road and some other locations. The total is just under $3 million which includes some ancillary items. They would be $460,000 short next year for this project because they cannot use every penny of their revenue sources and because they are allocating $370,000 to the construction of the School/Topper project which was approved last year.
City Council Meeting Page 23 of 41 May 13, 2024
Therefore, he is requesting use of $460,000 in ARPA funds to cover the shortfall for the 2025 Pavement Maintenance Project. He also has a Hampton/Mt. Diablo Crossing where he is requesting $150,000 of that. The Council could decide putting this money towards the paving repair and the City would be closer at being whole on that project. The Mt. Diablo RRFB is a flashing beacon crossing. Staff requested a grant from TDA and at the time they requested $150,000 and were notified they would only be awarded $50,000. So, he also anticipated having mast arm poles that could be converted to a full signal in the future if needed. With only $50,000 in matching funds, he would not recommend that, but he still would recommend doing a flashing beacon crossing. The work would be a cost of $200,000. He would be requesting $150,000 for that project out of Measure J funds that could not be used for the paving project.
Because of this, in talking with Administrative Services Director Tracy Robinson, the only other source of funding to make that project whole would be some ARPA funds and he would need that not only for next year’s project but to award this year’s project later in this meeting tonight of $1 million in total. $540,000 would go towards tonight’s project and $460,000 would go towards this.
In going down two more lines in the chart in yellow highlights, regarding the St. Mary’s Road Bank Stabilization project, they did an emergency repair 1 ½ years ago and said they will apply for federal funds for that. He has applied for those funds, and it is FHWA and not FEMA, and this is handled through Caltrans, but there will be matching funds associated with that. So, if he is ever to do a permanent restoration there, and he believes the City will get the funding, they will need matching funds for design and construction in the order of $100,000. He has shown this in yellow because he does not have a funding source to get that $100,000 than perhaps the General Fund. Similarly, the Campana building demolition would be from the Facilities budget which has no balance at this time, is estimated to be about $200,000 if they were to demolish and make that a safe parking lot for use. The reason he put those in yellow in discussions with Tracy Robinson is she is working on the entire budget for the City. These are probably items which the Council could look at and come with the full budget ask in June. He does not need necessarily an answer on these two items tonight but would like an answer on the green top line because he needs to submit an SB 1 project to the State which has a deadline.
The rest is overhead and the carry over projects are the bottom half of the sheet. They will continue the pathway project in front of Springhill School. The Smart Signal project was discussed at the Tri-Cities meeting which is an on-going project. The bridge maintenance design is for maintaining several bridges in town which is a requirement through the federal bridge program. He will also submit in the future requests for funding for the actual construction projects, but the design is what is on-going right now. The pathway design and construction at St. Mary’s and Topper is the Connect Lafayette and this is where he needed some of the Measure J funds from this year for the approved project from last year.
Finally, regarding the BART Ped/Bike Project, both Measure J and Measure R are federal funds still allocated to that. For two years, the City did not have any progress with that project. It was in BART’s hands for two years. They recently got it back and have given it to their designer to try and consolidate a package. He has some hope they can put together a package.
City Council Meeting Page 24 of 41 May 13, 2024
Staff had a meeting with some BART representatives because on Measure RR, staff is not familiar with how to work those contracts and what specification language to have. They have different DBEs that are different than what staff is used to, so they are trying to learn about that and incorporate it into a total package. Staff does not have their estimate still, so they are waiting on a couple of things from them (BART). Nonetheless, after two years they finally got some movement on that project, and he hopes they can get a package out to bid. At that point, they will learn whether they have enough funding or not. He said the funding was pretty generous originally on that, so he is hopeful they can pay for that with the funding the City has.
In conclusion, the request from tonight is more about the paving project. In getting to his recommendations, he would recommend deferring approval for the St. Mary’s Road Bank Stabilization and razing the Campana Building until the full budget is considered in June, use the $460,000 in ARPA funds to cover the shortfall for the 2025 Pavement Maintenance Project which is the hard ask, and with these ARPA funds they could be whole for this year and next year, adopt the proposed 2024 Capital Improvement Program, accepting the St. Mary’s and Campana and the Five-Year Maintenance Program, and allocate funding per staff’s proposed funding sources. And, on that project, he recommended authorizing staff to file a Notice of Exemption for the 2024/2025 Capital Program projects. He was available for questions and would like to fund the top two lines in green, but this is up to the Council to decide.
Councilmember McCormick referred to postponing St. Mary’s and Campana until next month. He asked if approving or rejecting that has no impact on the $460,000 ask. Mr. Moran said no, it does not.
Councilmember McCormick said they are treating the Connected Lafayette project for Topper School as one bucket. He asked if it is possible with a single number or more detail they can see for each segment because each segment is different.
Mr. Moran said there is a St. Mary’s design which is pulled out which is $200,000 that was allocated specifically from the Council. That is being kept in its own pot. There is a portion of the funded earmark in OBAG III project that includes St. Mary’s which is the section between Birdhaven and Topper; the connection around the horn, if you will. Then, there is a design in front of the school—that block of St.
Mary’s so that is being kept separate. One has already been approved for construction and one just for design, and the amount would be $200,000 that was allocated to the just design part. So, you could take out part of the $200,000. However, they have used some of that money already because they allocated it last year.
Mayor Dawson opened the public comment period.
LAUREN HERPICH said with the ARPA funding, is the City able to replenish that money again, stating she has a real concern with using ARPA funding for street pavement because it is not the reason of ARPA funds.
Mayor Dawson stated ARPA funding is one-time funding and it is also for making cities whole of revenues lost during COVID, so it could be used for this type of project.
Councilmember Anduri stated the ARPA Subcommittee met with Ms. Robinson and the Subcommittee recommends use of the ARPA funds for these purposes.
