[0:00] Gentlemen, I would like to call the seedlings meeting of the Fairview municipal, yeah, fairview municipal advisory council to order, and that's to this.

[0:14] May we may we have the roll

[0:24] council council member farmer, here council member Higgins, vise chair roads here chair filled in here we have a quorum.

[0:37] Thank you.

[0:41] We will now.

[0:43] You need to turn that off please.

[0:48] Okay.

[1:01] How about now?

[1:03] All right.

[1:04] Can we all please stand for the pledge of allegiance?

[1:17] Still good.

[1:23] All right.

[1:25] Good job, Ashley.

[1:28] Ready?

[1:28] Again.

[1:29] I pledge allegiance to the flag.

[1:32] The United States of America.

[1:33] I

[1:50] now like to open for public comment.

[1:55] Jimmy, dang.

[2:00] Oh, I'm sorry. Hold on.

[2:07] I'm seeing none. Am I right? Seeing none. No, we have no public comments for the roll call in the pledge.

[2:16] All right. Seeing none, I will close public comment.

[2:24] So we have two forms of public comment one on what we just did.

[2:29] And then the next one on items that are not on the agenda.

[2:34] So now I'm going to open public comment for items that are not on the agenda.

[2:39] Okay, so our first speaker is Jimmy Dang.

[2:48] Hi.

[2:50] Thank you for allowing me to speak today.

[2:53] I just want to come and introduce myself to people who don't know who I am.

[2:56] My name is Jimmy Dang.

[2:57] I'm the general manager or a Loma sanitary district.

[3:00] I want to come and provide information about who we are.

[3:05] And just so that, you know, I left business cards on the table over there in case you guys have any questions about what we provide you and what we do provide you is your sewer service and also your garbage recycling the organic screen cart collection as well.

[3:20] last going on at the district recently we're going through elections now so we recently went from

[3:25] at large representation to districting that transition is happening currently lots of capital projects

[3:32] going on at the treatment plant you also see a lot of sewer line replacement projects in the

[3:36] streets and so just want to make sure I'm available to you guys and offer any assistance or answers

[3:44] any questions you guys may have again feel free to reach out my cards out there and so let's

[3:49] much. Thank you. Thank you very much. Rita Duncan.

[4:03] I'm Rita Duncan and good evening. I happened

[4:07] to be on the board for our former Secretary District and since we are now by district, I am representing

[4:15] District 5 which fair view is part of District 5 and wanted to let everyone know that I'm running

[4:24] and that I would appreciate your vote of it on the board since 2016 when I was appointed and

[4:35] running for real election and I have some suckers too. Anyway, you'll see my signs throughout

[4:43] the community. It says Rita Duncan for our Loma and on November the 3rd, I would hope that

[4:51] would consider voting for me. Thank you.

[4:54] Thank you.

[4:58] Call her.

[5:00] You're on the line. We're on public comment. You have three minutes, Brenda?

[5:04] Yes. I wanted to have a public comment about public comments. The Brown Act is absolutely specifically clear.

[5:14] I'm public comments,

[5:19] there's some discretion, but should happen before and or during a board's consideration of the matter.

[5:31] Most California special agencies and commissions do a motion in a second by the board.

[5:39] Then they take additional public comments or they do the public comments clearly and make sure everybody gets to speak before.

[5:50] But the beauty of breaking your hand during the board's consideration is many times the motion has little or nothing to do with the presentation and it gets really confusing for us in the public.

[6:04] But there's a couple of things that are not changeable in the Brown Act.

[6:11] And public input is priority and should not be disallowed.

[6:18] It should always be before and during board consideration.

[6:23] Some max of do with that way and it's very fair for us to put our hand up and it's really hard when we're not recognized.

[6:31] We might have something to say.

[6:33] but please represent the public and in what you do,

[6:38] make sure you always take public comment before,

[6:42] and if you can, if there's any question in your deliberation,

[6:48] recognize hands that might be up to clarify something.

[6:52] So I appreciate it, or Google,

[6:54] Brian Act and California,

[6:56] and you can read all this yourself.

[6:57] You don't have to hear from me.

[6:59] Thank you.

[7:01] Thank you.

[7:05] Call her, you're on the line for a public comment.

[7:09] Hi, good evening.

[7:10] This is CHP Officer, Jen Papstein, apologize that I am not there in person.

[7:15] I was out on the road and had to log in from my phone.

[7:19] I just wanted to check in and let you know that CHP is continuing to be proactive in the fair

[7:24] review area.

[7:25] In August, we issued 20 traffic citations and took 10 non-injury crashes.

[7:31] There were no injury crashes reported or that we responded to, and we arrested one DUI driver.

[7:38] There were no misdemeanor arrests and no stolen vehicles recovered through our department in the Fairview area.

[7:46] Some passive in, I'd like to mention, was national night out.

[7:50] We did have officers drive through the area, but no one pointed out that there was any neighborhood gathering.

