City Council Minutes Page 1 of 20 March 23, 2026
*
City of Lafayette
City Council Minutes
Lafayette Library and Learning Center – Don Tatzin Community Hall March 23, 2026 3491 Mount Diablo Boulevard, Lafayette, California 6:15 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 Minutes Page 2 of 20 March 23, 2026
1. CALL TO ORDER – 6:15 P.M.
Mayor Anduri the Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:15 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: City Council: Mayor Anduri, Vice Mayor McCormick; Councilmembers Cervantes, and Wotherspoon
Absent: Councilmember Candell
Staff Present: Niroop Srivatsa, City Manager; Tracy Robinson, Assistant City Manager; Greg Wolff, Planning and Building Director; Monica Ly, Contract Planner; Nichole Zittel, Associate Planner; Mala Subramanian, City Attorney; Joanne Robbins, City Clerk Disclosure and/or Take Action on Remote Participation due to Just Cause or Emergency Circumstances Pursuant to AB 2449 (Gov. Code section 54953(f).)
3. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
ACTION: It was M/S/C (McCormick/Wotherspoon) to adopt the agenda. Roll Call Vote: Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes:
Anduri, McCormick, Cervantes, Wotherspoon; Noes: None; Absent: Candell).
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS ON THE CLOSED SESSION – 6:15 P.M. – None.
5. CLOSED SESSION
A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
Gov. Code section 54956.9 (d)(1)
Housing Action Coalition vs. City of Lafayette
Contra Costa Superior Court, Case No. C25-0512
REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION – 7:00 p.m.
Mayor Anduri announced there was no reportable action taken in Closed Session.
6. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Mayor Anduri led in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Mayor Anduri announced that the City Manager will be making a statement for the record.
City Manager Niroop Srivatsa said the City was shocked and saddened to hear that a Lafayette resident was killed this weekend and their hearts go out to the family and friends of the victim. This was the City’s first homicide in over 20 years. She expressed her deep gratitude to the Lafayette Police Department and to the officers who responded and were able to swiftly locate and detain the suspect. She also thanked all other law enforcement agencies who came to their assistance on Saturday, especially the Contra Costa Sheriff’s Office investigations and crime scene investigations.
City Council Minutes Page 3 of 20 March 23, 2026
She reassured the community that there is no threat to the public. Lafayette is a safe community and this was not a random attack. The victim and the suspect knew each other. The investigation is on-going. If anyone has information about the case, she asked to contact the Investigations Division of the Sheriff’s Office at 925-313-2600 or call the anonymous tip line at 866-846-3592 to leave a voice message. Again, she thanked the Police Department for their swift response and for arresting the suspect.
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS (For items not on the agenda) – None.
8. CITY MANAGER’S UPDATE
City Manager Niroop Srivatsa gave the following update:
• She reminded everyone that the Citizens Police Academy kicks off tomorrow with 12 participants, including Vice Mayor McCormick.
• Summer Camp registration opens Sunday and favorites like carpentry and sewing are back alongside new K-Pop inspired camps. Details and sign-ups are on the City’s website. • From the Public Art Committee: Celebrate National Poetry Month at Poetry for the Ages on Tuesday, April 21st between 12 and 1:30 p.m. at Town Hall Theater for readings by 6 local poets, followed by tea, coffee and cookies. There are only 25 seats and early registration is encouraged. • The City has secured $3.737 million in State transportation improvement program funds for the Aqueduct Pathway. The funding will be available to the City in FY 2029. This will help build a key segment connecting Dolores Drive to the Lafayette BART station, improving safe access to downtown and transit. The design work for the project extending to Pleasant Hill Road is already underway.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
9. PRESENTATIONS – None.
10. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Anduri removed Item A.1, the February 20th minutes. He asked if Councilmembers or members of the public wished to remove any other items, and there were no other requests and no public comments.
A. City Council Minutes
2. March 9, 2026
Recommendation: Approve.
B. Resolution 2026-22 Approving the Amended and Restated Contra Costa Clean Water Program Agreement (2026-2041) and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2026-22 approving the Amended and Restated Contra Costa Clean Water Program Agreement, Effective July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2041, and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement.
C. Resolution 2026-23 Approving Contra Costa Clean Water Program Inspection Activities Agreement and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2026-23 approving Contra Costa Clean Water Program Inspection Activities Agreement and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement.
City Council Minutes Page 4 of 20 March 23, 2026
D. Accept the donation of the daguerreotype “In Memory of Our Troops, 6475” by Binh Danh for inclusion in the City’s public art collection and authorize its installation at the Lafayette Library and Learning Center.
Recommendation: Accept the donation and authorize installation.
E. Approve the public art proposal by Masayuki Nagase for installation in the Glenn Seaborg Garden at the Lafayette Library and Learning Center.
Recommendation: Approve the proposal.
F. Annual Progress Report on Housing Applications, Production, and Programs for the State Department of Housing and Community Development
Recommendation: Approve and direct staff to submit the Annual Progress Report (APR) to the California Department of Housing & Community Development (HCD) and the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (LCI).
G. Budget Request for Library Seaborg Garden/Waterproofing Project Recommendation: 1) Authorize $127,372 be budgeted in 16-640-861 to complete waterproofing and renovation of the Seaborg Garden at the Lafayette Library and Learning Center. 2) Authorize release of $127,372, from the Library Maintenance Sinking Fund.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (McCormick/Cervantes) to adopt Consent Calendar Items A.2, B, C, D, E, F, and G.
Roll Call Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Cervantes, Wotherspoon; Noes: None; Absent: Candell.
11. OLD BUSINESS – None.
12. STAFF REPORTS
A. Niroop Srivatsa, City Manager
City Council Priorities for FY 2026-27
Recommendation: Confirm the priorities for the next fiscal year.
