TOWN OF MORAGA
REGULAR MEETING
May 25, 2022
Rovember, 19)% MINUTES
6:30 p.m. Regular Meeting
TELECONFERENCED MEETING LOCATION ONLY
*COVID-19 NOTICE*
THIS MEETING WAS CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953 (AS AMENDED BY AB 361), WHICH AUTHORIZED
TELECONFERENCED MEETINGS UNDER THE BROWN ACT, DURING CERTAIN PROCLAIMED STATES OF EMERGENCY. THE GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA PROCLAIMED A STATE OF EMERGENCY RELATED TO COVID-19 ON MARCH 4, 2020.
THIS TELECONFERENCED MEETING WAS NECESSARY SO THAT THE TOWN COULD
CONDUCT ESSENTIAL BUSINESS AND WAS PERMITTED UNDER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953 IN ORDER TO PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH AND THE SAFETY OF ATTENDEES.
Consistent with Government Code Section 54953, this meeting was held via teleconference only, and was not physically open to the public. Town Councilmembers and staff teleconferenced into the meeting by audio and/or video. The meeting was
CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor Renata Sos.
ROLL CALL
Councilmembers present:
Councilmembers absent: None
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Vice Mayor Woehleke led the Pledge of Allegiance.
3. SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mayor Sos reported the Town Council had met in Closed Session prior to the regular meeting at 5:30 p.m. regarding a Conference with Real Property Negotiators, with no reportable action resulting from the meeting.
4. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS
There were no proclamations or presentations.
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
Town Council Regular Meeting 1 May 25, 2022
Clay Serrahn, President, Moraga Park Foundation (MPF), provided the background of the MPF and reported that after a two-year hiatus due to the pandemic, the MPF and the Town of Moraga were once again presenting the Moraga Summer Concert Series to run from June 9 through August 4, 2022 at the Moraga Commons Park band shell. A total of nine bands would perform on Thursday evenings from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. Food vendors would be present on-site, and everyone was welcome to attend. The concert schedule was available on the Town website and the MPF website at www.moragaparks.org. The MPF website included information on other MPF events, ways to donate and information on serving on the MPF Board.
Mayor Sos thanked the MPF on behalf of the Town Council for all the ways the MPF was bettering the community and for resuming the Summer Concert Series.
6. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA
A. Acceptance of Consent Items
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Mayor Sos reported no comments had been received for this item.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
ACTION: It was M/S (Woehleke/Onoda) to adopt Consent Agenda Items 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5 and 6.6. Roll Call Vote: 5-0.
6.1 Receive Accounts Payable Claims for: 05/05/22 Approved ($356,884.63); 05/05/22 ($135,000); 05/06/22 ($39,398.29) 05/10/22 ($5,000)
6.2 Approve Minutes for the Special Joint Town Council and Approved Planning Commission Meeting on March 2, 2022
6.3 Approve Minutes for the Regular Town Council Meeting on Approved March 9, 2022
6.4 Continued Use of Teleconferenced Meetings Approved
Consider Resolution 49-2022 Approving the Continued Use of Teleconferencing for the Meetings of Town Council and all Committee and Commissions Pursuant to the Provisions of Assembly Bill 361
6.5 Salary Schedule FY 2022/23 Amendment Approved
Consider Resolution 50-2022 Amending the FY 2022/23
Salary Schedule to Correct the Hourly Rate of Four Part-Time Classifications in the Unrepresented Group Effective July 3, 2022
6.6 RMRA List of Streets to be Funded Approved
Consider Resolution 51-2022 Establishing the Town of
Moraga's Fiscal Year (FY) 2022/23 List of Streets to be Funded In Part or Solely with FY 2022/23 Road Maintenance and
Rehabilitation Account (RMRA) Revenues as Required by
Senate Bill 1, the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 Town Council Regular Meeting 2 May 25, 2022
B. Consideration of Consent Items Removed for Discussion No items were removed from the Consent Agenda.
7. ADOPTION OF MEETING AGENDA
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Mayor Sos reported no comments had been received for this item.
ACTION: It was M/S (McCluer/Onoda) to adopt the Meeting Agenda, as shown. Roll Call Vote: 5-0.
8. REPORTS
A. Town Manager Update - Town Manager Cynthia Battenberg reported on the hiring of new Moraga Police Lieutenant Steve Borbely and identified his background as a retired officer from the Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff. She welcomed Lieutenant Borbely to the Town of Moraga. She also reported that the contractor for the Canyon Road Bridge would be resuming the items on the punch list. The Public Works Department working with the Moraga School District (MSD), Acalanes Union High School District (AUHSD) and emergency service providers would choose the days that would be the least impactful to the community and the public would be notified when those dates were known.
In addition, the Fourth of July festivities were on after a two-year hiatus, all the community events would resume including the fireworks display. The Buy-a- Rocket campaign had started. All information was available on the Parks and Recreation page of the Town website. Summer and day camps would also start on May 30.
B. Mayor's and Councilmember's Reports
Mayor Sos - Explained in response to Councilmember McCluer's comment during his report, that any time written comments had been asked to be read into the record she had read those comments into the record and if that had not occurred it was an oversight. She found his suggestion to consider a policy to address that issue to be unnecessary. She otherwise reported she had attended Spring Fest at Moraga Commons, a celebration of student activism and engagement and the Staff Appreciation Luncheon at the Hacienda. She thanked Moraga Citizens Network (MCN) for hosting the event and all of the community service groups who had participated and provided refreshments.
Vice Mayor Woehleke - Reported he had attended the monthly Liaison Meeting and briefed the Council on the discussions; represented the Town at the undergraduate ceremony at Saint Mary's College (SMC); and had attended a Moraga-Orinda Fire District Board (MOFD) meeting with the MOFD Board to allocate $500,000 to provide grants to homeowners in the MOFD for fire resistant vents, which he hoped would be advertised in the About Town newsletter. He had also spoken with ENGEO regarding fire abatement that was to occur this week in the Moraga Geologic Hazard Abatement District (GHAD).
Councilmember McCluer - Reported he had attended the Staff Appreciation Luncheon at the Hacienda. He provided the latest inflation information for the cities Town Council Regular Meeting 3 May 25, 2022
of San Francisco and Oakland and stated the rate of inflation was declining. He had met with the Moraga School District (MSD) Superintendent to discuss several items which he detailed; and otherwise suggested there should be a policy about reading public comments into the record to ensure there was no misunderstanding, which he would raise as a request for a future agenda item. He had also attended а СССТА (County Connection) meeting and briefed the Council on the discussions; spoken with the Executive Director of the Lafayette Chamber of Commerce; and provided feedback to the Town Council from some local business constituents and a major landlord after a recent Town Council meeting regarding the Moraga Chamber of Commerce's request for American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds.
Councilmember McCluer also referenced the Small Business Recovery Grant Program and his understanding that three business applications had been denied since they were non-profits. He stated he would be making another request for a future agenda item to discuss the definition of small business and whether to include non-profits.
