City Council Meeting Page 1 of 20 September 28, 2026
*
City of Lafayette
City Council Minutes
Lafayette Library and Learning Center – Don Tatzin Community Hall September 28, 2026 3491 Mount Diablo Boulevard, Lafayette, California 6:30 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 20 September 28, 2026
-
1. CALL TO ORDER – 6:30 P.M.
Mayor Anduri called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Anduri, Vice Mayor McCormick; Councilmember Candell, and Cervantes Absent/Excused: Councilmember Wotherspoon
Staff Present: Niroop Srivatsa, City Manager; Tracy Robinson, Assistant City Manager; Jonathan Katayanagi, Director Parks and Recreation; Greg Wolff, Director Planning and Building; Arly Cassidy, Senior Planner; 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 (McCormick/Candell) to adopt the agenda, as amended, moving Item 10E to the Consent Calendar as Item 11E. Roll Call Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Candell, Cervantes; Noes:
None; Absent: Wotherspoon).
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS ONLY – 6:30 P.M.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
6. CLOSED SESSION
A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
Gov. Code section 54956.9(d)(1)
Save Lafayette v. City of Lafayette
Contra Costa Superior Court, Case No. N26-1665
RECONVENE FROM CLOSED SESSION – 7:00 p.m.
Mayor Anduri reconvened the regular meeting at 7:07 p.m. and announced no reportable action was taken on the Closed Session Item.
7. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Mayor Anduri led in the Pledge of Allegiance.
8. PUBLIC COMMENTS (For items not on the agenda).
SHANE REISMAN, Burton Valley resident, provided an update on the Lafayette-Moraga History Trail, noting that the project he presented to the Council the previous year is nearing installation. The project includes nine interpretive panels along the regional trail from Valley Vista to Olympic, featuring historical information, maps, photographs, and stories.
City Council Meeting Page 3 of 20 September 28, 2026
He announced a ribbon-cutting ceremony scheduled for October 10 at 10:00 a.m. at the Lafayette Community Center. The two-hour event will be hosted by Lafayette, EBRPD, and the Town of Moraga and will include a walk along the trail to view the panels. Supervisor Candace Andersen and Congressman DeSaulnier were also invited.
ROBERT LAVOIE alerted staff that the meeting’s sound system came through very well for the first speaker but not from the Council, and he asked if the technical staff could work on increasing the sound level.
9. CITY MANAGER’S UPDATE
City Manager Niroop Srivatsa gave the following report:
• From the Engineering Department:
o A couple of projects are moving from planning to construction. Their contractor has started installing the new rapid flashing beacons at Mt. Diablo and Hampton which is an important safety improvement for pedestrians on the boulevard. o Caltrans has officially issued the notice to proceed for both the School Topper Project and the St. Mary’s Road Bank Stabilization project. Both projects will start in the Spring of 2027.
• From the Parks, Trails and Recreation Department:
o A Lafayette tradition is underway. 7
th grade Cotillion has started at Stanley Middle School.
This brings students together for an evening of dance, etiquette and fun. o Looking ahead, the Senior Services Commission is getting ready for the Senior Volunteer Fair on Tuesday, October 6th from 10-12 in this room. It is a great opportunity for residents to discover ways to share their time and talents with local non-profits. • From the Planning Department:
o The Council may have noticed that Lafayette has a new addition to its skyline—a tower at 1001 Oak Hill Road. This 7-story mixed use development near BART will bring 85 for-sale condominiums to the downtown, including 11 BMR units and about 2,000 square feet of commercial space and 155 parking spaces. What makes this noteworthy is that this is the only multi-family project to break ground this year. Other projects have received entitlements, but have not yet moved to construction with developers citing the high cost of financing and the cost of construction.
• From the Police Department:
o She recognized exceptional work by their Police Department. On September 11th, Officer Cohen responded to a medical emergency, quickly realized that the individual needed immediate help and began CPR. He continued until Con Fire arrived to take over and the fire personnel have credited Officer Cohen’s quick action as an important factor in that person’s survival.
o The Art and Wine Festival was a great success and a heartfelt huge thank-you to the Chamber of Commerce for making this the highlight of the year every year for many years in a row. The Police Department worked extra hard to keep everyone safe, and they thank their regional partners—the Sheriff’s Department, EBRPD Police, Walnut Creek Police, BART Police, Santa Clara Police, Con Fire and American Medical Rescue.
City Council Meeting Page 4 of 20 September 28, 2026
o Finally, Slow Down Lafayette continues to be busy. They are receiving a number of traffic complaints in different parts of the community, one receiving particular attention is at the top of Upper Happy Valley Road. Andy Comly, Patrick Golier, and others are working together to solve that problem.
In summary ,across the City there is a lot of good work underway from improving safety and major projects moving forward to supporting our community, creating housing, and keeping Lafayette safe and vibrant.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
10. PRESENTATIONS
A. Officer Daniel Harper and K-9 Elwood
Introduction of Police Department Canine
Recommendation: Receive and file.
Chief Williams introduced Officer Daniel Harper and K-9 Elwood, the Lafayette Police Department’s first K-9 in more than four years. Officer Harper and Elwood recently completed six weeks of patrol training and will soon undergo explosive-detection training. The team will assist with locating missing persons and evidence, conducting safety sweeps of schools and businesses, and responding to critical incidents, enhancing public and officer safety.
Chief Williams recognized Sgt. Pliler, a former K-9 handler, for initiating and advancing the program, and thanked Lafayette residents and businesses for their generous donations that made the program possible.
Sgt. Pliler explained that Elwood was named in honor of his former academy classmate, Pittsburg Police Officer Larry Elwood Lasater, who was killed in the line of duty in April 2005 while attempting to apprehend bank robbery suspects. The Lasater family and Pittsburg Police Department approved the name. Sgt. Pliler noted that Mrs. Lasater was unable to attend but planned to meet Elwood privately.