City Manager Srivatsa gave background on the Council’s work to establish priorities for the upcoming fiscal year, which runs from July 1 to June 30. These priorities play a critical role in shaping the City’s budget, including how they allocate resources and staffing. The Council met on February 20th and identified three key multi-year priorities: 1) Wildfire prevention, preparedness, and utility safety; 2) Mt. Diablo Corridor planning; and 3) planning for the development and financing of the City’s recreational needs.
Following the workshop, management staff meant to assess workloads and funding, and they are beginning the budget process and confirming the priorities this evening, which will allow staff to better prepare and focus their efforts on achieving the Council’s priorities in the upcoming budget year. As such, she recommends the Council confirm these priorities.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
Mayor Anduri pointed to a minor change in the heading under Wildfire Prevention to delete “and utility safety” and City Manager Srivatsa agreed to remove it.
Councilmember Cervantes said he is very excited by this item, believes the Council spent a thoughtful day going through priorities, and said these are all important things for the community.
City Council Minutes Page 5 of 20 March 23, 2026
Mayor Anduri thanked and recognized the work of the City Manager and staff who briefed the Council on developments in each of these areas. He thanked Nadine Levin who led an effective workshop and he thinks they have some important goals to reach.
Councilmember McCormick added that the passage of Measure H allows the City to stabilize its finances to be able to think about the future and be aspirational and he thanked the community.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Cervantes/Wotherspoon) to confirm the priorities, as amended, for the next fiscal year. Roll Call Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Cervantes, McCormick, Wotherspoon; Noes: None;
Absent: Candell).
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Monica Ly, Consultant Planner
SB33002-25, DR12-25, TR9733, GR08-25, TP45-25 OUTDO Lafayette LLC (Owner), C-1 Zoning:
Request for 1) State Density Bonus and Design Review, 2) Major Subdivision, 3) Grading Permit, and 4) Category II Tree Permit to demolish an existing commercial building, construct 30 condominium residential units with 55 parking spaces, and remove 6 protected trees at 3458 Mount Diablo Boulevard, APN 243-011-042.
Recommendation: Conduct a public hearing, review the proposal, and adopt Resolution 2026-24, finding the project exempt from CEQA and approving the project.
Consultant Planner Monica Ly presented a staff report for a proposed development at 3458 Mount Diablo Boulevard involving a State Density Bonus, Design Review, Major Subdivision, Grading Permit, and Tree Permit. The project proposes demolition of an existing commercial building and construction of a 30-unit condominium development with 55 parking spaces, along with removal of protected trees. The application is being processed under SB 330 and AB 130. Ms. Ly outlined site characteristics, zoning, General Plan designation, and revisions made in response to prior Planning Commission (PC) and Design Review Commission (DRC) feedback.
Subsequent project revisions included changes to unit mix and affordability compliance. A proposed three-bedroom unit initially failed dispersion requirements, leading to adjustments in Below Market Rate (BMR) unit distribution and a shift from a public art concession to an inclusionary design concession. Staff determined earlier proposals did not meet code requirements, prompting further revisions to align with affordability and dispersion standards.
Design updates addressed prior DRC comments related to building massing, height, façade articulation, materials, and site layout. The proposal now includes a 31-unit subdivision (30 residential, 1 commercial), removal of certain property lines and easements, and significant tree removal (18 of 20 trees), with requested waivers from standard mitigation requirements under density bonus law.
The project seeks multiple zoning waivers, including reduced setbacks, increased building height (62’3” proposed vs. 35’ allowed), and reduced landscape setbacks. While parking requirements are met, concessions are requested for design standards and unit distribution. Based on a 0.64-acre site, the project qualifies for 23 base units, with a 27.5% density bonus and 5% lot consolidation credit allowing up to 31 units. The proposal includes three BMR units (two very low-income, one moderate-income), though staff recommends improved distribution across floors.
City Council Minutes Page 6 of 20 March 23, 2026
The applicant also requests concessions related to bedroom mix and inclusionary housing design. The project complies with objective design standards, exceeding required points, and meets key development criteria. Tribal consultation required under AB 130 was completed, and mitigation measures for cultural resources have been incorporated into project conditions.
Staff reported limited public comment and recommends adoption of Resolution 2026-24, approving the project, subject to conditions.
Vice Mayor McCormick inquired whether the project falls within the BART proximity zone that exempts parking requirements, and staff confirmed it is located just outside that radius. He noted the absence of solar features in the proposal and confirmed that no solar components are included.
He asked about compliance with trash, recycling, and compost service requirements, including pickup logistics on Second Street. Staff indicated that service provider comments have been relayed to the applicant for resolution during the building permit phase. After questioning the zoning history and use of the Mt. Diablo Boulevard frontage, staff explained the proposal evolved from a dog wash station to two commercial spaces, and later to one commercial space and one live/work unit in response to design review feedback and concerns about market viability.
Councilmember Wotherspoon raised questions regarding the distribution of Below Market Rate (BMR) units, noting that the published plans show two units on Level 2, while staff described a potential redistribution to Levels 3, 4, and 5. Staff explained that code requires BMR units to be distributed throughout the project rather than clustered; a compliant approach would place one unit on each of Levels 3, 4, and 5 to achieve proportional distribution.
When asked whether the applicant had submitted revised plans reflecting an alternative distribution, staff confirmed that no such revisions have been provided and that the current plans reflect the applicant’s original proposal.
Councilmember Cervantes discussed the Below Market Rate (BMR) units and confirmed the applicant is requesting a concession. Staff clarified that the proposal does not meet standard dispersion requirements, as it clusters two very low-income units on Level 2 and places a two-bedroom unit on Level 4 under the concession request. He also inquired about parking access from Second Street, confirming that access via Orchard Hill Court leads to the second level and noting the access point appears relatively narrow.
Mayor Anduri confirmed that Inside Out serves as the City’s landscape consultant and highlighted its concern regarding the vulnerability of a large Valley Oak tree located off-site near Second Street by Merrill Gardens, recommending additional protections. Ms. Ly noted the applicant is requesting a tree protection waiver related to tree replacement.