City Council Meeting Page 25 of 41 May 13, 2024
Vice Mayor Kwok said he also questioned the use of ARPA funds on roads and is glad the Subcommittee met. He thinks the ARPA funds are there to help cities get through a difficult time in a pandemic. There were many negative impacts, and one of the things coming out of it was high inflation, high prices, and what he has seen is that the cost of roadwork has gone up significantly, and it has not come down as much as other construction costs over time. He thinks this is related to the impact to the pandemic on the City, and sees it makes sense to use the funds. If they were not using it for other purposes and sitting there and available, he could see the City using it for infrastructure and roads are the most significant infrastructure and the most prudent use of their cash because it will cost more if not done now. So, he thinks it is an acceptable use of funds.
As to other recommendations, he agrees with deferring the Campana until later, and he was in support of other items per staff recommendations.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Kwok/Candell) to 1) Defer approval for the St. Mary’s Road Bank Stabilization and razing the Campana Building until the full budget is considered in June. 2) Use $460,00 in ARPA funds to cover the shortfall for the 2025 Pavement Maintenance Project. 3) Adopt the proposed 2024/2025 Capital Improvement Program (excepting St. Mary’s Road Bank and Campana) and allocate funding per staff’s proposed funding sources. 4) Authorize staff to file a Notice of Exemption for the 2024/2025 capital program projects and for the added storm drain project to be completed this year. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes:
Dawson, Kwok, Anduri, Candell, and McCormick; Noes: None).
2. Award of Construction Contract for the 2024 Road Paving Project – Project No. 014-9741 Recommendation: Award a construction contract to JV Lucas Paving Inc., in the amount of $2,351,798.35 for the 2024 Road Paving Project – Project No. 014-9741.
Engineering and Public Works Director Mike Moran gave the staff report and said this would have been on the Consent Calendar because this project went very well. The City received good bids and were lower than the Engineer’s estimates. The bids within the estimate were within reason. Staff feels good about the contractor, and the only thing different about this is that the County is joining forces with the City to utilize their contract to patch pave the very poorly conditioned street of northbound Pleasant Hill Road, which he described. He is asking for award on this contract and staff feels they have good value on the project to be built. They are also absorbing two of the razed crosswalks they need to work into a contract and do design for as part of the safety improvements near schools.
Councilmember McCormick referred to the overage of the surface seal due to higher costs, and asked if it was because there is more competition here. Mr. Moran said yes, and this is by far the biggest reason.
They had more bids, a local bidder that wanted this project, and in the past there were other local bidders where owners live nearby, and the contractors are happy to work nearby if they live nearby. It is also a different skill set.
Mayor Dawson opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Kwok/Candell) to award a construction contract to JV Lucas Paving Inc., in the amount of $2,351,798.35 for the 2024 Road Paving Project – Project No. 014-9741. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes:
Dawson, Kwok, Anduri, Candell, and McCormick; Noes: None).
City Council Meeting Page 26 of 41 May 13, 2024
2. Award of Construction Contract for 2024 Surface Seal Project- Project No. 014-9740 Recommendation: 1) Award a construction contract to VSS International in the amount of $2,481,000 for the 2024 Surface Seal Project – Project No. 014-9740. 2) Allocate $1,000,000 of ARPA funding for street maintenance projects (Fund 014) with $540,000 to cover the 2024 Surface Seal Project shortfall and $460,000 to be added to the 2025 Pavement Maintenance Project.
Engineering and Public Works Director Mike Moran gave the staff report and said sometimes the City gets a bid that is reasonable and low and another one higher, but combined the City can award both of them with a workable budget. This was so high that they were not able to do that. As background, when staff learned that St. Mary’s Road was going to be deferred because of EBMUD’s planned pipeline project, staff had thrown out the idea of putting together a small surface seal project, so they do not get too far behind on the PCI.
They put out bids and also received only two bids which were both very high and they figured they were so high because it was later in the season than when they went out for bid. We hoped this is an anomaly and they thought of rejecting all bids and regrouping it as a much bigger package next year and they will come out better. Unfortunately, they did not come out better. Staff still recommends doing this so they can maintain and even recapture some of their PCI score.
In talking to others, it is high for them as well, and again, the City has stringent traffic control requirements, small streets, they want people off of it when wet, and they reached out to the low bidder and asked why it was so high. There is some concrete work along with this. It includes the roundabout taper on Pleasant Hill Road going towards Olympic from two lanes to one. It includes a sidewalk section in front of Diamond K next to the City offices and it is a difficult course with trucks being loaded with forklifts across the walkway. This will have a more defined walkway and sidewalk and there will be clear loading/unloading zones, so it is a safety project as well.
Staff wants to award it. They are sorry it does not represent the best value seen. They are not doing a surface seal next year and they will probably evaluate that for the following year, in part, from looking at the data from bids around the region from this year and next year and weigh in on that and use that to help mold their future Pavement Maintenance Program. The streets planned out to 2028 on the previous report may get changed so the City can get the best value for the money moving forward. But, at this time, they recommend the Council award this project, and it would take $540,000 from the ARPA.
Councilmember McCormick asked if next year the competitive situation will change or not. Mr. Moran said he is thinking he should be a surface seal contractor himself because honestly, this is a great opportunity for someone to make quite a bit of money. Region-wide there is an entire pavement maintenance program with 9 counties that are pushing this treatment, yet there are very few contractors.
This is not easy or fun work to do, residents do not like them, they are messy, do not give a nice smooth surface, but they rejuvenate the pavement and protect it, so it wears out much slower and extends its life. He is hoping to see over the next two years that more companies will step up and possibly the City will get 8 or 10 bidders in the area instead of 4 bidders, with only 2 of those trickling to Lafayette, but things can change.
Mayor Dawson opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
City Council Meeting Page 27 of 41 May 13, 2024
Mayor Dawson noted that the ARPA Subcommittee met and talked about this, and also supports the staff recommendation.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Kwok/McCormick) to 1) Award a construction contract to VSS International in the amount of $2,481,000 for the 2024 Surface Seal Project – Project No. 014-9740. 2) Allocate $1,000,000 of ARPA funding for street maintenance projects (Fund 014) with $540,000 to cover the 2024 Surface Seal Project shortfall and $460,000 to be added to the 2025 Pavement Maintenance Project. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes:
Dawson, Kwok, Anduri, Candell, and McCormick; Noes: None).