[7:57] So next year, if anyone's planning a neighborhood gathering, we'd love to hear about it and have an officer come say hi to you.

[8:06] Some ongoing enforcement that we're doing is continuing our regional side-show enforcement task force, trying to prevent side-to-activity in the Southern Alameda County area.

[8:16] and lately our focus has been on school zones making sure that the pedestrians are safe and

[8:22] drivers are obeying the traffic laws and there's no collisions occurring at school pick up and drop off.

[8:32] Some upcoming events that we have this Saturday this weekend on September 5th from 9 a.m. to 2 o'clock

[8:39] there's a car seat checkup event at our office here. If you know anyone who has a young

[8:46] child and that rides in a car seat, please contact our office to schedule an appointment to have

[8:52] that car seat installed properly. Car seats definitely help save lives and we want to make sure

[8:58] that all of our children are safe while riding in motor vehicles. We also have our holiday enforcement

[9:03] period coming up on this weekend, Labor Day weekend, starting September 4th through September 8th.

[9:11] We're going to have a lot of officers out patrolling, making sure that everyone is getting to their

[9:16] destination safely. Upcoming education on September 17th here at our CHP Hayward office at 6 o'clock

[9:24] PM. We're going to have our start smart class for our youth between the ages of 15 and 21.

[9:30] you can call our office to schedule a spot to have a teenager, get some information on how to be

[9:37] safe while driving. And September is California Pedestrian Safety Month. The CHP is raising awareness

[9:43] about the risks to pedestrians on the road and the importance of ensuring safe travel for pedestrians.

[9:50] As a pedestrian, you can't expect or what you should be able to, but we just want to make sure

[9:55] that you're safe and paying attention to vehicles on the road and safely crossing the street.

[9:59] And as-

[10:00] As always, I'll take some traffic complaints. You can email us at 345 reckless driving at CHP.ca.gov or call our office at 510-489-150.

[10:11] Thank you. Have a good meeting.

[10:14] Thank you so much.

[10:21] Caller, you're on the lawn. You have three minutes, Ali.

[10:25] Good evening. Fairview and Mac. This is Ali Aversut, the planning department. I'm sorry that I can't be there in person this evening.

[10:31] I wanted to dial in to invite the neck members and the wider fair view community to participate in a community wide urban forest planning workshop that our department is hosting on September 29th from 530 to 7pm at the San Lorenzo library.

[10:48] So, this is going to be the first of four community workshops over the next couple of years about the

[10:54] unincorporated urban forest plan, which I spoke to your committee about a couple of months ago, I believe.

[11:01] And this is a plan that our department is just now beginning to work on with funding from Cal Fire.

[11:06] So, this first meeting will be an opportunity to learn about the unincorporated urban forest

[11:12] generally and the county's urban forestry goals and how this unincorporated urban forest plan that

[11:19] were developing can help the county meet those goals. So again, that meeting is September 29

[11:24] from 530 to 7pm at the San Lorenzo Library. You can show up without registering or if you'd like

[11:32] to register in advance, you can do that at our website. The link is at www.acgov.org slash cda slash

[11:41] planning slash trees-links.htm and I know that's a really long URL so Ashley has also been

[11:49] so kind as to put some flyers about the workshop with the registration link on the back

[11:53] table and those are two-sided and English and Spanish. If you are unable to attend the workshop

[11:59] you can actually use that same link that's on the flyer to take a survey which is open now

[12:04] through the end of the month and this is the place where you can tell us about your priorities related

[12:09] to trees in the unincorporated areas.

[12:13] So we definitely encourage you to do both.

[12:15] Attend the workshop and take the survey if you're able.

[12:19] So thanks so much for your time and we hope you'll consider attending.

[12:22] If you have any questions at all, my email is Allison,

[12:27] ALISON.abbers, baby, B-O-R-S at acgov.org.

[12:32] And my number is 510-6705428.

[12:36] Thanks.

[12:37] Okay, thank you very much.

[12:40] I have no other speakers for public comment.

[12:43] Okay.

[12:44] Since we have no more speakers for public comment, public comment is now closed.

[12:52] Now we're going to take a look at approving the minutes.

[12:57] Let's see.

[12:58] We have two sets of minutes to be approved.

[13:02] I believe.

[13:03] Just just just turn.

[13:05] That is the first one is for know what?

[13:12] And we approved the just July, did we approve, did we do June, I

[13:22] thought it said in these minutes that the June ones were, just a minute,

[13:30] or are they here, I have too much, I'm not supposed to say that you don't want to hear that,

[13:47] we continued the approval of June fourth, minutes to the next meeting, is what it says here in the minutes for

[13:58] July.

[14:06] That is, actually, that is what I thought I remembered, but I don't happen to have a copy

[14:11] of those minutes currently. Yeah, I am going to look at your previous at the June meeting to

[14:20] see if anything you can approve the minutes that are in front of you and then at your next meeting

[14:25] we can bring back any unapproved minutes. Okay, so the question is though if those June minutes

[14:33] We're in fact approved in this, these minutes need to be changed, but if they weren't approved, then it's right the way it is.