Mayor Anduri then inquired whether protections for the oak tree are required. Ms. Ly responded that tree protection measures are included in the Conditions of Approval (COAs) based on arborist recommendations. The Mayor expressed concern that the specific tree was not included in the applicant’s arborist report and therefore may not be adequately protected.
City Council Minutes Page 7 of 20 March 23, 2026
Mayor Anduri also revisited prior discussions on stormwater management, confirming that bio-retention basins will be located along Second Street as directed by the City Engineer, Design Review Commission, and Planning Commission, noting this location aligns with natural water flow and avoids the need for mechanical pumping that could introduce risk of failure.
Mayor Anduri called upon the applicant for a presentation.
NIKHIL GERA, applicant, introduced his architect, Goetz Frank, to talk about the project and how it has progressed over time, and can return to talk about the concession and waivers.
Architect Goetz Frank summarized the project’s iterative design process, noting ongoing coordination with staff, a voluntary study session, and multiple revisions in response to Planning Commission (PC) and Design Review Commission (DRC) feedback. He presented updated renderings, including photo montages and Google Street View integrations, to better reflect real-world context and design changes such as increased top-floor step-backs, enhanced ground-level activation, and revised façade elements.
He addressed prior comments by replacing the proposed dog wash station with a commercial space and a live/work unit, adding residential units to activate the second-floor façade, and incorporating design features to improve pedestrian engagement. He also stated that the two Below Market Rate (BMR) units on the podium level would meet quality standards comparable to market-rate units, with acoustic insulation and proximity to amenities.
Mr. Gera discussed the BMR unit concession request, explaining his willingness to provide a threebedroom unit in response to PC feedback, despite the higher cost and reduced revenue from replacing a more valuable corner unit. He noted that this adjustment was initially intended to offset the requirement for public art. He expressed concern that the project would still be required to provide public art in addition to the three-bedroom unit, creating financial constraints. He requested clarification from the City Council on the interpretation of BMR unit “dispersion” requirements, indicating flexibility to distribute units across floors but seeking confirmation on whether a more flexible, project-wide approach would satisfy the standard.
Vice Mayor McCormick expressed appreciation for the project revisions but raised concerns about the proposed live/work unit along Mt. Diablo Boulevard, emphasizing the importance of strong, street-facing commercial uses to support Lafayette’s vibrant downtown. He cautioned that live/work units can be less successful, citing prior local examples where such spaces underperformed both residentially and commercially. He encouraged the applicant to consider prioritizing fully commercial space, noting successful recent developments with street-level retail, and highlighting design limitations of the current live/work unit, including visibility, ceiling height, and signage constraints. He suggested, at minimum, designing the space to accommodate a future café or similar commercial use with appropriate infrastructure.
Mr. Gera explained that the live/work configuration was a risk-mitigation strategy due to uncertainty in attracting commercial tenants, though the space is designed with features such as double-height elements to improve visibility and functionality. He indicated the intent to provision the space for a café use, while maintaining flexibility to avoid prolonged vacancy.
City Council Minutes Page 8 of 20 March 23, 2026
Vice Mayor McCormick also inquired about sustainability and operations. Mr. Gera confirmed that, although not required, the project will include solar to help reduce HOA and operational costs. Regarding waste management, he stated that plans are still being developed in coordination with Republic Services, with a willingness to refine the approach to optimize functionality.
Councilmember Cervantes echoed support for the project’s evolution and emphasized the value of including a three-bedroom Below Market Rate (BMR) unit to better accommodate families, while confirming that two-bedroom units could also serve moderate-income households such as teachers or police officers with children. He confirmed the applicant’s proposal to provide two very low-income, twobedroom units and one moderate-income, three-bedroom unit in exchange for waiving the public art requirement.
Mr. Gera explained that, by exceeding the minimum requirement for very low-income units, he qualifies for a concession, which he intended to apply toward enhancing the BMR unit mix rather than funding public art. He expressed concern that current expectations would require both the upgraded unit mix and the public art contribution, creating financial strain.
Councilmember Cervantes clarified the proposed unit distribution—two BMR units on Level 2 and one on Level 4—and noted staff’s concern that this configuration does not meet dispersion requirements due to clustering.
Mr. Gera further explained design and financial considerations, noting that the 900-square-foot BMR units are smaller and more cost-efficient, allowing affordability targets to be met without impacting the overall project layout. He stated that such unit sizes are not typical for market-rate units in Lafayette but are appropriate for BMR housing. In discussing the target market, Mr. Gera indicated the project is designed to appeal broadly but is most likely to attract empty nesters and downsizing homeowners seeking lowmaintenance, high-quality housing, as well as some younger, urban-oriented buyers seeking proximity to transit and a more compact lifestyle.
Councilmember Wotherspoon sought clarification on the planted podium and third-floor outdoor spaces.
The applicant explained that these areas are private open spaces assigned to individual third-floor units, while a separate shared resident lounge is located on the top floor. She also inquired about long-term maintenance of the planted areas. Mr. Gera stated that initial installation, including landscaping and irrigation, would be provided by the developer, with ongoing upkeep to be managed by the homeowners association (HOA).
Councilmember Wotherspoon also confirmed design details along the Mt. Diablo Boulevard façade, including that certain balconies are partially recessed and partially cantilevered, extending both within and beyond the building façade. Regarding property boundaries, she asked whether the property line extends to the centerline of Second Street. Mr. Gera indicated this is the case and noted that the street is subject to a permanent easement, limiting changes to its use.
Mayor Anduri referred to the discussion regarding the large Valley Oak tree, and he asked and confirmed Mr. Gera was willing to include protection for it during construction.
City Attorney Mala Subramanian noted that the Valley Oak is on another private property and the City may want to condition it on that owner.