3. Adopt Resolution 2024-20 Authorizing Use of SB1 Funds for Lafayette’s 2025 Pavement Maintenance Project
Recommendation: 1) Authorize using SB-1 funds for Lafayette’s 2025 Pavement Maintenance Project and adopt Resolution 2024-20. 2) Allocate $460,000 of ARPA funds for use to fund the 2025 Pavement Maintenance Project.
Engineering and Public Works Director Mike Moran gave the staff report and said this is more a formality of what the Council has already done. A resolution is needed for the 2025 Pavement Maintenance Program that he submits to the State so the City can get its SB 1 funding. Secondly, recommendation number 2 is redundant to allocate $460,000 of ARPA funds for use to fund the 2025 pavement maintenance project. He added this because the State likes this to be an independent motion by the Council and wants to know this will be funded.
There were no questions or comments from the City Council.
Mayor Dawson opened the public comment period.
LAUREN HERPICH said the ARPA Subcommittee has made this recommendation. She reiterated that while it is now seen that the public has spoken that they want to have pristine roads which she agrees with, the public has spoken over the years that they also want parks, dog parks, and a vibrant downtown, and amenities that will help contribute to the community. One of those things she saw during COVID was that a number of downtown residents do not have outdoor places to play. They have had friends over their house to visit their postage stamp of a backyard and they have said they live in an apartment and have had nowhere for their kids to play.
Now, the City is allocating over $1 million to street paving. She loves having a nice brand-new street, but in 2015 they also went through the street paving program. Moraga Boulevard was beautiful and pristine and 8 years later it is a patchwork of patches. So, if this money is going to be spent on street paving, she would encourage the City to process any incentive programs for homeowners and businesses to take care of any underlying infrastructure work. The City could have a park for 20+ years or a patchwork of roads that may look beautiful for a handful of years, so she asked the Council to think about this perspective.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Kwok/McCormick) to 1) Authorize using SB-1 funds for Lafayette’s 2025 Pavement Maintenance Project and adopt Resolution 2024-20. 2) Allocate $460,000 of ARPA funds for use to fund the 2025 Pavement Maintenance Project. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Dawson, Kwok, Anduri, Candell, and McCormick; Noes: None).
B. Jonathan Katayanagi, Parks and Recreation Director
City Council Meeting Page 28 of 41 May 13, 2024
Potential Acquisition of Property at 221 Lafayette Circle, APN 243-140-005 Recommendation: Consider the acquisition of 221 Lafayette Circle as Parkland for purchase with Parkland Acquisition funds. If desired, as Parkland Council can declare, as a minute order, its intention to negotiate for the purchase of parcel APN 243-140-005 (221 Lafayette Circle) and schedule a closed session to discuss price and terms of payment.
Parks and Recreation Director Jonathan Katayanagi gave the staff report and overview of the request of the Council to consider the acquisition of 221 Lafayette Circle as Parkland for purchase with Parkland Acquisition funds. The Council, as Parkland Council can declare, as a minute order, its intention to negotiate for the purchase of parcel APN 243-140-005 (221 Lafayette Circle) and schedule a Closed Session to discuss price and terms of payment.
The Parks, Trails and Recreation recommends the Council consider the parkland and are not recommending a specific use at this time and have asked that the Parks Subcommittee continue to look at a potential use.
They discussed several potential uses and agreed it could serve as parkland but could not decide on a specific use, with the size being the biggest limiting factor for the parcel.
He pointed to a report created by three volunteer Parks Commissioners working with him; however, the recommendations in the report do not represent the recommendation from the entire Commission. He created a list of pros and cons to consider.
Pros include:
• The parkland being an opportunity;
• Having a willing seller;
• Available parcel;
• Funds available to purchase parkland in a specific fund ($3.5 million); • Available funds in the City’s budget for appraisals’
• Location is immediately adjacent to 66 apartments and other residences in the downtown within walkable distance;
• Existing utilities on site; and
• The small size of the park which could mean lower maintenance costs.
Cons include:
• Maintenance and facility development costs;
• Uncertainty with timing of development fees of over $3 million to be paid for specific projects to the Facilities and Parkland funds, as many developers seek payment at time of occupancy; • Conflicting interests: Council’s discussion of the need to create a development agreement for the DeSilva property that may have a civic use that could include parkland. Staff is working on the two parks collaborative concept;
• Specific site is not listed in any of the City’s plans for parks; City Council Meeting Page 29 of 41 May 13, 2024
Staff’s recommendation is for the Council to consider the acquisition of the property. If the Council wishes to move forward, the Council could declare its intent, go into Closed Session and begin a negotiation process. Any decision tonight is not necessarily a decision to acquire the property. The PTR Commission’s report had even more detail than what the full Commission was able to see as it came forward, but the City must move quickly when these opportunities come up because they go quickly. It is a unique opportunity in that they have a property owner willing to negotiate with the City.
Additionally, it is unique because it is running a dual track. They have an application to develop the site as a single-family home and staff has kept that process very separate. He and the Commission have been willing to review this as a site. The Planning Department has been working with the applicant to review their site as well, and the applicant has remained open to discussions.
Councilmember McCormick said in the report there is mention of Native American artifacts found at the site in the 1960’s and staff was engaging with the Historical Society. He asked what is the impact of this and asked if it would preclude any development.
Mr. Katayanagi replied that the findings and the report were for an adjacent site. There is nothing immediately at this site, but there may be a potential for artifacts. In that case, consultation with the tribes would need to take place. It is typically built into the CEQA process.
Councilmember McCormick asked if this would happen after the City owned the property and moved forward with it.
City Manager Srivatsa said no, it would not. The City would do its due diligence. The consultations are taking place are associated with the CEQA work for the development application.
Councilmember McCormick said there is not a recommendation on what kind of park it would be. He asked what that would take. He knows there are challenges and potential uses, and he asked what the recommendation is from the PTR and the timing.
Mr. Katayanagi said he feels they were very conflicted and would want to take their time to get the public input to determine what the appropriate use for the site would be. At the time they made the recommendations through the Parks Subcommittee and up to the PTR Commission, the intent at that time was to see it as a parkland opportunity based on its location and who it would serve as a park. Any sort of green space to the adjacent apartments or those that necessarily have a front yard would be beneficial and could serve many park benefits. It could serve as a good park space, but they would not need that public input or public process to determine what that final use would be. So, there would need to be an additional process that may take longer than the acquisition process could take, as well.