Officer Harper thanked Chief Williams, Sgt. Pliler, and the community and donors for supporting the K-9 program. He introduced Elwood as a two-year-old Belgian Malinois from Mexico and expressed his commitment to making the community proud.
Councilmember Cervantes asked how Elwood would be utilized during a typical week. Officer Harper explained that, although assigned to Lafayette, Elwood could respond to K-9 requests throughout the County when another County K-9 is unavailable. Following explosive-detection training, Elwood will assist with safety sweeps and bomb-threat responses at events such as the Art & Wine Festival, Reservoir Run, rallies, and football games. He will also serve on routine patrol and respond to calls for service. Harper noted that having a Lafayette K-9 will reduce costs previously incurred when outside agencies were contracted for event security.
Mayor Anduri confirmed that a female K-9 handler had nicknamed Elwood “Woody.” Officer Harper said the department would continue using Elwood’s name in honor of Officer Larry Elwood Lasater, noting that training videos sent to Lasater’s family had been meaningful to them.
Mayor Anduri and Councilmembers thanked the officers for restoring the K-9 program and recognized its role in enhancing officer and public safety. Photographs were then taken with Officer Harper and Elwood.
City Council Meeting Page 5 of 20 September 28, 2026
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
B. Tracy Robinson, Assistant City Manager
Introduce New Employees – Planning Technicians Aamna Lodhi and Sutter Morris Recommendation: Receive and file.
Assistant City Manager Tracy Robinson introduced two new employees who are both Planning Technicians Aamna Lodhi and Sutter Morris. Ms. Robinson provided a background of their education and degrees, experience, and hobbies.
Planning Technician Aamna Lodhi said she is excited to be working for the City of Lafayette, said she grew up in the Bay Area and attended school in the Los Angeles area, but has deep ties in Lamorinda which she described.
Planning Technician Sutter Morris said he is also Bay Area born and raised. His time in Lafayette has been incredible so far and he is looking forward to serving the community and being a part of the community.
Mayor Anduri and Councilmembers welcomed both Aamna Lodhi and Sutter Morris, and a round of applause followed.
C. Appeals Hearing Board
Annual Update – Goals and Accomplishments
Recommendation: Receive and file.
Jenifer Paul, Appeals Hearing Board Member, presented the Board’s annual update, noting its mission to provide a fair, objective, and transparent administrative appeal process while supporting the City’s code compliance and community safety efforts. She thanked staff for their work, particularly given the absence of a dedicated Code Enforcement Officer.
During the year, the Board conducted one formal hearing regarding La Caminita, completing a comprehensive review of staff reports, evidence, and appellant testimony and reaching a determination regarding code standards and procedural due process. Board members also completed three online training courses covering Building Code Compliance, International Building Codes, and Fire ResistanceRated Construction.
Ms. Paul identified formalizing hearing procedures as a future goal to establish consistent expectations and processes for all parties. She said the Board remains available to hear future appeals and looks forward to continued coordination with the City and Code Enforcement staff.
Councilmembers Candell and Cervantes thanked the Board for its work, noting the complexity and length of the La Caminita hearing and supporting the formalization of hearing procedures. Vice Mayor McCormick, who serves as the Council liaison, also thanked the Board for its important service.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
D. Sarah Blumenfeld, Lafayette’s Representative to the Contra Costa Library Commission E-Rate Funding Program Update – Proposed changes to Federal E-Rate Funding Program, which provides discounted internet access and equipment to public libraries and K-12 schools.
Recommendation: Receive and file.
City Council Meeting Page 6 of 20 September 28, 2026
Sarah Blumenfeld, Lafayette’s Representative to the Contra Costa Library Commission, introduced Alternate Representative Stuart Robinson and reported on the Commission’s September 19 meeting. She highlighted the National E-Rate Funding Program, which provides reimbursement-based discounts of 20% to 90% for Internet access and equipment for schools and libraries, funded through the federal Universal Service Fund.
She reported that Contra Costa County Libraries received approximately $1.6 million in E-Rate reimbursements over the past five years at a 60% reimbursement rate. For 2026–2031, the County qualifies for an 80% reimbursement totaling more than $2 million. She noted that the FCC is considering changes to the 30-year-old program, including potential elimination or reductions. The current public comment period is open through October 13.
Ms. Blumenfeld then provided information on the program and nine-page instructions for submitting comments, noting that comments must reference four specific proposal numbers. She encouraged interested parties to review the instructions carefully. She said loss of the funding could affect the County Library’s ability to purchase approximately 64,000 new books over five years.
Mayor Anduri noted that the item was not agendized for action and said the Council would discuss it later in the agenda. He referenced the City’s Legislative Agenda, which includes advocacy for funding supporting libraries, arts, and cultural expression in Lafayette.
Vice Mayor McCormick asked whether the E-Rate program is funded through fees paid by telecommunications companies rather than taxpayer funds, which Ms. Blumenfeld confirmed. He also asked whether those funds would be redirected if the program were eliminated; Ms. Blumenfeld said she understood they would be, but did not have details regarding the alternative use.
Vice Mayor McCormick confirmed that the initial comment period ends October 13, with reply comments due November 12. No date has been established for the FCC’s review or decision.
Councilmember Cervantes noted that telecommunications companies would continue making the required payments, but the funds could be directed elsewhere if the FCC changes the program. Ms.
Blumenfeld confirmed this was her understanding but noted she was not an expert on the matter and did not know how the funds would be reallocated.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period.
ROB LAVOIE said it sounded like money was being used to support schools and kids who cannot afford internet. But Ms. Blumenfeld said if the money was lost, it would reduce the number of books they could purchase and asked for an explanation.
Ms. Blumenfeld said if the County loses the reimbursement of those funds, it means the County Library system has to pay a higher rate for internet access and for some equipment. That means they must take money out of the budget and one of the places that may come from is books, on-line services, or some other budget item.