Councilmember Onoda - Reported she had attended the Hacienda Open House and Poetry Read, with the Poetry Read hoped to be an annual event in partnership with Saint Mary's College (SMC); Spring Fest at the Moraga Commons Park; a Joint Art in Public Spaces Committee and Park and Recreation Commission meeting at West Commons Park; and the Staff Appreciation Luncheon for which she thanked all of the service organizations who had also participated. She had also participated in the Campolindo Leadership Symposium and Marin Clean Energy (MCE) Board meeting and briefed the Council on the discussions.
Councilmember Makker - Reported she had been unable to attend the Staff Appreciation Luncheon but took the opportunity to thank Town staff and all volunteers who had attended the luncheon.
Ms. Battenberg also took the opportunity to thank all the volunteer organizations who had participated in the Staff Appreciation Luncheon and shared that the event made a difference, was unique for Moraga, and was meaningful, special and much appreciated.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Master Fee Schedule for FY 2022/23
Consider Resolution 52-2022 Adopting the Town of Moraga's Updated Master Fee Schedule for Fiscal Year 2022/23, Effective July 24, 2022 Administrative Services Director Annie To provided a PowerPoint presentation of the FY 2022/23 Master Fee Schedule, which reflected the fees charged by all departments, was amended annually to reflect current costs, and with cost recovery targets to add or eliminate fees as applicable. All information had been outlined in the May 25, 2022 staff report. The fees could not exceed the reasonable cost of providing the service, would become effective July 24, 2022, and the revenue would be reflected in the Proposed FY 2022/23 budget. Proposed fee adjustments for Parks and Recreation, Planning, and Public Works Departments, and Development Impact Fees were all highlighted. No changes had been proposed for the Police Department.
Ms. To recommended the Town Council adopt the proposed resolution in Attachment A to the staff report. She clarified that the development fees for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and affordable housing could be discussed with the Planning Director. She understood that many cities were expediting ADUs.
Town Council Regular Meeting 4 May 25, 2022
Ms. Battenberg explained that staff may have to bring back a clean-up document since ADUs and reduced fees for affordable housing had not been reflected in the Master Fee Schedule. In response to whether there had been any complaints about the Town's fees, she stated the Town fees had all been based on the cost of providing the service, the Town did not make money on the services provided, many of the larger fees had been based on the cost of service, and she did not know of any complaints about the Town's fees.
As reported, no fee adjustments had been proposed for the Police Department and, in fact, a decrease in revenue for the Police Department had been forecast given there was less activity.
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Mayor Sos reported no comments had been received for this item.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Councilmember Onoda offered a motion, seconded by Councilmember McCluer to adopt the resolution in Attachment A to the staff report.
On the motion, Vice Mayor Woehleke clarified that staff would examine some of the fees and Ms. Battenberg stated the item would be brought back to the Town Council if any changes needed to be made.
ACTION: It was M/S (Onoda/McCluer) to adopt Resolution 52-2022 adopting the Town of Moraga's Updated Master Fee Schedule for Fiscal Year 2022/23, Effective July 24, 2022.
Roll Call Vote: 5-0.
10. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND REQUESTS FOR ACTION
A. Bollinger Canyon Study Area Rezoning
Provide Direction on General Plan Amendment and Rezoning of Bollinger Canyon Special Study Area
Planning Director Hamid introduced the item and the team involved in the Bollinger Canyon Study Area Rezoning project including several members of Town staff; Police Chief Jon King, MOFD -ire Chief Dave Winnacker and Assistant Town Attorney Karen Murphy, and provided a PowerPoint presentation that included an overview of the Bollinger Canyon Special Study Are Rezoning, which was a Town Council Goal and objective for the last several years and had been identified as a priority as part of the Housing Element.
Ms. Hamid provided an overview of the context of the Bollinger Canyon Study Area, General Plan Amendment and Rezoning and an overview of the Advanced Planning Initiative, including the 2023-2031 Housing Element as required by state law in response to the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) where the Town of Moraga was required to provide 1,118 units. She highlighted the rezoning of key parcels, Focused General Plan Update, including Phase 1:
Amendments for internal consistency with the Housing Element and to meet the State Safety and Circulation Element mandates, and Phase 2: Update of the remainder of the General Plan; and the Bollinger Canyon Study Area Rezoning and the Program-Level Environmental Impact Report (EIR) covering the identified actions.
Ms. Hamid reported a White Paper had been prepared and a neighborhood meeting had been held in January 2022. The Town Council had provided policy direction during a Study Session held on February 9, 2022 at which time several options had been presented for Parcel Group 3.
At that time, the Town Council provided direction to establish a new zoning designation identified Town Council Regular Meeting 5 May 25, 2022
as Rural Residential (RR) for 1 unit/5 acres. Based on the Town Council direction, staff had developed the zoning language, respective standards and General Plan Amendments.
A California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Scoping Session had been held on February 17, 2022 and from February through May ongoing coordination had been provided with property owners, the Police and MOFD. During March and April, the new zoning designations/map and conforming General Plan Amendments had been drafted. The agenda item would address only the General Plan and zoning designations and no development application or project was under consideration at this time. The purpose of the study session was for the Town Council to review the provisions of the new RR Zoning District and provide direction to staff and identify any other possible modifications.
Ms. Hamid emphasized that throughout each step staff had reached out to the property owners including the largest property owner, the Bruzzone family. The Planning Commission had been scheduled to meet via Zoom on May 17, 2022 but the meeting had been canceled due to the lack of a quorum and had been rescheduled as a Special Meeting held on May 24 via Zoom.
Comments from the Planning Commission and additional feedback from the public would be outlined during this presentation.
Barry Miller, Barry Miller Consulting, continued the PowerPoint presentation and identified the Study Area off of Bollinger Canyon Road that consisted of 423 acres, 20 parcels and 13 different landowners. An overview of the historic context of the property prior to the incorporation of the property into the Town of Moraga in 1974 was provided and it was noted the area had been part of the County with R-15 and R-20 zoning, which allowed two to three homes per acre and at which time the study area had been given the designation of Study, which in turn had been embedded into the 1979 and 2002 Town of Moraga General Plans. The current zoning context for the properties comprising the 423-acre Study Area was provided with a map of the surrounding areas and the current zoning for the abutting properties to the Town boundaries was identified.
The Study Area characteristics consisted of steep slopes, sensitive natural resources, outstanding visual and aesthetic values, high fire hazard levels, access and infrastructure constraints and potential connectivity to regional trails/open spaces. The Policy Framework in the 2002 General Plan and the existing conditions in the study area where the land use parcel size and ownership suggested three parcel groups identified as Parcel Groups 1, 2 and 3 were all highlighted.
Parcel Group 1 had initially included 11 of the 20 parcels in the Study Area (10 owners), consisting of 24.7 acres in total, with parcels ranging from 0.97 to 3.78 acres located along the easterly extension of The Bluffs neighborhood (end of Joseph Drive), with 10 of the 11 lots developed with one home each, generally built between 1974 and 1986. The General Plan/Zoning Recommendation for Parcel Group 1 was for 1-DUA which would conform to existing conditions recommendation for Parcel o up te and zoning of the adjacent The Bluffs neighborhood. The Town Council had concurred with this approach at its February 9, 2022 meeting.