Councilmember Anduri said staff mentioned the appraisal costs and he asked what part of the budget was this in. Mr. Katayanagi said it is under Fund 17; the Parkland Fund which has $20,000 allocated towards potential appraisals.
City Council Meeting Page 30 of 41 May 13, 2024
Councilmember Anduri said there is a 7-2 recommendation from the PTR Commission. He asked if it would be fair to say they want the Council to start this process and concurrently, they will be working on the recommendation. He is somewhat concerned that Mr. Katayanagi said the use recommendation might take longer and asked if there is some way the Council can have assurance they will get a recommendation on use if they move forward in making a decision on the acquisition.
Mr. Katayanagi said the Commission did not indicate how long a process they were looking for. They were conflicted regarding what the potential use could be. They were very undecided. There were several uses on the table. They started with consideration of a small, off-leash dog related space, considered a more passive green space similar to what the Town Green use was listed as in the DSP, a half-court basketball came up, and there were several uses that came up. The concern for the small space and use for off-leash dogs was one of the primary discussion points and whether or not it could serve that type of use. There was a high demand for that, and staff is seeing that in the use on the school fields, in some other park areas, and there is still a large need listed in the Parks and Recreation Facilities Master Plan for off-leash dog areas, but its small size is very limiting for that type of use.
Councilmember Anduri asked if it would be fair to say that each Commissioner had a use in mind, but they could not all agree on one use, or are there Commissioners who thought it could not be used for anything.
Mr. Katayanagi said there were Commissioners that were undecided and there may have been Commissioners that had reservations about its potential use based on the size. Seven voted that the Council move forward.
Mayor Dawson opened the public comment period.
SHANE RIZMAN said he is very interested in the topic, and he has spoken to Councilmembers about how strongly he feels about the value of parks in a neighborhood and its overall value-add to individual physical and community health, and how much it contributes overall to the community. Also, depending upon where one is in Lafayette, they are under-indexed on park space. So, this is an excellent opportunity to explore this space at low risk to see what can be created. In the materials, it is so close to the downtown that it creates a whole new dimension of walkable space that would add to the excitement and vigor of that part of downtown. He thanked the Council for their consideration and asked to continue to explore the opportunity to acquire this space and do something incredible with it.
Councilmember Dawson asked what would be considering this parcel in terms of staff time.
Mr. Katayanagi said he is the primary staff member for working with the appraisers and negotiating. He will also be calling upon BBK for their legal services as well as the City Manager. There will be significant staff time in working with the PTR Commission to review use. This is probably the larger portion of this with it being such a small space that does not already have a determined use in one of the City plans. The public engagement process surrounding that, working with Commissioners, and trying to figure out what that use will be will have a higher demand than the other end of the process depending on what the use and engagement is so it could be fairly consuming for staff time.
City Council Meeting Page 31 of 41 May 13, 2024
Councilmember Anduri said he is in favor of moving forward since the Commission is coming to the Council with a 7-2 recommendation. They clearly need additional park space downtown. This is not the ideal park site, but they do have Commissioners that think this could be possibly a good site. He thinks it is worth exploring what the price might be and then also encourage the Commission to continue its discussion of what the best use might be. If they move forward, they can look at the use, potential cost, and then make a decision.
Councilmember Candell concurred. In walking this tiny site amongst all of the apartment buildings, she thinks it is a great idea. She would definitely want to move forward. She is unclear about the second sentence in the recommendation; “If desired as parkland, Council can declare as a minute order….” She asked for an explanation of the wording.
Mr. Katayanagi said the Council just needs to declare its intent in minute order, so it would go into the minutes that the Council has declared an intent to potentially acquire the property, which then opens up the ability to negotiate. Staff would schedule a Closed Session at a future meeting.
City Attorney Mala Subramanian confirmed, and this is just showing the Council’s interest in the property since it has never been discussed before the Council so they could not go to Closed Session without having the initial discussion to see if there was an interest in going to Closed Session to discuss price and terms of payment.
Councilmember McCormick thanked staff for bringing this to the Council. It is interesting and an opportunity. He is cautiously optimistic and maybe the City can find a good use for it, so he supports taking the next step. It is such a unique property, and it seems they should take the next step in the process. He thinks the use should be something the community rallies behind, and he is interested in taking the next step and hopes it does not take much staff time to reach a conclusion.
Mayor Dawson said she has a concern about pricing. This is one-time monies the City has. Although the PTR Commission considered it, her thought there are many cons outlined that directly speak to the City’s fiscal sustainability issue. There may be a more practical thought process when planning for the future.
They need parks, which is known, but the City is also short on limited resources to put towards it. She is wondering if they could consider moving this back to the PTR Commission to return with more uses before it goes out for consideration. The public engagement process could also be a very time-consuming process.
Councilmember Anduri said in the staff report, staff mentions the most recent prices for the property were $1.3 and $1.4 million, but his understanding is that this was for this property plus additional property and not for this property alone.
Mr. Katayanagi said he does not have the exact details. He had heard there were some adjacent properties that were potentially part of the pricing seen, but he does not have the exact details. They will really not know what that cost is until they go through the appraisal process.
Councilmember Anduri said in the Addendum from the three members of the PTR Commission, they acknowledge they are not real estate experts and have an estimate, and this is substantially lower. He thinks it is worth starting now because if they find out immediately it is $1.3 million, then his view would change on that. So, it is better to start now rather than to go through a whole PTR Commission process and try to start the real estate negotiation.
City Council Meeting Page 32 of 41 May 13, 2024
Mayor Dawson said this is an outstanding question that would be good to have answered before she would feel comfortable with moving forward.
Councilmember McCormick asked if they are saying they want the appraisal process to go through first before the PTR Commission and staff spends time on it. Or he asked if they want to parallel track it.
Councilmember Anduri said he thinks they are going on a parallel track. He asked in terms of authorizing an appraisal, does the Council do that in Closed Session or now.