Mayor Anduri thanked Ms. Blumenfeld for her report and for representing the City of Lafayette.
City Council Meeting Page 7 of 20 September 28, 2026
11. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Anduri noted the Council had previously moved Item 10E to the Consent Calendar as 11E, and he asked if the Council or the public wished to remove any items, and there were no requests or public comments.
A. City Council Minutes
September 14, 2026
Recommendation: Approve.
B. Ordinance 704 Amending Sections 8-8161 and 8-8165 of Title 8, Chapter 8-8, Article 15 of the Lafayette Municipal Code Relating to Parking Meter Zones and Parking Fees Recommendation: Ordinance 704, waive the second reading, and adopt.
C. Measure H Funded Wildfire Preparedness Projects
Recommendation: Approve $48,500 for Wildfire Preparedness Projects as listed in the staff report.
D. Letter of Support for Contra Costa County Olympic Boulevard Corridor Trail Connector Grant Application
Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to provide Contra Costa County with a signed letter from the City of Lafayette in support of its Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant application for the Olympic Boulevard Corridor Trails Connector.
E. Relocate the November 23, 2026 City Council meeting from the Don Tatzin Community Hall to the Arts and Science Room or reschedule the meeting to November 30, 2026.
Recommendation: Hold the November 23, 2026 City Council meeting in the Arts and Science Room at the Lafayette Library and Learning Center so the Don Tatzin Community Hall’s floors can be refinished.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Cervantes/Candell) to approve Consent Calendar Items A, B, C, D and E. Roll Call Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Candell, Cervantes; Noes: None; Absent: Wotherspoon).
12. OLD BUSINESS
A. Jonathan Katayanagi, Parks and Recreation Director and Heather Ward, Administrative Analyst Proposed Services Agreement with All Ages Recreation Downtown (AARD) Recommendation: Direct staff to develop and enter into a services agreement with All Ages Recreation Downtown (AARD) for community recreation programming, senior services programming, youth and teen services, intergenerational programming, and related recreation services; and approve $30,000 in additional FY 2026-27 General Fund allocations, consisting of $12,000 for Senior Services (11-141-866), $12,000 for Youth Commission (11-142-866), and $6,000 for Parks, Trails and Recreation Commission (11-140-866).
Parks and Recreation Director Jonathan Katayanagi presented a proposed service agreement with All Ages Recreation Downtown (AARD). He noted that the Senior Service Commission, Youth Commission, and PTR Commission had reviewed the proposed services and recommended moving forward.
City Council Meeting Page 8 of 20 September 28, 2026
The agreement would provide $30,000 for recreation services, including $12,000 for senior services, $12,000 for youth and teen services, and $6,000 for community recreation programs. The temporary partnership would expand downtown recreation opportunities through dedicated teen space and programming, additional services for older adults consistent with the Age Friendly Plan, intergenerational activities, and recreation programming at community events. It would also leverage AARD’s existing downtown presence and capacity to provide services beyond the City’s current staffing and facility resources.
Staff requested authorization for the additional General Fund allocations and direction to enter into an agreement with AARD.
Vice Mayor McCormick asked whether the proposed allocations represented transfers from existing Commission budgets or a recommended allocation of the $30,000 based on the services AARD would provide. Mr. Katayanagi explained that staff worked with AARD, Commission members, and City staff to identify and assign value to the proposed services. The allocation reflects the estimated value and hours of services, including five hours per week of dedicated senior and teen center space. He noted that AARD’s participation in community events would also supplement Recreation staff resources and reduce the staffing burden associated with providing those programs.
Vice Mayor McCormick asked whether the agreement would replace the previously budgeted $30,000 for the two-park collective. Mr. Katayanagi explained that the MOU for fundraising and matching funds had concluded, and AARD was asked to cease fundraising, except for its remaining obligation. With the City considering acquisition of an adjacent parcel, efforts related to the park project have been refocused while its future is evaluated. The arrangement provides an opportunity for AARD to support downtown recreation services while the City continues its park planning efforts.
Councilmember Cervantes asked if the two park collaborative project and $30,000 for that is being shifted to this. He asked if there is no net increase in the budget.
Mr. Katayanagisaid there is no net increase—it is maintaining the same pace they were investing in those downtown activities. If they were looking at the same level of support they were providing in the past, it aligns very well with that. They were contributing about $35,000 as their matching amount, but it aligns well with that investment for downtown activities. He noted this is separate from the Youth Commission’s fundraising efforts so it is an ask for a new allocation to the General Fund as part of their program. They have been able to donate from their fundraising efforts to several projects. They were the single largest donor to the Lamorinda Skate Park in Moraga, but this is a separate ask of those funds that they fundraise for otherwise.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (McCormick/Candell) to direct staff to develop and enter into a services agreement with All Ages Recreation Downtown (AARD) for community recreation programming, senior services programming, youth and teen services, intergenerational programming, and related recreation services; and approve $30,000 in additional FY 2026-27 General Fund allocations, consisting of $12,000 for Senior Services (11-141-866), $12,000 for Youth Commission (11-142-866), and $6,000 for Parks, Trails and Recreation Commission (11-140-866). Roll Call Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Candell, Cervantes; Noes: None; Absent: Wotherspoon).
City Council Meeting Page 9 of 20 September 28, 2026
Mayor Anduri thanked Mr. Katayanagi and Grace Dixon for all of these efforts. He attended meetings of the PTR Commission and Senior Services Commission and it was a great discussion, and they are looking forward to the benefits from this.
13. STAFF REPORTS – None.
14. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Arly Cassidy, Senior Planner
Ordinance 703 Amending Chapter 6-39 of the Lafayette Municipal Code to Incorporate Objective Design Standards (Phase 2) Housing Element Implementation Recommendation: Introduce Ordinance 703, waive first reading, take public testimony and continue to October 13th for second reading and adoption.