Parcel Group 2 was identified as the Harvey Ranch properties consisting of four parcels, 136.1 acres of land with one property owner who was working with the John Muir Land Trust (JMLT) to dedicate land as open space. The General Plan/Zoning Recommendation for Parcel Group 2 was for Non-MOSO Open Space Zoning (1 unit per 5, 10, or 20 acres). This district was used for open space and that was not covered by the 1986 Moraga Open Space Ordinance (MOSO) and reflected existing and planned uses. The Town Council generally had concurred with this approach at its February meeting.
Parcel Group 3 consisted of five parcels, 262.7 acres, with four property owners, including the 186-acre site previously proposed for development, with all parcels 5 plus acres in size. The existing uses in Parcel Group 3 were agriculture and Rural Residential. The General Plan/Zoning Options for Parcel Group 3 included: A) 1 unit/5 acres; B) 1 unit/10 acres; C) Non-MOSO Open Town Council Regular Meeting 6 May 25, 2022
Space (5,10 and 20 acres); and D) 1 unit/acre. The Town Council had generally preferred Option A at its February meeting for 1 unit/5 acres to be identified as RR Zoning.
Since the February 2022 Town Council meeting, two of the parcels at the end of Joseph Drive were being moved from Parcel Group 1 into Parcel Group 3 at the request of the two property owners of the respective parcels, with each having a single-family home while the parcel at the northern end had a vineyard and active agricultural use.
A composite map with the surrounding area and the two parcels at the end of Joseph Drive moving into the RR Zoning District was provided. The new RR Zoning District would apply to 270 acres with the intent to "promote a rural character by providing for very low density single-family residential uses, agricultural uses, and preservation of the natural environment consistent with the General Plan," and would consist of seven parcels with a maximum buildout under the current parcel configuration at about 50 units.
The new RR Zoning District permitted uses included single-family homes, agriculture, dog care/training, and other uses allowed in all residential districts under State law; a 5-acre minimum lot size (smaller lots allowed through clustering and Planned Developments (PD), provided overall density was maintained); and with basic standards to include 25-foot setbacks, 100-foot street frontages, 140-foot lot depth/width, with a site and development analysis to be required for a PD or subdivision.
In creating the new RR Zoning District, other conforming zoning amendments had been required including the deletion of all references to "S" District throughout the code, addition of references to "RR" Districts throughout the code, and allowances for animal keeping (provisions would be similar to MOSO Open Space and Non-MOSO Open Space).
In response to public comment, staff had proposed revising the definition of "agriculture" to include processing, with the definition proposed to read:
"Agriculture" means the tilling of soil, the raising of crops, horticulture, dairying, and the raising and managing of livestock, including all uses customarily incident, and the necessary accessory uses for packing, treating or storing the produce, provided that any such accessory uses shall be secondary to that of normal agricultural activities, but not including cannabis, slaughterhouses, fertilizer yards, bone yards, plants for the reduction of animal matter, or any other industrial use which may be objectionable because of odor, smoke, dust, or fumes.
Mr. Miller acknowledged the Planning Commission and some members of the public had raised concern with the language in this definition during the May 24 Planning Commission meeting.
The following General Plan Amendments would also be made: Deletion of "S" designation, new references to RR designation where appropriate, deletion of Goal LU-6/Policy LU-6.1 on Study Area, deletion of Implementation Measure for Study Area, modification to General Plan Map (parallel to zoning designations) and need for additional amendments with further changes to be made through the Housing Element process and General Plan Update Phase 2.
Ms. Hamid summarized the input received after the distribution of the staff report for the May 17 Planning Commission meeting, which had included: a request to move two parcels at the end of Joseph Drive (3.8 acres and 3.5 acres) from 1-DUA/acre to the RR Zoning District. Staff had also received a third request on May 24 from the property owner of 1957 Joseph Drive, although that would have to be further evaluated by staff. Concerns had been raised about limitations on agricultural processing and the future of agricultural activities (from vineyard operators) and the largest landowner (186 acres) had requested a 1-DUA designation and there had been concerns with traffic, safety, and evacuation capacity from neighbors on Valley Hill and The Bluffs area.
Town Council Regular Meeting 7 May 25, 2022
During the May 24 Planning Commission meeting the definition of agriculture had been identified as needing to be modified to avoid subjective language, with concerns raised about the threshold for the term "objectionable" and whether the definition would apply to existing activities. The Planning Commission had also asked that sufficient time for property owner input at public hearings be provided and that congestion and safety along St. Mary's Road be addressed. The Planning Commission had voted 5-0 (one Commissioner was absent another had a conflict of interest and had to recuse himself) to forward the staff recommendation to the Town Council subject to further changes to the definition of agriculture.
Next steps included Town Council review of the Draft Housing Element, and after comments were received from the Town Council in July, the document would be submitted to the State Department of Housing and Community Department (HCD) for the first round of review. Staff would continue work on the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Comprehensive Planning Initiative, the General Plan Amendments and continue to communicate with property owners. In the fall of 2022, the release of the Draft EIR for the Advanced Planning Initiative and in December 2022, the final zoning and General Plan text would be submitted for adoption.
Responding to the Council, Ms. Hamid, Mr. Miller, Ms. Battenberg and Assistant Town Attorney Karen Murphy clarified:
• An overview of Attachment B, New Chapter 8.22 Rural Residential Zoning Text, was provided. In response to how the site would be evaluated, staff had looked at the MOSO language and had determined that an analysis should be prepared by certified professionals and staff had proposed language in Section 8.22.100 Site and development analysis, subparagraphs (B) through (F) of New Chapter 8.22, which would require specific and defined geotechnical analyses.
The new RR Zoning District permitted uses were again identified as single-family homes, agriculture, dog care/training, and other uses allowed in all residential districts under State law; a 5-acre minimum lot size (smaller lots allowed through clustering and Planned Developments (PD), provided overall density was maintained); and with basic standards to include 25-foot setbacks, 100-foot street frontages, 140-foot lot depth/width, with a site and development analysis to be required for a PD or subdivision. The approach taken would be consistent with the Non-MOSO Open Space areas that included provisions that allowed clustering. It was also a Town-wide policy to permit clustering of density or the transfer of density to another property. Whether or not 40,000 square feet was the right number for the minimum lot size (as reflected in Section 8.48.040 Development standards for single-family residential uses in planned development district (B) as shown in Attachment C, RR and "Study" Zoning Consistency Edits), was up to the Town Council to determine. The idea of using 40,000 square feet to make it consistent with Non-MOSO Open Space could be considered and had been discussed internally by staff. • General Plan Policy LU-1.11, Cluster Housing to Protect Open Space and set aside land with sensitive resources with least impact on the environment, and General Plan Policy LU1.15, General Development on Residential Parcels, were read into the record by Councilmember McCluer and identified as conflicting with what had been presented, although Mr. Miller clarified it was not necessarily inconsistent. The Town Council would have to evaluate both the General Plan and zoning language and look for ways to cluster development that was consistent with those policies depending on the property and it may be more difficult on some properties than others. The two General Plan policies could be referenced in the zoning text in some way to create a link to consistency between the two.
Town Council Regular Meeting 8 May 25, 2022
• Any developer may consider a PD when clustering and subdividing the lots: the developer would have to go through the Subdivision Map Act, which involved an entire process with a formal application. At that time, additional studies could be requested which would involve public hearings before the Planning Commission and the Town Council. A finding would also be required to be made that the PD, as proposed, promoted the rural character by providing very low density single-family residential uses and agriculture uses. Also, the current code had provisions that allowed open space to go through the PD process and it would be somewhat inconsistent with the code to have a zoning district that did not allow that process to occur.