Ms. Subramanian said the Council could do it as part of a public discussion, but typically it is something that comes from a Closed Session discussion.
Councilmember Anduri said he would recommend authorizing the appraisal now so they can find out what that number is right away and process on parallel tracks.
Councilmember Candell suggested doing so with a not exceed amount for the price of the appraisal.
Ms. Subramanian said she does not believe staff agendized the item to do that, but she knows the City Manager has certain purchasing powers that are within her power so she thinks this is something she can do separately, but the Council would not take a vote on it.
City Manager Srivatsa said they would compare the appraisal cost with the previous appraisals they have conducted to ensure it is in line.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/Candell) that the Council considered the acquisition of 221 Lafayette Circle as Parkland for purchase with Parkland Acquisition funds; that the City Council declared its intention to negotiate for the purchase of parcel APN 243-140-005 (221 Lafayette Circle) and to schedule a Closed Session to discuss price and terms of payment. Roll Call Vote: 4-1 (Ayes: Kwok, Anduri, Candell, and McCormick; Noes: Dawson).
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Jean Eisberg, Planning Consultant
DR06-22, GP01-22, TP04-22 SAJ Development (Owner) SRB Zoning: Request for (1) Design Review, (2) Grading Permit, and (3) Category II Tree Permit to redevelop four parcels containing three existing commercial/retail buildings (three-story 4,700 sq. ft.; two-story 2,725 sq. ft.; onestory 1,645 sq. ft.) and 11 surface parking spaces. Work includes demolition of the one and twostory buildings to construct a six-story 68,135 residential gross sq. ft. (25,251 sq. ft. footprint) multi-family building containing 53 rental units with six (6) below-market-rate (BMR) units, subterranean parking (76 garage + 11 surface) with a maximum height of 63’, requiring 15,000 CY earth movement, and removal of 24 protected trees located at 1001, 1007, and 1009 Oak Hill Rd, APNs 243-030-020, 243-030-033, 243-030-038, and 243-030-041. The Project includes a State Density Bonus with concession and waiver requests.
Environmental Review: The Project qualifies for an infill exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act and Public Resources Code.
Project Planner: Jean Eisberg, [email protected], (415) 516-4479 City Council Meeting Page 33 of 41 May 13, 2024
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2024-19 finding the project exempt from CEQA and approving the project subject to conditions.
Planning Consultant Jean Eisberg gave the staff report and overview of the request for (1) Design Review, (2) Grading Permit, and (3) Category II Tree Permit to redevelop four parcels containing three existing commercial/retail buildings (three-story 4,700 sq. ft.; two-story 2,725 sq. ft.; one-story 1,645 sq. ft.) and 11 surface parking spaces. Work includes demolition of the one and two-story buildings to construct a sixstory 68,135 residential gross sq. ft. (25,251 sq. ft. footprint) multi-family building containing 53 rental units with six (6) below-market-rate (BMR) units, subterranean parking (76 garage + 11 surface) with a maximum height of 63’, requiring 15,000 CY earth movement, and removal of 24 protected trees located at 1001, 1007, and 1009 Oak Hill Road. She recommended two changes to conditions of approval: to clarify that number of affordable units in COA #30 and to clarify the utility undergrounding in COA #31.
Staff recommends the Council adopt Resolution 2024-19 finding the project exempt from CEQA and approving the project, subject to conditions.
Councilmember McCormick referred to the 11 parking spaces on the podium. He asked if this is solely for use of the housing or shared with the business on Poppy, or asked what is the use of the parking island.
Ms. Eisberg said the 11 spaces are on the surface parking lot and the remainder of those spaces are in the podium parking. She deferred to the applicants, Brian Griggs and Jeff Stone to comment on this during their presentation.
Councilmember McCormick said they are suffering through an extended period of construction on Mt.
Diablo Boulevard across the street from Desco Plaza which has caused numerous traffic delays and inconvenienced many residents. This project is even more in the heart of Lafayette affecting many people coming into the downtown from the freeway. He sees there was a proposed construction schedule in the plans for March 2024 which has passed through to July 2025, which seems aggressive given what they have heard. He asked what the impact will be on traffic and asked if there is anything that can be done to ensure this does not drag on for years and they are stuck with Oak Hill being cut down to one lane.
Ms. Eisberg said in terms of the construction schedule, part of what the Councilmember may be looking at is the part of the environmental analysis. This project started a couple of years ago. The applicant requested it be put on pause towards the end of 2022. This is why when the Council sees the construction was intended to start March 2024, that did not happen. So, their timeline has been pushed out in terms of potential construction start date.
The applicant will be required to do a traffic management plan as part of the building permit and this would identify any needed lane closures or what would happen during construction in terms of staging areas, any sidewalks or lanes that would need to be closed. That would be approved as part of the building permit process.
Councilmember Candell said one of the things the City has been hearing from the Fire Department is access to be able to fight a fire in this building, but she does not see that in the report. She knows it is part of the approval process, but asked if staff has spoken with them about this project.
City Council Meeting Page 34 of 41 May 13, 2024
Ms. Eisberg said the project was originally reviewed and referred to all of the City’s departments and the County Fire and Building Department. She does not see any specific comments regarding concerns about fighting a fire. There was also a CEQA analysis done, so no concerns are expressed here. But again, as mentioned, the project will be reviewed at the time of the building permit by the Fire Department and all required fire codes and inspections will need to be met at construction.
Councilmember Candell referred to COA #38 and the one-time contribution to the path. She asked if this is along the Aqueduct Trail.
Ms. Eisberg confirmed and said there is no change proposed to COA #38. The presentation simply identified some notable conditions of approval. This Aqueduct Trail is not an objective standard requirement for the project, but the City has been linking together the off-site trail. COA #38 is a voluntary contribution by the applicant towards a feasibility study. This particular section has some grade challenges, so it is not as simple as installing the trail. There will likely need to be some ramping to ensure it is ADA accessible. The next step is about identifying options and doing a survey.
Mayor Dawson called upon the applicant for a presentation.