Planning and Building Services Director Greg Wolff presented the staff report on behalf of Senior Planner Arly Cassidy, who was attending and presenting at the DRC meeting. He said the proposed Phase 2 Objective Design Standards (ODS) were before the Council for a second review. The process began more than a year ago but was delayed by the Housing Coalition lawsuit challenging the City’s Housing Element.
Following adoption of the settlement, staff is proceeding with Phase 2.
Mr. Wolff noted that five sections of the draft ODS are marked “reserved” because they could be viewed as restricting the development envelope and potentially conflicting with State law absent concurrent upzoning. Staff plans to address those sections as part of the HAC settlement upzoning consideration later this fall.
Staff provided a full redline version showing changes since January, a clean version incorporating the proposed amendments, and a clean version identifying the five reserved sections. Staff recommendsthat the Council provide feedback, introduce Ordinance 703, waive the first reading following public comment, and continue the matter to October 13 for second reading and adoption. He then introduced Monica Szydlik and Cal Kurtz of Lisa Wise Consulting.
Monica Szydlik, Senior Associate, Lisa Wise Consulting, gave a PowerPoint presentation and said she and Lead Associate Cal Kurtz are happy to be back to present the revised ODSs for all multi-family and residential mixed use development in the City. It has been great working with staff and she provided an overview of LWC, noting over the last 5 years they have focused on Objective Design Standards.
Ms. Szydlik briefly reviewed the project background, the process to develop the standards, and the recommendations contained in the packet and staff report. They were before the PC and they modified the height graphic, removed a butterfly roof as an allowed roof form, and modified the total area of fenestration on street-facing upper story elevations. She then provided an overview of changes made to the ODSs, briefly reviewed the recommendations, and asked for any Council questions.
Mayor Anduri noted that the PC discussed three items, one of which was the diagram for the height. The other two decisions on a 3-2 vote was to go from 45% to 40% and decided to eliminate the butterfly roof.
These are coming to the Council as split decisions.
City Council Meeting Page 10 of 20 September 28, 2026
Councilmember Cervantes asked whether a developer using the ODS streamlined process could instead pursue a discretionary process or, if nonconforming, seek variances, and whether density-bonus waivers constituted a fourth path. Senior Planner Cassidy clarified that density-bonus waivers are available under any development path. For projects qualifying for a State density bonus, developers may request waivers from individual ODS or zoning standards without a limit on the number of waivers, subject to the applicable requirements.
Councilmember Cervantes confirmed that a qualifying density-bonus project could, for example, request a waiver to use a five-story building with a butterfly or flat roof. Ms. Cassidy confirmed.
Regarding fenestration, Councilmember Cervantes asked whether the proposed standard had changed from 45% to 40% and whether an earlier 60% standard had been considered. Ms. Cassidy clarified that 45% had consistently been the proposed standard and that 60% had only been cited as an example of a level considered too high.
Councilmember Cervantes asked about the difference between a shed roof and a butterfly roof, and Ms.
Cassidy explained that a shed roof is typically a single sloped plane.
Mayor Anduri asked why shed roofs were included in the list, noting that he had difficulty finding examples of shed roofs on multi-story buildings. He also asked whether the “mechanical well in a pitched roof” provision, which describes a flat roof surrounded by a pitched roof form, was intended to accommodate shed roofs or whether shed roofs had a separate application.
Ms. Kurtz explained that shed roofs are typically used as an individual architectural element rather than as the primary roof form. For example, an entrance may have a shed roof consisting of a single sloped plane attached to the building, with the main structure continuing above or behind it. She noted this is the most common application of a shed roof.
Councilmember Candell questioned whether a shed roof should be considered a roof form, noting that the examples appeared to show entire building tops sloping in one direction. Mayor Anduri suggested that removing shed roofs from the list would still allow the example discussed, such as an awning or entry roof.
Ms. Cassidy explained that the language in Section B applies to all roof forms for multifamily and mixeduse development and does not distinguish between the primary roof and secondary roof forms. She noted that an awning is not considered a roof form and could have a shed-style slope; however, removing shed roofs from the list would also prohibit shed roofs on secondary portions of a building, such as a two-story wing attached to a three-story structure.
Ms. Szydlik added that the standards apply to all multifamily buildings, not just larger developments at the 60 dwelling-units-per-acre scale. Shed roofs may be appropriate for smaller buildings, townhomes, or portions of larger buildings and can provide design flexibility and opportunities such as clerestory windows. She said the intent was to provide developers and designers with a broad range of appropriate architectural forms while maintaining flexibility and creativity.
Councilmember Cervantes referenced the Mercantile building as an example of a structure that appears from the street to have a pitched roof but has a flat roof behind it that accommodates HVAC equipment.
He asked whether this was the type of design contemplated by the mechanical well provision.
City Council Meeting Page 11 of 20 September 28, 2026
Ms. Cassidy confirmed that it was. She explained that the provision would allow taller buildings to place mechanical equipment behind a pitched roof form rather than requiring it to be located at ground level, where equipment could create noise and be difficult to accommodate on constrained sites. The intent is for the portion visible from the public right-of-way to appear as a pitched roof while allowing a flat roof behind it for mechanical equipment.
Councilmember Cervantes asked and confirmed that these ODSs relate to multi-family housing which could be as little as 4 or more units, so the standards need to accommodate that in addition to larger projects. Ms. Cassidy added that she would agree that a shed roof is more likely on a smaller structure and not as likely on a deep and wide building. She cannot think of a stand-alone building with a shed roof but it is often used in residential buildings as a sub form.
Mayor Anduri asked if 949 Moraga still has that roof form or was it switched, and Assistant Planning Director Stefanie Cervantes confirmed that project has a pitched roof.
Councilmember Cervantes said there are standards for landscaping as well and one thing the Council is cognizant of is fire safety. They are not in a high fire severity zone downtown or even a moderate, but the evolution has been towards Zone Zero. He did not see any acknowledgement of that here, that there are wildfire risk issues and the landscaping should take that into account.