City Council Minutes Page 9 of 20 March 23, 2026
Mayor Anduri raised concerns about the accuracy of landscaping depictions, specifically questioning whether Tree #4 and other shown vegetation—such as Crepe Myrtles—accurately reflect what will be installed, noting that removal of existing mature trees and the addition of a six-story building may result in less greenery than illustrated. Staff clarified that Tree #4 is designated as a “focal point flowering accent tree,” without a specific species identified. He encouraged consideration of larger tree species along the frontage to enhance the streetscape.
Mayor Anduri asked the applicant to confirm that there will be an 8.5-foot-wide sidewalk along Mt. Diablo Boulevard. The applicant confirmed that there will be, emphasizing the importance of maintaining a vibrant, walkable corridor consistent with nearby developments. He also noted that the Second Street frontage will be reduced to approximately 6 feet from building wall to curb. Additionally, he inquired about potential third-floor step-backs along the Mt. Diablo façade.
Mr. Gera explained that further setbacks would reduce unit count and compromise project feasibility, as the current design is necessary to maintain the required number and size of units.
Councilmember Wotherspoon asked about ADA access to the ground-floor commercial and live/work spaces, noting steps at the lobby entrance. Mr. Goetz confirmed all ground-floor spaces are ADAcompliant, with a ramp located on the Second Street side providing accessible entry. She clarified that accessing these spaces requires circling around the building. Regarding the second-level podium screening, Mr. Goetz confirmed that the horizontal slats are designed to fully obscure visibility of vehicles inside the podium.
Councilmember Cervantes raised concerns about access to the second-level parking from Orchard Hill Court, noting the narrow 15-foot road and nearby parked vehicles. Mr. Gera confirmed that the road will be widened to 20 feet per Engineering requirements to improve access. He also noted potential construction impacts on neighboring elderly residents across the street. Mr. Gera stated he has not yet engaged with them but intends to coordinate with Merrill Gardens during construction to minimize disruption once project financing and scheduling are confirmed.
Vice Mayor McCormick inquired about electric vehicle (EV) parking infrastructure. Mr. Gera confirmed that the spaces are pre-wired for 220-volt charging, allowing chargers to be installed as needed, similar to his other building projects.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period.
WILL NEWHART urged the City Council to deny the project in its current form, citing concerns that the building is oversized, generic, and inconsistent with Lafayette’s semi-rural character. He criticized the design as profit-driven with minimal architectural variation and insufficient integration with surrounding development, and he noted the clustering of BMR units in less desirable locations. He also expressed concern over the number of waivers and concessions requested, arguing they demonstrate inadequate attention to community standards, and encouraged the Council to prioritize thoughtful design that enhances the City’s long-term character.
City Council Minutes Page 10 of 20 March 23, 2026
RAMON AMARAL, representing the North Coast States Carpenter’s Union, expressed support for new housing while stressing the need for strong labor standards. He cautioned that without oversight, some developers may select contractors who underpay workers, rely on unskilled labor, and create unsafe conditions, potentially causing delays and quality issues. He recommended requiring general contractors to employ skilled, state-certified apprentices, provide fair wages and benefits, and maintain safe work environments, noting that robust labor standards would ensure meaningful community benefits from the project.
Rebuttal – Applicant
Mr. Gera waived their rebuttal period.
Councilmember Wotherspoon highlighted positive aspects of the project, including replacement of the aging commercial structure with new housing, provision of an affordable three-bedroom unit, inclusion of commercial space, regular fenestration, absence of curb cuts on Mt. Diablo Boulevard, parking access from Second Street and Orchard Hill Court, corner bulb-outs, retention of the Second Street sidewalk, and expanded bike parking.
Her concerns focused on the planted podium area, specifically its maintenance and reliance on residents without backyards, suggesting the addition of box trees for easier upkeep. She noted the Mt. Diablo façade appears heavy and dominant, with the planted podium deck not contributing to softening the building’s mass along that frontage. She also expressed concern about the southeast corner lobby façade continuing to the fifth level, which does little to reduce perceived bulk, and about the high-contrast materials—dark grey/brown against pale cream—creating a visually prominent but disjointed appearance. She recommended lightening the darker tones and increasing the cream’s saturation to reduce the dramatic contrast and improve the building’s visual massing from the street.
Mayor Anduri inquired about the City Council’s discretion in approving the project. City Attorney Mala Subramanian explained that, because the project is multi-family affordable housing and complies with all objective design standards, the General Plan, and the Downtown Specific Plan (DSP), the Council’s authority—particularly regarding design review—is very limited under State law. Regarding requested waivers, Ms. Subramanian noted that denial would require a specific finding of adverse impact on public health or safety.
The Mayor observed that any modifications to the project would be at the developer’s discretion, particularly if changes enhance community benefits or improve the building’s appearance along Mt.
Diablo Boulevard, which Subramanian agreed is a fair characterization.
Councilmember Wotherspoon emphasized her goal of collaborating with the applicant to achieve the best outcome in the neighborhood context, noting that the dark massing of the proposed building contrasts sharply with the generally lighter tones of surrounding downtown structures, as observed in Google Earth aerials.
Mayor Anduri concluded that Council feedback should focus on potential improvements while recognizing it is ultimately the applicant’s decision whether to implement them.
City Council Minutes Page 11 of 20 March 23, 2026
Vice Mayor McCormick encouraged the applicant to “lean into” the commercial component of the project, noting the potential to create a vibrant streetscape along Mt. Diablo Boulevard similar to the successful Brant development, where commercial spaces were purchased and operated by business owners. He emphasized the importance of designing commercial-friendly spaces with features like large windows, signage opportunities, and an inviting façade to support pedestrian activity, cafés, and neighborhood engagement.
He also acknowledged the value of the 900-square-foot, two-bedroom BMR units, recognizing that while small, they provide an otherwise unavailable ownership opportunity in Lafayette at an attractive price point.
Councilmember Cervantes noted that replacing the existing one-story commercial building with housing is a net positive for the City, but emphasized that the project’s massing makes it highly prominent along Mt. Diablo Boulevard, so careful design is critical. While acknowledging the Housing Accountability Act limits the Council’s discretion on height, he stressed the importance of mitigating the building’s visual impact and supporting a streetscape that enhances Lafayette’s main thoroughfare.