Brian Griggs, developer, said he and Jeff Stone are partners in Oak Hill, and they have moved move through entitlements and then are working through working drawings, financing, and then construction.
Mr. Stone would be here tonight but is home ill. He is participating via video, and he would be the most appropriate to answer specific questions. A lot of work has gone into this, and Mr. Stone has worked a long time to get a 6-story building not to appear as a 6-story building, and he thinks this has been delivered as a workable solution for one of the key entries into the town.
Regarding the contribution as to the EBMUD, it was not a requirement, but this is a critical link for their residents to get to BART and use some of the full purpose of that trail parallel to the freeway. The work done to date was a little stale and pricing estimates were stale, and there are alternatives that could be explored, so they want to be a part of that to ensure it comes to reality. He does not have a large presentation because the staff report and package was well done. The drawings themselves were well done and they received some good feedback from the Planning Commission and prior to his involvement from the DRC and other organizations on some of the issues they felt were important link undergrounding of the lines, and working collaboratively with Mr. Moore, the neighbor who shares an easement with this property. He suggested allowing Mr. Stone to respond to specific questions and thanked the Council.
Jeff Stone, applicant, referred to the traffic management plan, this is one of the first things they study. It is a sequencing and a staging plan. They have the staging plan for the front of the building, so they do not affect all of Oak Hill while they are under construction. The construction schedule is definitely not starting this year for a variety of reasons. Frankly, they pulled the project hoping that they would be in front of the Council with a project that relates to the 6th cycle Housing Element but today, since they have this available to them to close on the land, they are forced to finalize this entitlement.
City Council Meeting Page 35 of 41 May 13, 2024
For Fire, they have talked and discussed with Chris Bachman of Contra Costa Fire Protection District. The reason it is difficult in the City of Lafayette is the lack of a ladder truck. Quite a while ago, they fortunately worked out an alternate means and methods of additional standpipes, additional stairways to roof, additional access, additional ladders, additional fire-proofing methods of construction materials.
Environmental analysis that went into that takes this project into consideration. The only thing that would have changed under those 32 exemption documents is the construction schedule. As far as the rest of the project, he was listening in, and the Council was getting feedback on costs in general, which is roadways and what asphalt contractors are doing. In general, he is under construction finishing Lucas Ranch, 3742 Mt. Diablo, and 950 Hough in Lafayette. He is proud of those projects to be under construction, but the costs in general are pretty prohibitive, and then you put the capital costs on top of that which have more than doubled since the time they started this project. It makes it even more difficult to see these projects through.
They are committed to this location in the City and are committed to the community and are committed to being a solution-oriented developer that looks at the whole part of the housing issues that they see to provide both hopefully rental as well as for-sale housing. He always contemplated this site as a rental project because there has not been a rental site built for about 15 years in Lafayette. So, it is something that is needed. He and his partners have seen it through, and they are committed on closing on the site and committed to continuing to figure out the best way forward for the actual development, so it satisfies and helps the gateway into the City.
Councilmember Anduri said he understands Mr. Stone wants and needs this approval in order to close on the property, but he has a preferred project.
Mr. Stone clarified that he has designed and submitted to Lafayette a larger project that takes all four parcels. It cannot be processed yet because the 6th cycle Housing Element has not been certified by HCD.
The option he has on the property requires him to finalize something so there is some value on the property because unfortunately, getting commercial real estate is not what it was worth 3 years ago.
Councilmember Anduri said he thinks he read in the PC minutes that Mr. Stone has more than required EV charging than what the ordinance requires. Mr. Stone said he does not remember what is specified on the plans, so he does not want to misrepresent it, but from a market standpoint, they are providing EV charging as much as possible. Not only is it the right thing to do but fortunately, the market is demanding EV charging stations at stalls these days.
Councilmember Anduri asked if the project is still all-electric. Mr. Stone said as of today, yes.
Councilmember McCormick referred to the 11 parking spaces separate from the underground parking and asked if this can be shared with the business next door or dedicated to the building.
Mr. Stone said the retail use will be the spots off to the right with the curb cut, and the residential and commercial use will be shared evenings and days.
Councilmember McCormick asked and confirmed this will be a rental project. The Council talked about getting commercial on the ground floor and residential above, and he asked if this was ever considered for this property.
City Council Meeting Page 36 of 41 May 13, 2024
Mr. Stone replied that commercial is not underwriting for developers at all, especially with the availability in multiple local markets in Lamorinda and then go to Oakland and San Francisco. Retail is a little nervewracking on that particular site. When trying to underwrite something like a restaurant, it is whether people will be pulled all the way to that site or is it not as walkable as other areas like 950 Hough to the center. So, as a core and shell with the size of the building of 53 units and needing to get that podium because it steps up into the hillside, by trying to reduce the height of the building from Oak Hill, it may be economically, technically, and physically impossible with what they are proposing.
That said, in the other architectural and topographical studies done with the other architects as well as their own side, if they looked at a for-sale project and you increase the density of what is being considered in the 60 or 75 du/acre, then they would want to activate it with some ground floor retail, so it is seen as an amenity for not only the community but also the building.
Councilmember Candell said in following up on Councilmember Anduri’s question about your preferred project, she asked Mr. Stone to explain that more. She asked if this is assuming that the Council is going to upzone this property, so they have another project ready to be submitted if and when the City upzones the property. Mr. Stone confirmed.
Councilmember Candell said it sounded as if he needed another parcel or she asked if it was just these same parcels. Mr. Stone confirmed it is the same parcels and they need to get the approval now to finish the entitlement that they started so there is value from a development standpoint and a commercial building. The way the underwriting world works is it is either the value as purchased as a parking lot with a commercial building and with a commercial building up above it or, he can look at it from a value standpoint of that there is an entitled 53-unit project plus a commercial building. It is an issue of finance, and it is why they have been patient in trying to understand how this was going to finalize itself out. But they cannot guarantee that the upzoning occurs and cannot guarantee that process. So, they have an option on the property they would like to close on, so they need this entitlement.
Councilmember Candell said the other pieces are design questions. She knows they have objective design standards and cannot ask for anything, but she asked if the colors are really the colors this is going to be.