Councilmember Candell commented that she attended a League meeting and a presenter said every single one of their buildings need to be fire-resistant so cities should utilize the highest fire safety codes regardless of the location.
Ms. Cassidy agreed there is not much about fire in the landscaping sections of the ODS. The tree protection ordinance would still apply. There is the ability to remove a tree within the Zone Zero of 5 feet is allowed without a permit, so anything the ODS does not directly conflict with would still apply. It is only if the ODS is more lenient or more restrictive that it would trump the underlying zoning and requirements.
However, the City does not have anything about Zone Zero plantings outside of trees in the current zoning ordinance. Her understanding is that the State and County are working on Zone Zero requirements which will come into play for very high fire severity zones. She referred to a GIS image of the outline of the downtown district and the fire zones overlay. There is a section of high and a very small buffer of medium that protrude into the south end of the downtown primarily in single-family areas, but they go all the way up to Mt. Diablo Boulevard, so this is something to discuss and consider.
Mayor Anduri asked if Councilmember Cervantes was asking that they go beyond design guidelines.
Councilmember Cervantes said he was just trying to understand it.
Vice Mayor McCormick referred back to shed roofs and it feels like staff is giving the Council an either/or where if you have any kind of shed roof on the structure, it could be anything. He suggested being more precise in their working to phrase the ODSs to say shed roofs are allowable for side buildings, sub-roofs, but not as the main roof characteristic.
Ms. Cassidy agreed and the header does not exist now but can be inserted to constrain what they have now to the main roof form or above a certain height if the Council wishes and then they could have a separate sub-section that describes alternate or smaller roof forms.
City Council Meeting Page 12 of 20 September 28, 2026
Councilmember Candell returned to the discussion of density-bonus waivers and concessions, noting her understanding that waivers are required when a development standard would prevent construction of the affordable housing, rather than being automatically unlimited in all circumstances. She referenced the Housing Accountability Act (HAA) and said some jurisdictions have successfully challenged waiver requests.
Regarding the 40% fenestration standard, she noted that the International Energy Conservation Code limits vertical fenestration to address heat gain and loss, with lower baseline percentages potentially increasing to 40% when higher energy-performance criteria are met. She asked about Title 24. Ms. Kurtz explained that Title 24 encompasses California’s Building Standards Code, including the Energy Code.
Councilmember Candell asked whether developers conduct energy performance reviews before submitting projects. Ms. Cassidy said developers and architects generally consider Title 24 requirements throughout the design process and balance factors such as fenestration, insulation, design, cost, and market considerations to meet required energy standards.
Councilmember Candell asked whether the ODSs establish energy-conservation or fire-safety standards beyond State requirements. Mr. Wolff said the ODSs do not currently increase energy-conservation requirements. Title 24 establishes statewide standards that become more stringent with each code cycle and are enforced by the City and County Building Department. He explained that higher local energy standards would generally be established through Reach Codes, which Lafayette has not adopted. Mayor Anduri referenced the City’s EV-charging requirements, and Mr. Wolff confirmed that Lafayette’s local regulations require greater access than State law.
Councilmember Candell asked whether the ODSs were required to limit the amount of tertiary building materials, given that primary materials must exceed 50%, secondary materials are limited to 45%, and tertiary materials to 25%. Ms. Szydlik said the limitation was not mandated but was intentionally included following community discussion regarding building materials and colors. She said the intent was to maintain design cohesion by establishing a dominant primary material and limiting excessive use of accent materials and colors.
Mayor Anduri said right now it is written for 40% limit on fenestration on the façade that faces the street.
He asked if there is a reason why the City could not make it apply to the other sides of the building. Ms.
Szydlik said no, there is no reason they would not be able to apply that equally on all sides. In general, they focus on what is seen from the right-of-way which impacts the public realm and the community.
They have standards for windows and visibility, interior side with residential privacy in mind, but this is the threshold for what feels right in Lafayette; what is a building that demonstrates the character they value. They would prefer to limit that to what you can see from the right-of-way.
Mayor Anduri asked if they might run into problems if they were to make it 35% instead of 40%, and Ms.
Szydlik said no, they would not.
Mayor Anduri said the way this reads, if an area of glazing exceeds 18 square feet, it has to be divided into squares or broken into smaller groups. He takes that to read that you could have 48 square feet of glazing so long as it is broken into squares, and he asked if this is the way Ms. Szydlik reads it. Ms. Szydlik said you certainly could.
City Council Meeting Page 13 of 20 September 28, 2026
Mayor Anduri referred to page 13 of the clean version which has to do with trees. The requirement of trees every 40 feet on the street was removed as part of the process, and it was pointed out that this is covered by 3912(c) - Street Facing Yard. He wants to be sure what the “street-facing yard” is. He is not aware of any development the City has that has a front yard, so he is trying to infer the need to have street trees in front of 6 story buildings and how they can do it. When talking about “front yards” of buildings, they generally do not have these. So, this ODS would not require a developer to install any trees.
Ms. Cassidy said the word “yard” is interchangeable with setback. Not every zone in the downtown requires a setback. Some do not, and in that case, this would not apply. There are clear loopholes and it is also a very easy and popular requirement for developers to waive out of and build up to the setback.
However, if they did build a building set back from their property line, it is not always a landscaped area.
It is often covered in pavement or just used as bike parking or something else, but not always looking like a yard. This standard is meant to require landscaping and trees to go in but, again, it is a waivable requirement.
She spoke to the Director of Public Works about trees and downtown street trees. There is no code section in the Public Works section of code that requires the planting of trees. The only thing that would apply in this case is the tree protection ordinance which is about the replacement of trees. All street trees and all downtown trees are automatically protected no matter their species or size, so replacement would be required if they already existed. If they do not, there is no other requirement other than what is listed in the ODS for requiring new trees on the street frontage.