He commended the developer for responding to feedback from the DRC, PC, and Council, emphasizing the goal of a successful, fully occupied project that adds positively to the street environment. He expressed support for including a three-bedroom BMR unit to provide greater housing options for lowerincome residents and indicated openness to trade-offs to accommodate this.
Mayor Anduri acknowledged the limited Council discretion under the density bonus and Housing Accountability Act, noting relief that housing will be provided on an underutilized site, but expressed frustration with the building’s six-story height, proximity to the sidewalk, and overall massing. He praised the applicant’s design efforts, noting it is more visually appealing than typical developments, but emphasized that it does not fit well with Lafayette’s existing character, contrasting it with Merrill Gardens, which steps back, includes a courtyard, and maintains a generous streetscape.
He stressed the importance of preserving an 8.5-foot sidewalk along Mt. Diablo Boulevard, encouraged exploring additional setbacks, and recommended larger, taller trees to provide a leafy buffer and soften the building’s base, and framed these comments as refinements to improve the building’s presence along the boulevard and enhance the pedestrian experience.
Councilmember Wotherspoon expressed disappointment that tree replacement is not feasible due to the hot climate, noting that reducing the downtown street tree canopy worsens urban heat island effects and limits greenhouse gas mitigation. She acknowledged the applicant’s waiver request and the intent of the State density bonus law to expand housing, but emphasized that this situation illustrates a conflict between important policy objectives.
City Council Minutes Page 12 of 20 March 23, 2026
Mayor Anduri noted that the City’s Downtown Street Improvement Plan calls for continuous rows of large street trees along Mt. Diablo Boulevard and emphasized the importance of maintaining that canopy. He encouraged the applicant to consider planting red oaks, as used in front of Merrill Gardens, to provide visual screening and avoid leaving a “dead spot” along the block. On the resolution, he clarified that the three-bedroom BMR unit issue is linked to the requirement for unit dispersion. While the applicant is willing to provide a three-bedroom unit, staff—and he agreed—determined that the current layout does not achieve dispersion throughout the building. Thus, the matter is not a trade-off between threebedroom units and public art; it involves both providing the three-bedroom BMR and addressing the unit dispersion requirement.
Vice Mayor McCormick sought clarification, believing the three-bedroom BMR versus two-bedroom units was a trade-off with the public art requirement. Mayor Anduri clarified it is not a trade-off; the applicant must comply with BMR size and dispersion criteria. Ms. Ly confirmed that while providing a threebedroom unit satisfies the bedroom count requirement, staff does not consider the current layout to meet the dispersion requirement. Levels 3, 4, and 5 would represent a more proportionate distribution, but the City Council can make the final determination.
On the distribution graphic, Ms. Ly explained that the proportional distribution reallocates the BMR units from Level 2 to Levels 3 and 5, ensuring the total count remains 31 units, though this requires adjusting the other units accordingly.
Mr. Goetz clarified the elegance of the solution to putting the two BMRs on the second floor is that they also served to shield the garage. If they dispersed them on the upper floors, then they would expose the garage again. He also noted that they fully understands the planner’s motivation to optimize the distribution here; however, they would like to note that architecture is not a fully flexible affair. There are multiple factors that influence floor planning such as stacking, floor plan, overall layout, and so they do their best but they can get to 80% but to mathematically come to 100% is rarely seen because it would lead to very unoptimized and strange situations. So, it is a normal situation in a case for the distribution that they get there to 80% to 90% and that is okay. So, they would ask is what they show good enough for the distribution? They also only have three units. If there were 12 BMR units, there is more flexibility, but when only having three, they put two in one location and one in the other, and one is higher up in the building. So, this is what they are requesting.
Councilmember Cervantes clarified he thought two BMR units would remain on the second floor if the other units were moved upstairs, but Mr. Goetz confirmed that in the proposed redistribution, the second floor would instead have just the garage and a large wall—no units remain there.
Mr. Gera explained the reasoning, noting that in response to feedback that the building felt too bulky, they reduced the top floor units and added step-backs, losing 2,000–3,000 sq. ft. They shifted some space to the second level to balance this. Moving the BMR units differently would require undoing these changes, potentially increasing the height of the sixth floor to maintain the same total square footage. He concluded the current layout was chosen to meet both objectives: shielding the garage and addressing upper-level massing.
Vice Mayor McCormick emphasized that the intent of dispersing BMR units is to avoid making residents feel like “second-class citizens.” He expressed concern that placing two units on the second floor next to the garage—one directly across from the elevator and bathroom—disconnects those residents from the rest of the community, making them feel isolated.
City Council Minutes Page 13 of 20 March 23, 2026
Mayor Anduri noted the architect’s point; that asresidents enter their units, access to the lounge or fitness center doesn’t require seeing the garage unless they go to their car. However, he is reluctant to consider this configuration as meeting the “dispersed throughout the project” requirement because two of the three BMR units are concentrated together on the garage level, which could set a precedent the City cannot easily rely on in future projects.
Councilmember Wotherspoon offered a different perspective: “dispersed throughout the project” does not prescribe an absolute method. With only three BMR units out of 31, and five candidate floors (or four realistically), placing two on the second floor is not inherently disadvantageous. She noted that separation via hallways and doors and proximity to amenities (lounge and fitness center) could be a benefit, providing convenience and limited hallway traffic.
Councilmember Cervantes added that part of the challenge is the small number of units. He acknowledged that ideal dispersion might place one BMR unit per floor, but doing so could negatively affect the Second Street façade. Keeping the two units on the second floor preserves a better aesthetic for the building frontage, and in his view, “perfect is the enemy of the good.” Mayor Anduri said, however, no one is asking the applicant to move those units.