• Pursuant to the current map of the Study Area, the request to move two parcels at the end of Joseph Drive (3.8 acres and 3.5 acres) from 1-DUA/acre to the RR Zoning District had been shown, although the third request, as staff had earlier described, had come late on May 24 from the property owner of 1957 Joseph Drive and that would have to be further evaluated by staff. If that property was included, staff recommended reaching out to the property owner in between the Captain Vineyard property and 1957 Joseph Drive. Staff noted more work needed to be done before those adjustments could be made. • The proposed changes to the MMC and General Plan Amendments would not disallow any of the existing uses that were operational, which would remain as is and in effect would be allowed to continue and be grandfathered-in.
• Based on input from Captain Vineyards, in particular the definition for agriculture as proposed by staff would allow the vineyard operation to continue and allow the processing to continue but heavy industrial uses as identified in the definition of agriculture would not be permitted. Again, the Planning Commission had sought less subjectivity with the definition which could be discussed with the Town Council. The proposed definition of agriculture as proposed, would allow viticulture to continue and would allow the continuation of processing as an ancillary use. Events or tasting rooms would not be addressed with the definition of agriculture, just standard agricultural uses.
Mr. Miller acknowledged Vice Mayor Woehleke's recommended corrections to the May 25, 2022 staff report, particularly the second to last sentence of the first paragraph as shown on Page 7 to be revised to read: In addition, staff notes that the RR designation/zoning of one dwelling unit per five acres is not the equivalent of open space zoning, including because the RR designation allows housing as a permitted use as opposed to a conditionally permitted use in open space zoning. As to Attachment A, General Plan Text Amendments, Page A-3, Edit Policy LU1.11 and Edit Policy LU1.14, he noted the redlines included references to Rural Residential and Attachment B, new Chapter 8.22 Rural Residential Zoning Text, Page 2 of 3, Section 8.22.070, Maximum building height and Section 8.22.080, Accessory structures and buildings, references to title should be corrected to read "code."
Again speaking to Attachment A, General Plan Text Amendments, Page A-3, Edit Policy LU1.11, while this section would be acceptable, as shown, the Vice Mayor had recommended it would be better if corrected to read: Cluster Housing to Protect Open Space. Provide for the permanent preservation of open space by allowing clustered housing designs in areas designated MOSO Open Space, Non-MOSO Open Space, or Residential (including Rural Residential) on the General Plan Diagram; however, minimize cluster housing in locations that are visually prominent from the scenic corridor or where it would adversely impact existing residential areas.
• Staff acknowledged Town Council concern that the language shown on Page A-2 of Attachment A, General Plan Text Amendments, Edit Policy LU-1.8, f) which read: Lot Town Council Regular Meeting 9 May 25, 2022
Sizes in Rural Residential (0.2DUA). Lots smaller than 5 acres may be created through the Planned Development (PD) process. In such instances, the minimum lot size shall be 30,000 square feet. Project-wide densities of no greater than one unit per 5 acres shall be maintained in all cases, should be modified to allow for larger lots and more specificity in terms of minimizing clustering, and staff could go back and modify the language if that was the direction of the Town Council.
• Clustering would create an opportunity to achieve the number of units and was not by right. There could otherwise be areas left that were undevelopable. • No application was before the Town at this time. An application would be evaluated at the time of submittal based on its location and would include studies and entire environmental review with any proposed mitigations. All projects would be required to be consistent with the General Plan and the zoning with a process to be followed when an application was received, to be reviewed by planning staff for compliance with the objective standards in both the General Plan and zoning and note any inconsistencies. When the zoning was in place, a density range of units up to a specific number would be permitted, and those units would be required to comply with the criteria, to be addressed through conditions of approval or other criteria such as mitigation measures as part of the development review process to ensure consistency with the General Plan and zoning and addressed through the development review process. Due to that criteria, clustering was not allowed by-right. • Senate Bill (SB) 9 and ADU law was clarified with provisions that applied to any lot in the Town where ADUs and certain types of lot splits were allowed, pursuant to new State legislation with respect to allowing such types of uses.
Mayor Sos acknowledged the receipt of numerous emails which had been received by the Town Council.None of the written comments received specifically requested to be read into the record.
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Dave Bruzzone, clarified that the Bruzzone Family was the owner of the 186-acre parcel in the Bollinger Canyon Study Area. He was not the sole property owner and he had not requested that the zoning for the property be 1-DUA but had always suggested the Bruzzone property be looked at similarly as other properties including Sanders Ranch, which was zoned 2-DUA. The Bruzzone property had originally been zoned R-15 as part of the County zoning at 3-DUA, which was how The Bluffs neighborhood had been developed. All of those densities should be considered.
Mr. Bruzzone suggested the 1-DUA per five acres was confiscatory and would not allow the property owner to bring in utilities and it was unknown whether there was enough ground water to support wells or septic tanks for any number of units. He also found that Councilmember Makker's comments related to Chapter 8.22, and site development standards were of note with the criteria being uniquely applied to the Bruzzone property, which was inappropriate and not applied to other properties. In addition, the EIR and analysis of impacts was inadequate since it had not included a proper alternatives analysis which should cover the appropriate range of housing possible within the Bollinger Valley, and which included what the Bruzzone property was zoned when incorporated at R-15, 3-DUA similar to Sanders Ranch and Palos Colorados at 2- DUA, and the adjacent area at the end of Joseph Drive, which the Town was potentially considering for 1-DUA per acre. In order for the EIR to be proper, it should analyze those impacts and it would be inadequate if it did not.
Mr. Bruzzone added the current "Study" designation permitted agriculture and under the conditional uses all uses other than agriculture were permitted with the issuance of a permit, which was a very big range. He stated the modifications proposed by the Town would limit the Bruzzone Town Council Regular Meeting 10 May 25, 2022
family's ability to achieve what was currently allowed as a conditional use, including dude ranches, riding facilities, wineries, commercial kitchens, dog kennels and the like, and the Town would not only impact the value of the property by not providing proper zoning, the Town would be severely changing the conditional and permitted uses, which he found to be inappropriate.
Ann Walgenbach, Moraga, stated she had provided written comments to the Town Council. She was the Firewise representative for Bollinger Canyon including The Bluffs neighborhood and Valley Hill where she lived and was deeply concerned with any construction or additional housing that could be built in the area as a risk to public safety, wildfire evacuation and traffic flow.
Bollinger Canyon Road, as it currently existed, was a non-conforming dangerous windy road that did not meet current standards. She believed this was the wrong place to add homes, was already a potentially dangerous location, the MOFD was concerned with the area, and more potentially dangerous situations should not be added. Also, plans from the past were being changed and should be due to the new normal and current fire risk. If development was to occur, she recommended 1-DUA per 10 acres, or a transfer density to a safer location in the Town.