Mayor Andurisaid even if there are trees, there is still no requirement that they be replaced. Ms. Cassidy said there is—the tree protection ordinance would require it, butthis is not inescapable. If it can be proven there is not enough sidewalk width to plant them on the sidewalk, if there is a density bonus they can waive out of that requirement, so there are ways to get out of it, but the code section exists that states they should be replaced. She does not remember what the old tree ordinance said, but she knows they were both protected and she just cannot recall if there were different requirements for how they are replaced or how that is configured.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period.
LIBBY HENRY ceded her time to Eliot Hudson.
ELIOT HUDSON expressed concern that the proposed ODS design standards may not adequately support Lafayette’s goal of maintaining a semi-rural ambience. He referenced comments from the Planning Commission indicating that staff did not know what residents wanted buildings to look like and urged the Council to prioritize preserving the City’s established character. He argued that overly restrictive standards could be adjusted in the future, while undesirable buildings would be difficult to change once constructed.
Mr. Hudson focused on three provisions he believed detracted from the City’s semi-rural character: 18- square-foot single-pane windows above the ground floor, up to 40% glazing, and shed roofs. He stated that the proposed window size was significantly larger than single panes found in several existing Lafayette buildings and could allow continuous rows of large single-pane windows across a building façade. He clarified that limiting individual pane size would not prevent developers from providing large overall windows composed of multiple panes.
City Council Meeting Page 14 of 20 September 28, 2026
Regarding the 40% glazing allowance, buildings he considered consistent with Lafayette’s semi-rural character generally have 30% or less glazing. He also opposed allowing shed roofs, which he said were inconsistent with the desired character. He referenced 210 Lafayette Circle as an example used to support the larger windows but argued that the building’s character derives from its overall design, including its three-story scale and balconies, rather than the size of its windows.
He cautioned that future projects would not necessarily replicate those characteristics and could instead create an urban wall with large expanses of glass. He also noted that developers may seek concessions and waivers from applicable standards and urged the Council to limit individual window panes to six square feet or less, reduce the allowable glazing to a level consistent with buildings exhibiting semi-rural character, and remove shed roofs from the permitted roof forms.
ROB LAVOIE said he supports Mr. Hudson’s comments and reminded everyone about unlimited waivers.
He thinks the City should make the standards as much as what residents want, knowing developers have a lot of freedom in terms of the waivers and to make them earn it rather than give in on some of these things right now. He asked to make the standards very strict and as close to what residents want as possible and realize they can be waived. If developers waive too many things, the end result will not look like what they are trying to get, but hopefully it will cost them and they will not do something else like a 5 foot setback on top of big ugly windows.
Regarding providing developers with flexibility, the City is dealing with a very coveted, high-priced product and they will make a lot of money on these projects and he asked to make sure they have restrictions to adhere to what the City’s mission statement requires. He asked the Council to define what they want and make the developers earn it.
Mayor Anduri closed the public comment and returned discussion to the Council. He thanked consultants, Ms. Cassidy, DRC members Cass and Stanton for their incredible work on this, and for staff bringing to the Council what is a considerable improvement over what they had the first time. He asked Councilmembers if there is anything in the ODSs that they would like to change and asked if the Council was ready to approve the first reading tonight.
Vice Mayor McCormick expressed his appreciation to the PC as their discussions were great. He thought one element got short-changed which is the shed roof. He thought their conversation was detailed about the other two aspects, and appreciates the public talking about roof design which is a compelling way to think about how something more traditional and semi-rural. He would completely support removing shed roofs as a priority element. He thinks this was not given enough due consideration.
Councilmember Candell said she completely agrees and if there is a way to re-write this to allow them for a small sub-piece, it just cannot be the top roof.
Mayor Anduri said it sounds like the majority of the Council would prefer not to see the shed roof as the main roof design, but allow it as an auxiliary building roof or accent roof or sub-roof. Under B, it states “Allowed roof forms are limited to the following,” and number 3-shed. He recommended after the word “shed” to add “not allowed as a major roof form”. Ms. Cassidy noted that staff will work on language while the Council is deliberating and propose something towards the end of the discussion.
City Council Meeting Page 15 of 20 September 28, 2026
Councilmember Cervantes said the irony for him is when thinking of a shed, he thinks of a rural structure, but he agrees with Councilmembers that this is one piece of this that was forwarded by the PC that does not work. He thinks it detracts, and appreciates Mr. Hudson’s suggestions throughout the process relating to roofing. He thinks the other outcomes get them there as a better product, but he would remove the shed. He would also remove the butterfly but the PC did that already.
Vice Mayor McCormick agreed. Regarding fenestration, this is the result for window size and this is where you can give and take. In reading the PC’s discussion and deliberations on the fenestration size, it was not quite as compelling to him as to why it was 35% instead of 45%. So, he would support a more restrictive fenestration. When looking at semi-rural and ambience, that seems like it is a consistent theme.
Mayor Anduri and Councilmember Candell agreed. Councilmember Cervantes said he appreciates the PC’s thoughtfulness on all of this. They started at 45% and dropped it to 40% and he was okay with 40% and could also live with 35%. It felt like they split the difference in where they ended up, but he does not have a strong feeling on that if the Council wanted 35%.
Vice Mayor McCormick said he thinks that even the 40% examples the Council is looking at, he understands what they are trying to avoid and to him, the 35% helps get them more to the target. Mayor Anduri noted that 955 Huff is 39% and 1001 Oak Hill is 34% and that is very helpful, which he agrees with.
He would not want to see 40% on a 6-story building on Mt. Diablo Boulevard. Mayor Anduri confirmed Council consensus for 35%.
Mayor Anduri asked to modify page 7, 3907A(2) and he asked to take off the “on street facing” upper story. He thinks it should apply to all sides. Basically, there are buildings that cover corners, and for 6- story buildings, you can see them along the street.