Councilmember Cervantes said if they want to maintain proportional which means having BMR units on the 3rd, 4th and 5th floors, then the option on the right does not work. Mayor Anduri said the applicant would then seek a concession. That is what the applicant is asking for now and what is in the proposal before the Council.
Councilmember Cervantes agreed and said the concession is to drop the public art requirement. Mayor Anduri said no; the concession is to be able to keep the two units together like this and that they do not have to meet the dispersal requirement—that is the concession.
Councilmember Cervantes said then if that is the concession the developer gets, they would take on the public art requirement which they said the math does not work for them doing that. Mayor Anduri said they said it would. They cannot do both. They cannot do the three-bedroom unit and the art requirement.
Councilmember Cervantes said then they would have three two-bedroom units and that is the other thing he is trying to hang onto which is having the three-bedroom unit as one of the three BMR units. Possibly that is the trade-off the Council makes perhaps. He frankly prefers the look on the right than on the left.
Mayor Anduri said if the Council agrees that two units on the second floor and one unit on the fourth floor is adequate dispersal and they change that to a three-bedroom unit, then they do not need to use a concession and they will use the concession on public art. But the key to that is to say the Council can make the finding that this is adequate dispersal, so this is the first question. He asked Vice Mayor McCormick if he is willing to make that finding that it is adequate dispersion, noting he could not.
Vice Mayor McCormick agreed it is not adequate dispersal and he cannot make the finding. He agrees with Councilmember Wotherspoon that there are certain advantages there but there are advantages for any unit to be there, and they could put a market rate unit there.
City Council Minutes Page 14 of 20 March 23, 2026
Councilmember Wotherspoon said she thinks the square footage comes into play because the BMR units are 900 square feet. She guessed they could turn two into one market rate 1800 square feet, but she was not sure of the square footages of all of the different units, but noted 1800 square feet is probably one of the upper end units.
Councilmember Cervantes acknowledged the Council is at an impasse regarding BMR unit dispersal. He suggested that if all three BMR units were two-bedroom, it might allow the developer to achieve dispersal—but only mathematically, not necessarily spatially.
Mayor Anduri clarified that even with three two-bedroom units, the two on the second-floor garage level remain, so the Council cannot make the dispersal finding under the code. Therefore, if the dispersal finding cannot be made, the developer would need to use the density bonus concession to provide the three-bedroom unit AND retain public art, rather than treating it as a trade-off. Ms. Ly confirmed this interpretation.
Vice Mayor McCormick noted the importance of precedent in making this determination.
Councilmember Wotherspoon referenced Corporate Terrace, where an entire building was dedicated to lower-income residents, noting that was clearly not dispersed. Mayor Anduri distinguished that case, as it was for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities, and suggested the Council hold this discussion and return to it later.
In looking at the resolution, Mayor Anduri requested going through it page by page:
• On page 1, there are no changes.
• On page 2, the sixth Whereas refers to “The Design Review Commission recommended Option 1 as a preferred stormwater treatment alternative for consideration.” He asked if that is the bioretention on Second Street, and Ms. Ly stated “yes.” • On page 3, he said number one “Commission’s” should be “City Council’s” in the second line. • On page 4, there were no changes.
• On page 5, there were no changes.
• On page 6, for now they will ignore the “public art” and will return to this. • On page 7, under the Downtown Design Review, paragraph D, “Project promotes a character relating to Lafayette that is informal with variations in architectural styles, massing, setbacks, and upper story setbacks.” This qualifies.
• On page 8, there are no changes.
• On page 9; demolition permit and the final page of the resolution, there were no changes. • Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval, Page 1 had no changes. • On pages 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of Exhibit A, there were no changes but Mayor Anduri asked where to put in the tree protection. Ms. Ly said when the Council makes a motion, the Council can request that staff add the tree protection to the COAs and staff will make that change. Vice Mayor McCormick stated COA #40 includes the standard language, and Mayor Anduri recommended calling this out.
• Page 10, 11 (the Council will return to the public art), and 12 of Exhibit A had no changes.
City Council Minutes Page 15 of 20 March 23, 2026
Mayor Anduri clarified that for the applicant to avoid using a concession, the Council must make a finding that the BMR units are adequately dispersed—whether they are two-bedroom or three-bedroom. Staff had indicated that the proposed three-bedroom unit still does not meet the dispersal requirement.
Vice Mayor McCormick noted that the three-bedroom request was originally to address the lack of family housing, not dispersal. Mayor Anduri agreed, but emphasized that dispersal is a separate requirement under the code.
Councilmember Cervantes pointed out that moving all BMR units to Levels 3–5 would make the Second Street façade mostly garage, which is undesirable, and Mayor Anduri agreed that the applicant will not change that. This makes it difficult to find the units “adequately dispersed.” Mayor Anduri expressed concern about precedent—if the Council makes a dispersal finding in this case, it could affect future projects. He suggested that, absent the finding, the applicant would default to providing three two-bedroom units and public art.
Councilmember Wotherspoon asked what happens if the Council says “no” to dispersal; Mayor Anduri clarified that the units would remain where they are, but the applicant would need to use the concession to meet requirements (e.g., provide the three-bedroom unit and public art).
Mayor Anduri proposed taking a vote, noting that three votes are required to make the dispersal finding.
If the finding is not made, the project would proceed with three two-bedroom BMR units plus public art.
In short, the dispersal finding is discretionary but difficult due to the layout and precedent. Without the finding, the applicant defaults to using the concession for the BMR units and retains the public art requirement.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Cervantes/Wotherspoon) that the Council can make the dispersal finding. Roll Call Vote: 2-2-1 (Ayes: Cervantes and Wotherspoon; Noes:Anduri and McCormick; Absent: Candell).
Mayor Anduri said the motion fails. He confirmed with the City Attorney the legality with the way they were proceeding. The application therefore stays the same. The applicant is asking for a concession and then the public art requirement stays.