Alexis Maple, Moraga, a resident of The Bluffs, urged the Town Council to vote no on approving any rezoning changes. The Bluffs neighborhood was already a high-risk area in terms of access in and out on a good day (never mind in an emergency situation), and the list of study area characteristics were all negative in terms of the ability to expand the area in any way due to the risk of fire, narrow roadways, traffic, and the lack of access in and out. While she appreciated the effort to assess what was viable, any development would have many impacts including the ability for the Bluffs to remain a Firewise community and ability to evacuate in the event of a fire. Even if 50 units were built, potentially 200 additional vehicles would impact the Bluffs neighborhood daily including impacts to Bollinger Canyon Road. She urged the Town Council to not rezone the property or increase the zoning that had been proposed at this time for anything. She applauded those property owners willing to decrease the number of units that could be built on their properties.
Susan Captain, Moraga, stated she had provided comments via email and acknowledged that the Vice Mayor had been involved in working on a past initiative for Home-Based Winemaking businesses. She wanted the Town Council not to lose the Moraga General Plan policy to promote and preserve the Town's agricultural resources as an important part of the Town's heritage and character. She understood that agriculture was difficult to define. She commended Ms. Hamid and the Town staff and community members for working with Captain Vineyards to preserve what they had worked long and hard to bring to the community.
Tim and Kai Kai Woo, Moraga, residents of San Pablo Court, also commented on the traffic increase and fire and safety issues that would impact the area and echoed the concerns raised by previous speakers that the Town's streets would be unable to handle the volume of potentially 200 additional vehicles.
Sheerin Ong, Moraga, a resident of Joseph Drive, stated she had submitted her concerns to the Town Council via email since February, also echoing the concerns raised with traffic, fire safety and safety for her children who walked Joseph Drive and who would like to be able to walk to the Moraga-Orinda Trail although that was currently unsafe.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Councilmember McCluer suggested even if the lots were allowed to be 40,000 square feet in size next to five and ten acre lots there would be a consistency issue. He wanted staff to see whether the PD could be modified or excluded in this area to be a five-acre minimum in the RR Zoning District, or if that could not be done, there needed to be some distance between clustered three quarters- to one-acre lot sizes and five- to ten-acre lot sizes. Uncertain how that could be addressed given the unique area, he asked staff to focus on the use of terms "near" or "minimal," Town Council Regular Meeting 11 May 25, 2022
which could be subjective. He also suggested if the lots were split for 50 percent of the units that would be a total of 175 units as opposed to 50 residential units. If the lots were split at 25 percent that would be a total of 113 units, with potentially up to 500 vehicles.
Councilmember McCluer suggested that given the Town must meet SB 9, the staff report should include some dialogue to address the substantial impacts on traffic and fire versus approval of the RR Zoning District. He otherwise commended staff on the process but asked staff to take extra time to review what was before the Town Council at this time. He wanted to see some modifications and a win-win to have the new RR Zoning District category but there needed to be consistency with the General Plan, and he had great concerns with the potential issues.
Ms. Murphy also clarified that if a development application came in the lot splits would not become part of that development application when it first came in but would only apply once the individual lots had been created for subsequent homeowners.
Councilmember Onoda verified with staff the process and challenges and asked if the Town Council were to go back to the non-MOSO housing and had housing permitted rather than conditional, whether that would change the scenario to allow for five, ten or twenty acres and make it more reflective of the neighborhood.
Mr. Miller suggested it would be problematic since the use permit process was used to determine the acreage.
Ms. Battenberg understood the PD cluster approach also applied to MOSO Open Space and Non- MOSO Space, and Ms. Hamid confirmed the Town Manager's comments and explained that with the RR Zoning District there would be clarity of review and process and anything that was 1-DUA at five acres would be permitted as long as it met the development standards. If a development came in it would be subject to studies, must meet the Subdivision Map Act, and may also have to go through the PD process, involving public hearings and meetings.
Ms. Battenberg understood if the Town were to add residential permitted uses to non-MOSO that would affect all non-MOSO properties in the Town of Moraga.
Vice Mayor Woehleke stated the planning process would consider all potential impacts, as previously identified, and a project could evolve through the process. As a result, it was too early to address the detail level at this time and that included emergency egress, fire mitigation and clustering. Before anything was built it must be approved by the MOFD or CALFIRE and those agency's requirements were changing significantly.
Vice Mayor Woehleke commented that he had gone out to the Bollinger Canyon area to visit potential sites. He noted that nothing would be built unless the appropriate fire agencies signed off and they would be more prescriptive than they were years ago. Given the new laws for High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, some of the new laws about guaranteed housing would be exempted due to the fire risk and CAL FIRE still needed to identify risk factors in some of those areas.
The Police Department would also have to sign off on whether services could be provided to any future housing, and while Vice Mayor Woehleke shared the concerns with new housing in the subject area, that was not part of the scope at this time. He found it was too early to make decisions given the potential risks and pointed out some projects had not been built since the risks could not be addressed. He suggested that clustering should be an option and there were certain locations where it was the right thing to do and others where it was not. He referenced the Palos Colorados development where he would have rather had the 450 acres be split between 150 acres of 123 homes with one acre zoning, but which were really half-acre zoning due to the clustering and 300 acres of true open space. The same applied to the Bellavista Development, whereby if clustering was not allowed housing may have been allowed in Coyote Gulch. He noted Town Council Regular Meeting 12 May 25, 2022
it was a trade-off. The subject area had been a Study Area for years and the Town Council had been tasked to identify appropriate zoning for the property. He suggested what the Town Council had decided in February 2022 was the right compromise, the RR Zoning District was not dense, clustering could occur in the semi-flat area, and it would not be visible from the scenic corridor along St. Mary's Road since it was a recessed area.
Councilmember Makker pointed out they were not close to any development or a PD and many of the comments raised would be more applicable when a development application had been submitted. She was open to exploring flexibility and distance between clusters but stated it was challenging to see what that would look like in writing. She wanted to see the Town Council complete its goal on rezoning the Bollinger Canyon Study Area. As to the definition of agriculture, she was pleased with the change that had been made based on public comment, which was the type of iterative process the Town Council should be striving for and further refining, and to track the County definition made sense. She suggested the definition was not too vague and the term "objectionable" was in the context of odor, smoke, dust and fumes. She had no problem with the definition as proposed by staff.
Mayor Sos suggested in terms of the RR Zoning District the Town Council had very thorough, considered and productive discussions with myriad factors and agreed that was the best call for the property under the circumstances and should not be revisited. She agreed a number of concerns had been raised that needed to be addressed and she thanked the public for the extensive input, although some of the items could not be addressed now at a level of detail. The current focus was to ensure that the changes to the General Plan and changes to the MMC would effectuate the zoning the Town Council had decided would be consistent with the look and feel and character of the property and the General Plan. She encouraged the reinforcement of those General Plan principles as appropriate, although clustering and other things were still subject to many other development standards and requirements.
Mayor Sos suggested there should be consistency between the RR Zoning District and Non- MOSO and MOSO Open Space and it was important to incorporate what already existed and not try to create new things that only applied to this part of the Town. She also agreed with the definition of agriculture and thanked staff and the property owners who were already engaged in agricultural activities for coming up with a solution since the Town did not want to prohibit something that was already being done, and the Town wanted to respect and celebrate the heritage and tradition of agriculture uses in the Town. She thanked staff and the consultant for all of their hard work and for continuing to engage the community and obtain input.