Vice Mayor McCormick said he was thinking there are the side yards that back up to buildings but he understands for taller buildings that is visible from all sides, so it is a good point.
Mayor Anduri asked staff to delete “street facing” and state “On upper story elevations, the sum surface area shall not exceed 35%.” Both changes are in that section.
Mayor Anduri said he will not pursue his tree comments tonight. Regarding the 18 square feet, Vice Mayor McCormick said the PC discussion on the fact that a 4x4 picture window is a fairly standard element is compelling to him. To restrict that and not allow a developer to put that in a living room or something on a 4th or 5th story overlooking the City or Mt. Diablo just seemed restrictive. On a personal note, both his children have purchased homes in the last 6 months and they are both purchasing homes in a semirural traditional styles. He was looking at their windows and he could not see the 2x3 foot restriction as practical. He would rather be supportive of a 4x4 picture window.
Councilmember Cervantes said he lives in the outback of Springhill Valley so it is pretty semi-rural. He measured the windows and the living room/kitchen window is 20 square feet flanked by two, 12 square foot windows, and a couple of other windows are 25 square feet flanked by a pair of 12 square foot windows.
City Council Meeting Page 16 of 20 September 28, 2026
He said he looks out the windows and can see Mt. Diablo and other things. He believes 18 square feet is fine to him. Where he lives the windows are a great deal larger than that. If they are going to have a 35% fenestration threshold, then he recommended letting the architect figure out how to best work that. In the end, if it is less than 18 square feet, fine, in the context of the overall design. But, he feels like giving some flexibility there would be appropriate. As he read the PC minutes, there is a tension here. They want to have standards, but they also want to allow for some amount of design flexibility and creativity so he thinks this is the one place to do that.
Councilmember Candell said she would like to challenge that because being familiar with Councilmember Cervantes’ house, those are picture windows and it is a very different area than a downtown multi-family development. She does like when there is at least something interesting that makes each pane smaller, and that is driving around all those “stumpies” around Dublin, all the pretty ones had interesting smaller windows and pitched roofs. It just adds to the design to her. The big plain ones are very plain and modern, and this is a way they could reduce it. She would encourage the Council to at least try and find some wording that maybe it is not a single 18 square foot window, but to make sure you cannot put them three in a row and make 48 square feet or something, and to make them as interesting as possible.
Vice Mayor McCormick agreed with that and also three of them side by side which is definitely more modern. But, a 3x6 foot window pivoted horizontally right there in the living room does not seem outrageous. So, this is where it depends on the details.
Councilmember Cervantes said this is where providing some flexibility for the architect to come up with something that works in the overall context. Otherwise, if that is the main window and it is smaller, he was not sure he would like that.
Vice Mayor McCormick said 6 feet feels very small, and 2 x 6 feels very small to him.
Mayor Anduri said he is hearing that the Council is wanting to keep it where it is. This is the most difficult one. If there was some way to encourage the breaking up of it, they really cannot do that. But, he confirmed they are making the three changes as discussed.
Ms. Cassidy confirmed she has the 3907 windows and balconies, removing “street-facing” from that requirement and then it goes on to come down from 40% to 35% of total fenestration. She has some suggested language for the shed roof, and no change on the total window size.
Councilmember Cervantes raised wildfire safety and landscaping concerns, particularly the use of lesscombustible materials around buildings.
Mayor Anduri asked whether those issues would be more appropriately addressed through a separate downtown high-rise fire-safety ordinance.
Councilmember Candell and Vice Mayor McCormick agreed, noting that modern multi-family buildings are subject to State fire-safety requirements, including sprinklers, and differ significantly from singlefamily homes in high-fire-risk areas.
Mayor Anduri noted the significant fire-safety requirements now applicable to multi-story buildings.
City Council Meeting Page 17 of 20 September 28, 2026
Vice Mayor McCormick said he would support incorporating best practices but was hesitant to add additional requirements to the ODSs.
Councilmember Cervantes agreed that the issue warranted further discussion, particularly regarding highfire-severity neighborhoods, while recognizing the different circumstances of downtown multi-story development.
Ms. Cassidy said her recent work on the tree protection ordinance had increased her interest in wildfire safety and noted the State’s current emphasis on Zone Zero. She suggested considering a clear requirement limiting or prohibiting landscaping, wood fencing, and gates within five feet of exterior building walls, with a noncombustible transition such as metal. She said this could provide a simple, understandable measure to reduce fire spread.
Councilmembers agreed the issue could be addressed in a future ODS revision.
Councilmember Candell said staff would bring back a revised section for consideration. She asked that the next ODS revision provide greater clarity regarding waivers and concessions, suggested developing standardized Pro Formas to estimate the cost to a developer of complying with a requirement rather than receiving a waiver, and asked whether such a process could be explored as part of evaluating waiver and concession requests.
Mayor Anduri noted that the Council explored a similar approach in 2021 during consideration of the Lincoln property but, to his understanding, no jurisdiction had successfully implemented it.
Councilmember Candell said she had heard that other cities had been successful.
Ms. Cassidy said she has some suggestions for wording on the shed roof. Section B, introduction can remain the same and then at Number 3, Shed, it could say “Shed roof, limited to accessory buildings and lesser roof forms; not to be allowed as a primary roof form.” ACTION: It was M/S/C (Cervantes/McCormick) to introduce Ordinance 703, amending the LMC to add Chapter 6-39, as amended, to waive first reading, take public testimony and continue to October 13th for second reading and adoption. Roll Call Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Candell, Cervantes; Noes:
None; Absent: Wotherspoon).
15. COUNCIL/COMMISSION REPORTS
Councilmembers report on activities and consideration of matters a Councilmember wishes to initiate for placement on a future agenda.
Councilmember Cervantes reported that he and Councilmember Wotherspoon met with Concord Councilmember Carlyn Obringer, who also serves on the EBRPD Advisory Board, to discuss e-bike policies.