Mr. Stone said without going into too much detail, the problem with an entitlement process of a project is that they have not gotten into the CDs, design development, or construction documents. So, the entitlement documents are always something to start processing more siting and massing. He thinks the Council is aware of his work and the pride he takes into architectural projects. If this project is built, every color, every brick and part of the project will be further analyzed during the CD process. If anything changes, they would go back to staff and/or DRC or any other commissions that necessitate approval.
Councilmember Candell said her suggestion is to somehow soften this up from looking so industrial and she hopes this can be addressed. Mr. Stone emphasized that he will be looking at every detail of this project before it is built, and he thinks there is room for improvement.
Councilmember Candell said she works in Dublin and is surrounded by all different shapes and sizes, and some are far more attractive than others. It is not hard to see the addition of fun railings and shapes, so everything is not a rectangle. So, she is encouraging him to consider them for this project.
City Council Meeting Page 37 of 41 May 13, 2024
Mayor Dawson referred to the Fire Department and said it sounds like he worked with Chief Bachman.
Normally, the Council sees these letters from agencies. The ladder truck was an issue for the City, and as they move into development this may be the first of many projects that are higher levels. She asked how the alternatives worked up came about and asked when could the Council hold this discussion sooner rather than later.
Mr. Stone said he can read an email to Samina from Chris Bachman so the Council could hear it from his words:
“Samina: They are working with us to submit an alternative means and methods since they do not meet the aerial access requirements. The items listed below would be acceptable since we still have aerial access but not the requirement of one full side for the highest point of the roof. The ground ladder access requirement could be eliminated if the portions of the building that do not meet compliance are constructed of Type 3-A construction. Firewall separation will be required to separate Type 5 and Type 3 construction if both are utilized. It appears the other items will be addressed when the building permit is submitted with the updated construction plans.”
He said in different types of construction, whether it is Type 1, 3, 5, single-family, etc., often times you can never meet a full fire code because of topography or other reasons. Fire consultants are brought on early with developers to determine what alternative means and methods could be supplied to that fire department so they feel not only the safety of their firefighters, as well as the safety of the occupants of the building can be met. So, the Type 5 to Type 3 would be 2-hour fire walls, the additional standpipes, ladder access, etc., which gives the fire department confidence that they would have the means to fight a fire given the time it would take for the fire to move in and through the building. This is a long way of saying it is site-by-site too. For 950 Hough, they had to make the entire building Type 3 for the 2-hour fire based on the lack of fire access because the fire truck would not have enough width on that roadway to get the truck into the position to get to the 4-story of that building. He said he has other examples in San Ramon where he is dealing with things differently, as well. Typically, developers analyze a project on a site and fire and life safety is one of the first things they look at from a due diligence side and how they are going to comply. In conclusion, before he would get a building permit, there would be a condition of approval that would require him to go to Contra Costa Fire Protection District that would verify all of those A and M’s.
Mayor Dawson said she listened to a recording of a couple of meetings of the Transportation Circulation and PC, and she appreciates the accommodations for those recommendations that came out of both those commissions. This is our showcase street through Oak Hill into the City, and she thanked Mr. Stone for his comments of making the project exemplary that meets the needs of the community.
Councilmember Anduri said he thinks at the PC meeting, Mr. Stone expressed an interest to cooperate early with the Public Art Committee on artwork, and he asked if he is okay with revising the COA which says “The property owner shall submit an application for public art which includes the following….” and change that to state, “The property owner shall collaborate with the Public Art Committee in the development of a proposed artwork and then submit an application for public art.” Mr. Stone agreed.
Mayor Dawson opened the public comment period.
City Council Meeting Page 38 of 41 May 13, 2024
CHRIS PALOMO said he is a field representative with the NorCal Carpenter’s Union out of Local 152 in Martinez, representing all of Contra Costa County, thanked the Council for allowing him to speak and said he is here to discuss the importance of making sure there are labor standards enforced on this development. The blue-collar men and women who will build this project deserve more than the bare minimum standards. They deserve a commitment to area standard wages, health care benefits, and the use of the State-certified apprenticeship program. Paying workers area standard workers is crucial for maintaining a stable, skilled, and motivated workforce in the construction industry. This not only supports the livelihood of the workers and their families, but also contributes to a higher work quality and safety standards on job sites. By ensuring the workers are being paid these area standard wages, the City is giving workers a fighting chance of the middle class at a time when high interest rates and everything costs an arm and a leg.
Secondly, he asked to make sure every worker has access to health care, which is essential. Health care should not be a luxury for the fortunate few. The physical well-being of their workers directly impacts their productivity, morale, and overall quality of life. By implementing health care benefits on this project, the Council is not only prioritizing the welfare of the workforce but are also strengthening the entire community’s health and resilience.
Lastly, the use of a State-certified apprenticeship program is vital to investment for the future of our workforce. The apprenticeship programs provide invaluable hands-on experience and knowledge, creating a pipeline of skilled and qualified workers who are not only ready to meet the demands of today but are also equipped to address the challenges of tomorrow. By enforcing these labor standards, the Council as leaders of Lafayette are not only ensuring the success of this future development but also are signaling Lafayette’s commitment to sustainable growth, quality job creation, social responsibility, and setting a precedent that will benefit this community for generations to come.
CHERYL MACDONALD said in following up on Councilmember McCormick’s question regarding how the project would be managed and whether there would be lane closures on Oak Hill, she thinks one developer mentioned the front of the building. She asked if this means Oak Hill would not have lane closures so the off-ramp would be a free-flowing lane for the project or, she asked if there would be temporary closures for that lane.
Mr. Stone thanked Mr. Palomo for taking the time to provide comments. They are a second-generation construction company that started in 1985 from his father who was on his own at about 15 years old. The blue-collar part of their business and how they treat labor is of the utmost importance of everything he does, which he further described.
Regarding the lane closure, construction is disruptive. They try to be as disruptive as possible especially during certain times. If there is or ever was any lane closures based off of mass excavation and/or significant concrete pours, there would be adequate traffic control, notice, and flaggers similar to any road construction. He cannot tell what that will look like today because they have not gotten into the construction documents, but knowing this is one of the veins into the City, they would be highly sensitive to the impact it would have on the community.