Ms. Hamid summarized the Town Council direction to staff to move forward with 1-DUA per five acres with a new RR Zoning District, with a closer look at the details for clustering, possible buffering and other provisions.
Ms. Battenberg added that staff would follow up and evaluate whether the 1-DUA per five acres made sense for the third property owner who asked to be included in the new RR Zoning District.
The next step would be the environmental review and staff would come back with language following the entire EIR process, which would include further opportunities for feedback and comments from the public.
Mayor Sos declared a recess at 8:43 p.m. The Town Council reconvened at 8:51 p.m. with all Councilmembers and staff present via Zoom.
B. St. Mary's Road Double Roundabouts
Consider Resolution 53-2022 Adopting an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the St. Mary's Road Roundabouts at Rheem Boulevard and Bollinger Canyon Road Project (CIP No. 14-604) in Accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); Appropriating $37,000 from Fund 799 - Town Council Regular Meeting 13 May 25, 2022
Lamorinda Fee and Finance Authority; and Closing Out the Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Analysis Phase of the Project Mayor Sos understood the Town Council was not being asked to make a "go" or "no go" decision on the actual construction of roundabouts but take certain steps necessary to close out the engineering and environmental phase of the project and set aside funds in the upcoming fiscal year to allow staff to pursue grant funding for future work on the project.
Ms. Battenberg explained she had received a number of questions regarding the staff report, and it had become clear that the process that had occurred in 2018 whereby multiple different scenarios and options had been researched and information put forward on safety, cost and benefits had not been shared with the current Town Council or the public. The Public Works Director/Town Engineer was asked to include that information in the PowerPoint presentation.
Public Works Director/Town Engineer Shawn Knapp introduced Associate Civil Engineer Mark Summers and John Pulliam, Lead Project Manager and Alex Jewell, Environmental Lead, Consultants with Kimley-Horn and Associates who were working on the contract for the conceptual design of a double roundabout at St. Mary's Road at Rheem Boulevard and Bollinger Canyon Road.
Mr. Knapp provided a PowerPoint presentation of the St. Mary's Road Double Roundabouts which included an overview of the project location at St. Mary's Road/Rheem Boulevard/Bollinger Canyon Road and highlighted the history and studies conducted in 2009 and 2015, and the 2016 Town Council Goal to Complete design and financing plan for 2-full sized roundabouts and secure grant funding to develop 35 percent design; with the improvements proposed to address existing insufficient stopping, sight distance and visibility issues, insufficient capacity to accommodate planned future growth, and the Town's "Walk | Bike Plan" which had identified those two intersections for improvements. The Alternatives: Benefit/Cost Analysis including performance measures and Caltrans Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) and examples of roundabouts in other jurisdictions in the Bay Area were highlighted.
Mr. Knapp described Rheem Concept 1: Existing Configuration; Rheem Concept 2: Roundabout; Rheem Concept 3: Traffic Signal; Alternative: Mini-Roundabout; and Alternatives: Benefit/Cost Analysis Results. He explained the Safety Roundabout Features that would reduce the number of conflict points from a typical intersection, single decision points for drivers, and crash type/severity that would be greatly reduced by reducing head-on and T-bone collisions. Additional overview was provided on the accumulated costs between the proposed alternatives at St. Mary's Road and Rheem Boulevard.
Mr. Knapp detailed the concept as approved by prior Town Councils for a double roundabout, with a larger roundabout at Rheem Boulevard and St. Mary's Road and a smaller roundabout at Bollinger Canyon Road and St. Mary's Road. He also highlighted the environmental phase of the project in coordination with numerous agencies and stated the Town had participated in an Interagency Meeting to discuss the project on May 13, 2021. Regulatory permits would be required for the wetland areas and preferred mitigation for impacts on the Alameda Whipsnake and Red-Legged Frog would require the purchase of credits at Oursan Ridge Conservation Bank, with the project also required to incorporate stormwater treatment and management measures.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) had evaluated the project's potential environmental effects but did not address the merits of the project itself. An Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) had been prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates in accordance with CEQA and on December 9, 2021 a Notice of Intent to Adopt an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration had been submitted to the State Clearinghouse and had been posted at the Contra Costa County Recorder's office for a 45-day review period. No significant project impacts had been identified. Potentially significant Impacts were less than significant with Town Council Regular Meeting 14 May 25, 2022
mitigation incorporated and mitigation measures included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). Mitigation measures would be required for air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology/soils, land use/planning, noise, tribal cultural resources, and mandatory findings of significance.
As part of the CEQA, Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) notices had been provided to owners and occupants of all properties within 600-feet of the project site via mail and notices had been posted at several locations around the Town, including the project site. The Draft IS/MND had been posted on the Town's website. On January 24, 2022, the public comment period had closed.
In addition, and in accordance with Assembly Bill 52, Tribal and Cultural Resources, staff had contacted 17 tribal representatives. One consultation had been requested by a Tribal Chair of the Confederated Villages of Lisjan Tribe and had been held on January 5, 2022 via Zoom. As a result, the IS/MND had been revised to require consultation with a Native American monitor during land disturbing activities. A letter had also been received from the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) to notify the Town of underground water lines within the project limits.
Mr. Knapp requested the Council adopt the resolution contained in Attachment A to the staff report.
Ms. Battenberg added that staff was also asking for direction since there was $140,000 from Fund 799, Lamorinda Fee and Finance Authority (LFFA), which had been allocated for the project. The project had come under budget and there was an additional $70,000. The Town Council was asked to discuss whether the Town should budget for Phase 2 and use $50,000 of those funds to pursue grant funding for the roundabouts.
Responding to the Council, Mr. Knapp explained that the cost estimate of $500,000 for storm treatment had come from the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) in the last couple of years and had not accounted for the new permit to be issued. The Town was required to treat additional amounts of acreage in the next three years as part of Capital Improvement Projects.
John Pulliam, Lead Project Manager, Kimley-Horn, added that they were at the end of the preliminary phase and as part of the work they were looking at what was required to comply with the RWQCB requirements about stormwater treatment, which treatment improvements had not yet been designed. The amount of space needed within the project as part of the engineering process had been determined and would include bio-retention swale features that would detain water, allow it to infiltrate, and be treated and cleaned before being discharged into a surface creek. The bio-retention swale would be a light-weight earth filled material that would be planted and allow water to infiltrate down into the ground and allow for plant materials. At the end of the structure there would be a weir or something else to allow large vents to discharge into the normal body of water.
Mr. Knapp described the project as one that would position the Town for the future since it took time to develop and secure funding for a later date and it had to be progressed forward as desired.
He acknowledged there were other safety projects the Town Council had looked at and were considering. Staff was not asking that the project advance to the design phase at this time but consider strategies for additional funding into the future to position the project for grants, all to be done in conjunction with the direction from the Town Council. He reiterated the project was at the 35 percent design phase. He explained that the intent was for the Town to complete the work in the agreement with the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA). Adoption of the MND would be the completion of that work. There were cost savings since not all funds had been expended, and if it was the desire of the Town Council, some of those funds could be set aside to apply for grants for something in the future.
Town Council Regular Meeting 15 May 25, 2022
Ms. Battenberg again detailed the direct costs over the past five and a half-year period as shown in the staff report at $111,000.