Mayor Anduri then asked for a motion to approve the resolution.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/McCormick) to adopt Resolution 2026-24, as amended that provides for adequate protection for the heritage oak tree on the northeast corner of Mt. Diablo Boulevard and Second Street, finding the project exempt from CEQA, and approving the project. Roll Call Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes:
Anduri, McCormick, Cervantes, Wotherspoon; Noes: None; Absent: Candell).
Mayor Anduri announced that there is no appeal period.
BREAK
Mayor Anduri called for a 5-minute break at 9:35 p.m. and thereafter, reconvened the meeting at 9:40 p.m.
B. Nichole Zittel, Associate Planner
City Council Minutes Page 16 of 20 March 23, 2026
Resolution 2026-21 Appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of DR07-24, V07-24 Hui-Tong (Owner), R-20 Zoning: Request for Design Review Permit and Variance to condition an existing barn into a single-family home measuring 1,365 sq ft with a max ridge height of 18'-6", reducing the 15' side-yard setback to 1'-4" at 7 Lark Creek Ln, APN 230-190-021.
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2026-21 Upholding the Planning Commission’s denial DR07- 24, V07-24 Hui-Tong (Owner), R-20 Zoning: Request for Design Review Permit and Variance to condition an existing barn into a single-family home measuring 1,365 sq ft with a max ridge height of 18'-6", reducing the 15' side-yard setback to 1'-4" at 7 Lark Creek Ln, APN 230-190-021.
Associate Planner Nichole Zittel presented the staff report regarding the appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial of a variance for the property at 7 Lark Creek Lane. She outlined the project site and described the existing and proposed barn, which was part of the variance request to convert it into a conditioned single-family residence. The barn predated the 1997 subdivision, which divided the original lot into three parcels at 3, 5, and 7 Lark Creek Lane. The variance sought to make the barn habitable.
Ms. Zittel then summarized the Planning Commission’s review of the appeal, noting that in November 2025 they upheld the Zoning Administrator’s denial because the findings necessary for a variance could not be made. No public comments were received following the notice of the matter.
She also noted corrections to the draft Resolution 2026-21: the first “whereas” statement on page 1 should reflect the August 17, 2024 Zoning Administrator meeting instead of November 17, 2024, and on page 2, the reference to the applicant meeting with the City Manager should be changed from November 2025 to September 2025.
Staff recommends that the City Council find the project exempt from CEQA and adopt Resolution 2026- 21, thereby denying the appeal and upholding the Planning Commission’s denial of DR07-24 and V07-24.
Vice Mayor McCormick disclosed that he visited the property last week and met with the applicants and toured the barn and discussed their project with them.
Mayor Anduri disclosed he visited the property today and disclosed he was on the Planning Commission in 1997 when the property was subdivided but this does not result in any conflict of interest.
Councilmember Cervantes inquired whether the 15-foot setback issue arises because Lots 5 and 7, though under the same ownership, are separate parcels, and whether merging the lots would eliminate the setback constraint for converting the barn into a residence.
Ms. Zittel explained that if Lots 5 and 7 were merged, the existing non-habitable barn would conform to setback requirements. She noted that property owners could explore options to convert the barn into an accessory dwelling unit (ADU). When Councilmember Cervantes raised concerns about ADU size limits, Ms. Zittel clarified that under the City’s ADU ordinance, converting an existing detached structure into a Class B ADU would not be subject to size restrictions if the lot lines were dissolved.
Mayor Anduri called on the applicant to make a presentation.
City Council Minutes Page 17 of 20 March 23, 2026
Tom Hui-Tong, owner, stated that he does not dispute the factual findings in the staff report and has no arguments regarding the record. His only point of discrepancy concerns a prior statement at the November appeal meeting indicating that the barn, at 1,300 square feet, would exceed ADU size limits if Lots 5 and 7 were merged. He noted that recent clarification indicates this is not the case, and this information is a key consideration for him.
Mr. Tong explained that at the prior Planning Commission meeting, the statement regarding ADU size limits was not corrected, leading them to believe it was accurate. He emphasized that when they purchased the property, they were told that the proposed conversion would not be an issue. He urged the Council to evaluate the appeal not solely from the perspective of finding reasons to deny it, but also considering whether approval would benefit the community.
Mr. Tong highlighted that converting the barn into a two-bedroom, two-bath unit would improve safety through upgraded fireproof roofing and siding, providing neighborhood-wide benefits without increasing the structure’s size, height, or external appearance. He described this proposal as a balanced compromise that preserves neighborhood character, noting that alternative development options could be more intrusive or commercially driven, contrary to the community’s values. He emphasized that the variance processis intended to allow consideration of unique circumstances, and requested that the Council weigh the pros and cons and consider granting the variance.
Finally, Mr. Tong noted he is representing himself without an architect or attorney. While legal or developer guidance suggested alternative avenues, he indicated that such routes would not achieve his vision for the property and that the current proposal reflects a reasonable compromise aligned with community standards.
Vice Mayor McCormick asked whether dissolving the lot line and converting the barn into an ADU could provide a viable alternative for the property owners.
Mrs. Tong explained that maintaining two separate lots is important to her, as it allows her to live adjacent to her older sister and provide daily care without the need to travel to Orinda. She also noted that she believes retaining two lots adds greater value to the property.
Vice Mayor McCormick observed that this approach offers the Tongs a choice between options. Mr. Tong agreed, expressing appreciation for learning about this alternative path.
Mayor Anduri said if the applicant wanted time to think it over, he asked if they should bring this back at another meeting or proceed tonight. City Attorney Subramanian said she does not think the findings can be made on the variance so the Council can proceed on this action if they were to choose to move forward with a merger or some other aspect, and that would be a separate application.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
Councilmember Cervantes noted that while he initially sought a way to support the project, he could not justify approving the variance. He acknowledged that converting the barn creates additional housing and recognized the family’s needs, but emphasized that the property is only 1½ feet off the lot line. He cited a recent lot line variance on Springhill Lane, where findings could not be made and the request was denied, and expressed concern about setting a precedent. He suggested that dissolving the lot line and converting the barn into an ADU might offer a viable alternative.