Mayor Dawson said if all goes according to approvals, she asked when would construction starts.
City Council Meeting Page 39 of 41 May 13, 2024
Mr. Stone said, honestly, he is hopeful that they can start processing the other project with staff and that the 6th cycle Housing Element is certified by HCD, that upzoning occurs, and the Council will see a much better project for the overall site. As of today, he could not say when they would start for a variety of reasons, the first of which is finance. Yield on cost underwriting is not where it was, and this is why people see so few starts in the Bay Area.
Secondly, without getting too far into the details of the construction market, it is a project that would be difficult to underwrite in total as a developer today. Therefore, they will continue to watch the macro side, but hopefully, the Council will be seeing them soon again with a project the Council will feel even better about.
Mayor Dawson said therefore, this is a proxy in a way for another project that will come down the pipe.
Mr. Stone said he did not want the developer putting the builder’s remedy in as a way of trying to get his way and putting a project into the City that he would not feel good about driving next to as he shows his kids the projects he develops. He had two alternatives, and the reality is, the weaponization of the builder’s remedy is something he is not interested in inside his own community and as a developer, but the reality of the economics are very real to them of whether or not there is value to land or if there is not value to land. So, they had to go through this process to secure some sort of entitlement depending on where the market is and depending on where the 6th cycle Housing Element goes.
Councilmember Anduri said he was smiling at the thought of the alternative project.
Mr. Stone said a builder’s remedy project would be 16 stories and it would be at 20% BMR and it would be like coming through Oakland and seeing the building on the right as your go through. This is not what he sees as the heart in coming into Lafayette. They felt like as community members and developers, this was a preferred alternative than either putting a builder’s remedy either as leverage and/or putting builder’s remedy in as a means of getting a project that would underwrite that they ultimately would not feel proud of.
Mayor Dawson closed the public hearing and returned to Council deliberation. There were no comments, and she suggested clarifying the updated conditions of approval.
Councilmember Anduri said he has no changes to the resolution other than he thinks the resolution needs to explicitly approve the grading and tree permits. It talks about the requirements and how they are met, but does not explicitly say the Council approves them. He said he is in favor of going forward with this, but he wants to say that he thinks this is an industrial-looking building as well and he was pleased to hear Mr. Stone say he would be open to further development of it. He hopes he is able to move onto the other project and that the City does not end up with this project.
Planning and Building Director Greg Wolff referred to page 22 of the packet, this is Resolution 2024-19 and Item 4 covers it adequately. Staff is happy to make any amendments but based on the above findings that the City Council approves the request for approval of the Design Review application, the grading permit application number, the tree permit application number, to demolish two existing commercial buildings with some square footages in there and construct a new 6-story multi-family development. If the Council wishes to add any additional language staff can do this. Councilmember Anduri said no, this is fine.
City Council Meeting Page 40 of 41 May 13, 2024
Mayor Dawson asked if there were any other edits needed.
Councilmember Anduri asked that, in addition to staff recommended changes to conditions described in the presentation, COA #14 regarding the Public Art Committee state after “Shall, the property owner shall collaborate with the Public Art Committee in the development of a proposed artwork and then submit an application for public art.” Ms. Eisberg confirmed this condition will be amended.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/Candell) to adopt Resolution 2024-19, with amendments to Exhibit A; finding the project exempt from CEQA; and approving the project subject to conditions. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes:
Dawson, Kwok, Anduri, Candell, and McCormick; Noes: None).
15. COUNCIL/COMMISSION REPORTS
A. Councilmembers report on activities and consideration of matters a Councilmember wishes to initiate for placement on a future agenda.
Councilmember Candell reported on the Lamorinda School Bus Transportation Agency meeting which was right after the last Council meeting. Good news was received from Whitney Simon which was an MOU with CCTA to be the agency for Lafayette to receive funding the State said the City was supposed to get. It was only for Lafayette this year, and Moraga and Orinda will receive it next year. The MOU got signed.
The second piece was they were trying to get the RFP in collaboration with Traffix which is a San Ramon agency, and they were hoping they could delay theirs, but they were not able to make that happen. Instead, they are moving their RFP process up by 8 or 9 months so by the end of the summer they will need to do an RFP but with Traffix it will give the school bus transportation agency more time to ramp up to support the City, as well.
Vice Mayor Kwok said May is Asian-Pacific Islander and Native Hawaiian American Heritage month and he had the pleasure of attending an Asian public affairs evening in Dublin with their City Council and other Bay Area City officials. It was a talent show of high school children in its 6th year. Tomorrow, he will also be attending an event in Martinez where Contra Costa County staff is holding an Asian Pacific Islander Heritage month celebration.
Councilmember McCormick reported on Saturday, they had their first Artisan Walk, which is a new Chamber of Commerce event with the City where downtown businesses participated and welcomed the public, which was quite successful.
Mayor Dawson said she had the pleasure of speaking to Friends of Lafayette Library and Learning Center Foundation. She recognized all the volunteers who bring cultural enrichment to the City.
Mayor Dawson opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
B. Councilmembers Candell and Kwok
Resolution 2024-21 Appointing two members to the Transportation and Circulation Commission Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2024-21 appointing members to the Transportation and Circulation Commission.
City Council Meeting Page 41 of 41 May 13, 2024
Councilmember Candell said she and Vice Mayor Kwok held interviews, and they recommended continued service of Stella Wotherspoon, and there were two applicants for the remaining opening, and recommended Michele Sahar.
Mayor Dawson opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
City Clerk Robbins asked and confirmed Ms. Wotherspoon’s term will start on July 1st and go for two years, and Ms. Sahar will be on the shorter term.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Kwok/Candell) to adopt Resolution 2024-21 appointing Michele Sahar and reappointing Stella Wotherspoon to the Transportation and Circulation Commission. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes:
Dawson, Kwok, Anduri, Candell, and McCormick; Noes: None).
16. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None.
17. ADJOURNMENT – 10:16 p.m.
APPROVED:
__________________________________
Gina M. Dawson, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Joanne Robbins, City Clerk