As to the staff time spent on the project over the years, Mr. Knapp clarified he could not speak to the staff time involved in two of the previous studies prior to his employment with the Town.
Ms. Battenberg clarified the Town had capital improvement projects, many of which or some staff had included administrative costs which were charged against the project and that had occurred for this project. Some of the capital projects where there was insufficient funding for staff time had been charged to the Department and that total was in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Budget.
Mr. Knapp reiterated the project had not been funded to move to another phase, staff was asking the Town Council to consider setting aside funds to look at grant opportunities and then staff would return and inquire whether it was something that the Town Council wanted to pursue. The Town staff time and another feasibility analysis by another firm along with the costs for Kimley- Horn's work had been outlined in the staff report. The Town had been reimbursed the complete amount from the CCTA and all information was in the staff report.
Ms. Battenberg understood the Town Council could decide to hold off until next year. The Town had the LFFA funding and could allocate those funds for next year and then postpone the project rather than give back the LFFA funding and request it come back.
Mr. Knapp confirmed that staff and the consultants could be asked to come back and provide more detailed information since the Town had the funding and investigate grants but absent funding the Town could not do anything. If the Town Council desired to shelve the project, he noted the project was 35 percent ready and could be evaluated next year as part of the normal CIP evaluations. He reiterated the Town had been completely reimbursed by the CCTA which had paid all grant funding for the project. The LFFA funds that had been retained were managed by the Town and those funds would go back into the Town's LFFA account, which had been proposed for the savings of the project. While the project could be postponed to next year, some funds would be necessary for the consultant to provide additional details that may be directed by the Town Council.
Mr. Knapp also clarified the purpose of the LFFA funds, which were development transportation impact fees intended for projects that would help the Town on a regional and local level to address traffic impacts and could apply to other projects that qualified under that definition criteria.
Ms. Battenberg stated the LFFA funds could not be applied to the Corliss Drive Sidewalk Project since that was not a joint Lamorinda project.
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Karl Davis, Moraga, stated the intersections under discussion had been worked on by Town staff for some time but he suggested the most obvious solution would be to come straight across from Rheem Boulevard, align Bollinger Canyon Road with Rheem Boulevard, and align St. Mary's Road with itself at Rheem Boulevard coming from The Bluffs so that the road would be straight and at elevation. While he had recommended that approach during the May 24, 2022 Planning Commission meeting, he had been informed that was not feasible. He suggested the Town Council accept the IS/MND but staff had not been working on the most obvious solution and that should be the direction from the Town Council.
Mr. Davis referenced a roundabout design located at Arlington Avenue in the City of Berkeley that was a beautiful design, but when the City of Lafayette had installed one at Olympic Circle, it had been a poor idea made worse with bypass lanes. He suggested there was no reason not to Town Council Regular Meeting 16 May 25, 2022
consider the approach he had described that would resolve the safety concerns raised about the development of the Bollinger Canyon Valley and impacts to Bollinger Canyon Road.
Danielle Ginestro, Moraga, explained that she had been a proponent for roundabouts for several years and she had spoken on this topic before. As a resident of The Bluffs, she viewed traffic speeding through the "S" curve, had seen first-hand the challenges with turning movements, and had viewed at least three rollover accidents in the "S" curve. There were several limited sight lines from the City of Lafayette onto Bollinger Canyon Road with little room to pass on the right- hand side, and there were challenges seeing vehicles when the sun set, with visibility issues on Rheem Boulevard onto St. Mary's Road traveling from Moraga into Lafayette. Given the unsafe driving conditions she agreed that roundabouts would be helpful. She disagreed with the previous speaker about the roundabout located in Lafayette and spoke to the traffic impacts on Rheem Boulevard during afternoon hours when school was out. She commented that when the development of Bollinger Canyon occurred those intersections would continue to be an issue for the Town.
Ann Walgenbach, Moraga, agreed and suggested the Lafayette roundabout was functional. She expressed concern with the lack of safety data to support the St. Mary's Road Double Roundabouts. She also commented on the challenges of pedestrians trying to cross Rheem Boulevard and spoke to the "creep" of traffic coming from the left to the right, which was difficult to manage, particularly when school was out and with traffic from Highway 24 creating dangerous and unsafe conditions.
Steven Roberts, Moraga, stated he used to own Perry's Ranch located at the end of Bollinger Canyon Road at 267 acres and had traveled the intersection frequently and was aware of the challenges. He reported he had executed a 100,000 yard landslide repair around 20 years ago at Julianna Court behind Sanders Ranch. In that case, a roundabout in Sanders Ranch had been a challenge for the heavy equipment involved in the landslide repair to navigate and that roundabout was not centered. If roundabouts were considered, he suggested they be large enough to accommodate the type of equipment haulers that could be anticipated for any development along Bollinger Canyon Road. He suggested the use of stop signs was the least expensive option and better for safety.
Mayor Sos read the following statement that had been requested to be read into the record.
Brent Meyers, Would the Town Council please, kindly and mercifully, put this unaffordable and over-engineered roundabout fantasy out of its (and our collective) misery? On at least two prior occasions, the council has indicated this expensive, time consuming and unrealistic exploration should be halted, only to be convinced by staff that doing so prematurely (before the EIR) purportedly would result in having to return already-expended grant funding. Now that the EIR is before you, let's accept the report and shut this down. If there is a legitimate need and desire among residents and the Council for a different traffic configuration at the St Mary's/Rheem/Bollinger intersections, an affordable and commonsense solution should be explored. One like Lafayette's dual-signal project on Reliez Station (near Olympic) that was accomplished for under $1 million. Not an $8 million dual roundabout. The folly of roundabouts that needlessly would be an order of magnitude more expensive than other viable, realistic and eminently more affordable solutions (along with the associated waste of staff time AND resident tax money) needs to end tonight.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Councilmember Onoda recalled last seeing the project in 2018 at which time the question had been asked whether two roundabouts on an "S" curve with a creek had ever been built and the Town Council at that time had been informed there had not. While she liked roundabouts, she commented that three stop signs had not been considered, should be attempted first, and if there Town Council Regular Meeting 17 May 25, 2022
was a problem the Town could then consider the next solution. She did not support the allocation of funds for Phase 2. She otherwise appreciated and thanked the public for all their emails.
Councilmember McCluer agreed and stated the Town needed the facts and data to identify a safety issue. Given the costs, he suggested a three-sided stop should be considered and cut- through traffic should be discouraged. He suggested a three-sided stop would promote safety in an area with speeding and noted that as one continued down St. Mary's Road into Lafayette there were five stop signs. He was not willing to move forward, was unsure roundabouts were the answer and did not want to allocate funds for potential grants given the unknowns. He needed to see more information and suggested the project be stopped, shelved and brought back next year.
Councilmember McCluer also explained there were school safety projects that were more important including the Corliss Drive Sidewalk Project and there were issues at Joaquin Moraga (JM) Intermediate School.
Vice Mayor Woehleke commented that when traveling the world, he liked roundabouts but the Town was suffering from a project that had gone on too long in a preliminary stage. He wanted to see the issue narrowed down to a roundabout rather than a three-way stop sign. He was also uncertain the project objective was safety related or whether the objective was the anticipation of increased traffic flow due to development in Bollinger Canyon. He supported the acceptance of the IS/MND to bring the project to that milestone but was uncertain there was sufficient information to move forward. He was concerned with the project budget and money spent to date and whether the project could become a continual financial drain. He wanted staff to work on viable worthwhile projects, and if there was justification for a roundabout, he could support that as being worthwhile.