City Council Minutes Page 18 of 20 March 23, 2026
Vice Mayor McCormick echoed these concerns, commending the barn as a structure but noting that approving the variance could create precedent issues, given that similar lots and buildings exist throughout the city. Councilmember Wotherspoon agreed, encouraging the owners to explore options such as lot consolidation or alternatives under SB 9, while noting she could not make the findings necessary to approve the variance.
Mayor Anduri referenced a letter from Mr. Kubitschek indicating that converting existing buildings into living quarters near property lines is not rare in Lafayette; however, staff could not identify any similar cases. He emphasized that the Council must consider consistency in the application of rules, as making exceptions could create inequities and set unwanted precedents. He further highlighted that Council decisions should focus on the building rather than the individuals applying, since the structure remains long after the current owners. He concluded that the variance could not be granted under the city’s standards and proceeded to entertain a motion.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Cervantes/McCormick) to adopt Resolution 2026-21 upholding the Planning Commission’s denial of DR07-24, VO7-24 Hui-Tong (Owner), R-20 Zoning: Request for Design Review Permit and Variance to condition an existing barn into a single-family home measuring 1,365 sq ft with a max ridge height of 18'-6", reducing the 15' side-yard setback to 1'-4" at 7 Lark Creek Ln, APN 230-190- 021. Roll Call Vote: Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Cervantes, McCormick, Wotherspoon, and Anduri; Noes: None;
Absent: Candell).
14. ITEM REMOVED FROM CONSENT
A. City Council Minutes
1. February 20, 2026
Recommendation: Approve.
• Mayor Anduri referred to page 21 of 27, it states that the money for Campana came out of the parking fund, but it came out of the City Office Fund.
• Vice Mayor McCormick referred to page 8, third paragraph starting with City Manager Srivatsa.
The second sentence should be changed to “Councilmember Candell said the restriction….” And not him.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Wotherspoon/McCormick) to approve Item A.1,. as amended. Roll Call Vote: Vote:
4-0-1 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Cervantes, Wotherspoon; Noes: None; Absent: Candell).
15. COUNCIL / COMMISSION REPORTS
A. Councilmembers report on activities and consideration of matters a Councilmember wishes to initiate for placement on a future agenda.
There were no Council reports or matters for placement on a future agenda.
B. Councilmember Wotherspoon and Mayor Anduri
Resolution 2026-18 Appointing one member to the Environmental Task Force Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2026-18 appointing one member to the Environmental Task Force.
City Council Minutes Page 19 of 20 March 23, 2026
Councilmember Wotherspoon said last month, she and Mayor Anduri interviewed two applicants for the Environmental Task Force and they recommend appointing Derrick Seaver. He has a background with environmental issues with his work place and they thought he would be a very active and positive member.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Wotherspoon/Anduri) to adopt Resolution 2026-18 appointing Derrick Seaver to the Environmental Task Force. Roll Call Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Cervantes, Wotherspoon; Noes: None; Absent: Candell).
16. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
A. E-mail from Sabira Williams, Program Director, The Social Connection, requesting a proclamation recognizing April as Autism Awareness Month in Lafayette.
Recommendation: Approve the proclamation recognizing April as Autism Awareness Month in Lafayette.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (McCormick/Cervantes) Approve the proclamation recognizing April as Autism Awareness Month in Lafayette. Roll Call Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Cervantes, Wotherspoon; Noes: None; Absent: Candell).
B. E-mail from Laney Whitcanack, Campaign Chair for Measure H, the Lafayette School District Parcel Tax Measure on the June 2, 2026 ballot, requesting a resolution of endorsement from the Lafayette City Council.
Recommendation: Discuss and direct.
Councilmember Cervantes said he read about the notion of Strong Community/Strong Schools, and in a community like Lafayette where they talk about Green Hills/Great Schools, they must make the great schools work which need stable funding which is what Measure H is about.
Mayor Anduri stated he and Vice Mayor McCormick used the two City Council slots to attend the lunch party on Tuesday and it was fantastic. The two co-leaders of the campaign made incredible presentations.
He likes the focus of the campaign on candor and this measure must pass given the severe situation.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (McCormick/Anduri) to approve a Resolution of Support for Measure H, the Lafayette School District Parcel Tax Measure on the June 2, 2026 ballot. Roll Call Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Cervantes, Wotherspoon; Noes: None; Absent: Candell).
C. Request from Mary McCosker, President of the Lafayette Historical Society and the Acalanes Chapter of the National Society Daughters of the American Revolution, for a proclamation recognizing the Marquis de Lafayette.
Recommendation: Approve a proclamation recognizing April 2026 as a time to remember and celebrate the City’s namesake, the Marquis de Lafayette.
Mayor Anduri stated this is a proclamation the Historical Society and the Acalanes Chapter of the National Society Daughters of the American Revolution would like presented on April 11th.
City Council Minutes Page 20 of 20 March 23, 2026
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Cervantes/Wotherspoon) to approve a proclamation recognizing April 2026 as a time to remember and celebrate the City’s namesake, the Marquis de Lafayette. Roll Call Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Cervantes, Wotherspoon; Noes: None; Absent: Candell).
D. E-mail from Maria Gastelumendi, resigning from the Environmental Task Force.
Recommendation: Accept resignation and thank Maria Gastelumendi for seven years of volunteer service.
Mayor Anduri thanked Ms. Gastelumendi for her seven years of service and for the personal and professional example she set through her work on environmental causes. Councilmember Wotherspoon agreed and recognized her hard work towards the betterment of Lafayette.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/Wotherspoon) to accept resignation and thank Maria Gastelumendi for seven years of volunteer service. Roll Call Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Cervantes, Wotherspoon; Noes: None; Absent: Candell).
17. ADJOURNMENT – 10:13 p.m.
APPROVED:
__________________________________
Carl Anduri, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Joanne Robbins, City Clerk