EBRPD is exploring improved approaches to e-bike use, and Councilmember Cervantes separately discussed the issue with the City’s Emergency Preparedness Officer, Andy Comly. He said there may be an opportunity for collaboration, with additional information forthcoming.
City Council Meeting Page 18 of 20 September 28, 2026
Councilmember Cervantes reported that he, Vice Mayor McCormick, Jay Rosen, Mary McClosker of the Historical Society, and the City Manager met with EBMUD representatives to discuss commemorating the former tower. The group considered displaying a four- to five-foot section of the tower, divided into four pieces weighing approximately 1,000 pounds each, along with other historic machinery from 1928. A location near the boathouse and fishing shack was discussed, potentially incorporating a bench area with views of the tower and dam.
Councilmember Cervantes and Vice Mayor McCormick also attended a Crime Prevention meeting to discuss topics for the upcoming year’s action plan. He additionally attended a Northern California Non-Profit Housing Association conference, where he learned about the State’s efforts to streamline affordablehousing approval and financing programs through greater coordination and consolidation of existing programs.
Vice Mayor McCormick said in addition to the Reservoir Tower, they had their inaugural M3 Committee meeting this past Monday. There were members of the public and consultants and they held a good kick-off meeting and discussed goals. They expect to meet with consultants for the M3 study every other month and in the intervening months will be reviewing the other larger transportation studies going on, starting with the BART access study.
Councilmember Candell reported on her attendance at the Cal Cities meeting, where a resolution submitted by the City of Murrieta and supported by numerous cities was considered. She noted that the Housing Committee amended the resolution by removing the reference to a “Constitutional Amendment” while retaining the intent to preserve consideration of all available tools. The resolution then advanced to the 45- member Resolution Committee, representing cities throughout California.
She reported that the first motion was to approve the Housing Committee’s amended version, while Livermore introduced a second motion to oppose and disapprove the resolution. Following public comment, 11 of 12 speakers supported the resolution. She said the majority of committee members also expressed support, with several citing frustrations experienced by cities. The first motion came up to support the Resolution as written and 42-3 was the vote which was a huge shift of opinions. They needed 234 voting delegates for a quorum, and they had 235 in the audience, so one person made the difference, and they will create a working group.
She also attended the E-bike meeting and reported that if a City wants to pass a Resolution, they have to have a broad coalition. The way to get an actual resolution is to look at the data, go to Children’s Hospital, John Muir Pediatrics, and bring up the data to prove an age limit should be proposed for E-bikes.
She also has been working on the CTP (Capital Transportation Projects) list for CCTA, and she recognized the work of Patrick Golier and Councilmember Wotherspoon. There are named projects which will go into the TEP for the next sales tax measure. Mayor Anduri asked what flexibility exists to modify the list, and Councilmember Candell said the next working group is October, so all of this is lining up quickly. The sales tax measure must fund named projects and it cannot go towards anything else.
Mayor Anduri said two days after the last Council meeting he attended Senator Grayson’s Senior Scams Stopper program at the Veterans Building which was well attended and good speakers. The Chief was in attendance with his team talking about their experience in Lafayette, and the Senator wants to hold another meeting.
City Council Meeting Page 19 of 20 September 28, 2026
The mural is being painted and the artist will be back tomorrow morning. It is fascinating to watch the process and the biggest detriment to him finishing is people coming up and talking how great the mural is and talking about it.
He also attended Merrill Gardens and helped them celebrate a 100th birthday on Friday for Annamarie Levy who lived in Lafayette since 1962. One of her sons, Adrian, was on TransCirc Commission for a few years.
Mayor Anduri said in following up on Sarah Blumenfeld’s presentation, it could be considered part of the City’s legislative program. He asked if the Council wanted to provide direction or leave it to the City Manager.
City Manager Srivatsa stated the Legislative Committee is meeting on October 14th so it is late to add it.
However, the request is consistent with the Legislative Platform, and she can craft a letter and work with Ms. Blumenfeld.
A. Mayor Anduri and Vice Mayor McCormick
Seventh Amendment to the City Manager Employment Agreement with Niroop K. Srivatsa Recommendation: Authorize the Mayor to execute the Seventh Amendment to the City Manager Employment Agreement with Niroop K. Srivatsa
Mayor Anduri pointed out that the one year extension provides for a salary increase going back to July 1st of 5%. He said this contract reflects how fortunate the Council is to have such a skilled, diplomatic City Manager who combines deep experience with vision, and he asked for a motion.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
Councilmembers agreed and echoed comments of Mayor Anduri’s portrayal of City Manager Srivatsa.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (McCormick/Cervantes) to authorize the Mayor to execute the Seventh Amendment to the City Manager Employment Agreement with Niroop K. Srivatsa Roll Call Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Candell, Cervantes; Noes: None; Absent: Wotherspoon).
16. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
A. Proclamation recognizing October as Domestic Violence Awareness Month In Lafayette Recommendation: Approve the proclamation recognizing October as Domestic Violence Awareness Month in Lafayette.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period.
SHELBY SUPPIGER said she is a recent UC Berkeley graduate and was a Gender in Women Studies major.
She did her thesis and interviewed three women in Lafayette regarding the dating scene, heard some unfortunate stories and things she could relate to herself, and said she would love to help to capitalize on domestic violence which is a problem, noting the problem does not go away without action and awareness.
Councilmember Candell asked Ms. Suppiger to provide the City Clerk with her email.
City Council Meeting Page 20 of 20 September 28, 2026
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Candell/McCormick) to approve the proclamation recognizing October as Domestic Violence Awareness Month in Lafayette. Roll Call Vote: 4-0-1 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Candell, Cervantes; Noes: None; Absent: Wotherspoon).
17. ADJOURNMENT – 9:35 p.m.
APPROVED:
__________________________________
Carl Anduri, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Joanne Robbins, City Clerk