He understood there were some challenges due to the creek and slopes which could be driving costs, but he questioned the overall cost of the project.
Vice Mayor Woehleke also understood there had been rollover accidents and asked about other alternatives that could be considered to stop rollovers that would be less radical and not require force fitting roundabouts into a tight space, including how to change the behaviors of drivers. As to the budget, he again expressed concerned stringing the project along absent a compelling reason to do so.
Councilmember Makker had not heard from staff that the school safety projects were deprioritized or secondary in any way in that the issue was whether the roundabouts should be on the list of continued priorities. If the project was dropped and the Town stopped looking at sources of grant funding, opportunities would be lost as to whether this was a viable path. She was in agreement with the comments already made and was uncertain that a solution had been presented that this was the way to go. If that meant the Town would lose the opportunities to explore whether or not this was a viable path she was okay with that.
Mayor Sos thanked the public for their comments about the situation on Bollinger Canyon Road and acknowledged those concerns and thanked staff for the work done to this point to reach the 35 percent design to close the first chapter. She did not see this project as the top priority. Given the already full Public Works Department workload, she suggested this project was not a must have that should take up more staff time and funding, which did not mean this intersection would be eliminated from consideration in that the Town Council and staff constantly considered a holistic level on where to invest in safety. While the Town may lose on the roundabout funding, she imagined it could obtain funding for other safety and mitigation measures.
Mayor Sos agreed the Town Council should not move the project forward to Phase 2, the project should be shelved and staff should continue to evaluate the intersections in the larger context of ongoing capital improvement projects and traffic safety measures.
Town Council Regular Meeting 18 May 25, 2022
Mr. Knapp stated that three extensive studies had been prepared with all details and there had been three public meetings going over all of the data, different options and refining them. The item before the Town Council was not intended to go over that information again but close out the current contract, as earlier described. He agreed the intersections had challenges and issues and explained that placing a three-way stop was an issue given that stop signs were the number one cause of accidents in intersections and there would be more cost to placing stop signs to properly to protect the Town's interests. Staff would look at all options available and report back to the Town Council and would take Town Council direction on the prioritization of projects.
By consensus, the Town Council determined not to carry over money into the budget for further work on this item.
ACTION: It was M/S (Woehleke/McCluer) to adopt Resolution 53-2022 Adopting an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the St. Mary's Road Roundabouts at Rheem Boulevard and Bollinger Canyon Road Project (CIP No. 14-604) in Accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); Appropriating $37,000 from Fund 799 - Lamorinda Fee and Finance Authority; and Closing Out the Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Analysis Phase of the Project. Roll Call Vote: 5-0.
C. Contra Costa County Animal Services Agreement
Consider Resolution 54-2022 Approving the Interagency Agreement with the Contra Costa County Animal Services (CCAS) Department for Animal Control Services Pursuant to the Town of Moraga Purchasing Policy and Authorizing the Town Manager to Execute the Agreement
Chief of Police Jon King presented the staff report and asked the Town Council to adopt the resolution contained in Attachment A of the staff report.
Police Chief King clarified there was no alternative to the Contra Costa Animal Services (CCAS) Agreement. He and the Town Manager had conversations with out of County agencies that provided annual animal services, but nothing had developed. CCAS was open to alternative services but currently the Town did not have the staff to consider animal services.
Ms. Battenberg confirmed that Chief King had considered alternatives and had taken a lot of time reviewing the CCAS Agreement and negotiating some of the finer points. She and Chief King had sent a strong message to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors (BOS) and Supervisor Candace Andersen that the costs should be allocated based on use and not based on per capita since the Town of Moraga was paying more for services received than other cities and a different methodology would be more equitable.
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Mayor Sos reported no comments had been received for this item.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Councilmember McCluer thanked the Police Chief and the Town Manager for working to manage the Town's funds and the County's willingness to consider benchmarking.
Mayor Sos also thanked the Police Chief and the Town Manager for getting the "true up" and for their continued advocacy for changing the formula for usage across the board, which was the best way the Town could get the needed services.
Town Council Regular Meeting 19 May 25, 2022
ACTION: It was M/S (Onoda/McCluer) to adopt Resolution 54-2022 Approving the Interagency Agreement with the Contra Costa County Animal Services Department for Animal Control Services Pursuant to the Town of Moraga Purchasing Policy and Authorizing the Town Manager to Execute the Agreement. Roll Call Vote: 5-0.
Town Council Reorganization
Reorganization of the Town Council Mayor and Vice Mayor Mayor Sos presented the staff report and asked the Town Council to complete the Town Council Reorganization as detailed in Resolution 6-2022, included as Attachment A to the staff report.
She thanked the Vice Mayor for his partnership and collaboration over the past five months and stated she would support him as he had supported her.
Vice Mayor Woehleke stated the last five months had been a pleasure and the Mayor had included him in decision making and the process had worked out well. He had no intention to change Committee assignments and to the great extent this was a minor switch. He encouraged the Town Council to continue its good work for the remainder of the year.
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Karl Davis, Moraga, appreciated the agreement the Mayor and Vice Mayor had made for this transition and was pleased things would remain stable, predictable and polite.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Councilmember McCluer thanked Mayor Sos for her leadership through the first half of the year.
He also encouraged Councilmembers to continue to listen and talk to one another.
Councilmember Makker appreciated the collaborative spirit, appreciated Mayor Sos' leadership and looked forward to working with Mayor Woehleke.
Councilmember Onoda congratulated Mayor Woehleke and Vice Mayor Sos for handling everything so nicely. She looked forward to the future.
No action was taken and the Town Council Reorganization occurred as stipulated in Resolution 6-2022.
11. DISCUSSION ITEMS
There were no Discussion Items.
12. COUNCIL REQUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember McCluer offered a motion to request a future agenda item to discuss and clarify whether the Small Business Grant Program should include non-profits at the next meeting of the Town Council scheduled for June 8, 2022.
Vice Mayor Woehleke seconded the motion.
ACTION: It was M/S (McCluer/Woehleke) to request a future agenda item to discuss and clarify whether the Small Business Grant Program should or should not include non- profits at the next meeting of the Town Council scheduled for June 8, 2022. Roll Call Vote:
2-3. Noes: Makker, Onoda, Sos.
Town Council Regular Meeting 20 May 25, 2022
13. COMMUNICATIONS
There were no communications.
14. ADJOURNMENT
Councilmember McCluer requested the meeting adjourn in honor of new Mayor Steve Woehleke and outgoing Mayor Renata Sos.
ACTION: It was M/S (McCluer/Makker) to adjourn the meeting at 10:21 p.m. In Honor of new Mayor Steve Woehleke and outgoing Mayor Renata Sos. Roll Call Vote: 5-0.
Respectfully submitted by:
Ments Militi
Marty C. Mclnturf, Town Clerk
Approved by the Town Council:
Hor Wadit
Steve Woehleke, Mayor
Town Council Regular Meeting 21 May 25, 2022