[14:43] Okay, give me, give me just a few minutes to look.

[14:48] If you'd like to move on to the regular calendar and then we can come back to this while I look with Tisa, we can do that.

[14:56] Okay, so, do I need to ask for a public comment around?

[15:01] No, you would just ask for public comment once you've taken up the minutes as an item.

[15:07] Okay. So we're going to delay the minutes until a little bit later in the meeting until we can confirm whether these minutes are correct on that particular point.

[15:16] All right. So here they are.

[15:29] Sorry. Why aren't I seeing?

[15:36] Here we go. I think this is fine.

[15:40] All right, the first item on the agenda is the affordable housing production policies update, inclusionary,

[15:48] zoning.

[15:49] This is an informational item, so we will not be voting.

[15:53] It is simply for information and the public and we will have an opportunity to ask questions.

[16:01] Good evening, though.

[16:03] Yes, if you'll just introduce yourself, that would be great.

[16:07] Thank you.

[16:07] Good evening council members. My name is Angelica Gonzales, the Assistant Planning Director with the

[16:13] Alameda County Community Development Agency in the Planning Department in the policy planning

[16:18] of research division. Thank you so much for taking the time to hear this side in this evening.

[16:23] The item before you is on the updates on affordable housing, production policies, specifically on

[16:29] inclusionary zoning and ministerial review update as well as the financial feasibility analysis.

[16:34] As mentioned, this is informational, and so with that, I'd like to invite the project manager,

[16:40] Olivia Ortiz, on getting us started with this presentation.

[16:47] Hi, everybody. I'm Olivia Ortiz. They, the planner three with the planning department.

[16:54] So, like Angelica said tonight, we're going to be talking about affordable housing production policies,

[16:59] inclusionaries owning a ministerial review update. Specifically, our lovely consultant, Rick,

[17:05] we'll be going on in a moment to walk you through our financial feasibility analysis. That was attached

[17:10] the agenda. But next slide, please. Real quickly just taking a step back on why we're looking

[17:17] at these specific policies and kind of the counties overall approach to thinking about affordable housing.

[17:26] We have, as you may know, document called the housing element. It was adopted by the board

[17:31] supervisors back at the end of 2024. So one of the reasons why we're looking at these specific policies

[17:38] is because the board adopted the program I believe six J that directs us to look at creating

[17:47] an inclusionary zoning policy program for unincorporated Alameda County. So that's one part and then

[17:55] Overall, there's kind of,

[17:59] sorry, I think about the way I say this, a affordable housing,

[18:03] I feel like I'm not speaking into this, Mike, affordable housing is sort of a approach

[18:08] that that makes too much sense, affordable housing is kind of approached by advocacy orgs

[18:16] and government agencies with like the three p framework that's thinking about protecting housing,

[18:25] protect that to the first P, preserving housing and producing housing. Our regional planning

[18:32] organization called the Metropolitan Transportation Commission slash association of Bay Area

[18:39] government, or MTCA bag, has this whole other policy. We're not going to talk about tonight

[18:44] called the transit oriented communities policy. It doesn't really apply to fair view specifically

[18:50] except for the housing policy component of it, that, again, go, kind of go through the three

[18:58] keys that I just went through. Those three keys, we are expected to have policies if we

[19:04] want to comply with the transit oriented communities policy that fall into each of the keys

[19:09] until we got some money from MTC Abag to look at the production policies and staff like two years ago

[19:18] thought inclusionary zoning and perhaps an expansion of the county's

[19:21] ministerial approval might make sense. So long when did, but we've been

[19:25] we've been thinking through this for a while and making our way here. And now

[19:29] our delightful consultant Rick of street level advisors is going to tell you

[19:33] about it. Next slide, please.

[19:40] Great. Thank you. I'm out.

[19:47] What the switch? Turn it. Yeah, look at that. There we go. Yeah.

[19:55] great. Thank you. Thanks for having me. I'm Rick Chocobus, my firm is

[20:00] On street level advisers, we work with cities and counties. Excuse me. All over the country, on housing policies, housing

[20:10] affordability, and how do we get housing built for everybody? We've been working with

[20:14] Alameda County, on inclusionary housing and ministerial approval policies for unincorporated

[20:21] Alameda County, and I just want to walk you quickly through what these policies are, what

[20:29] they might be structured. We don't have a specific proposal to share where sort of giving you the

[20:34] the framework that we're thinking about. And I'll tell you a little bit about the economic analysis

[20:39] that we did, and then we'll take questions. And so I'm just going to tell you enough to give you

[20:44] chance to think of good questions. So the first thing is inclusionary zoning. Inclusionary zoning

[20:50] is a type of local housing policy where we require builders of market rate housing to include

[20:59] some affordable units.

[21:01] When we say affordable units, we mean units that are set aside with an income cap.

[21:06] You have to earn less than a certain amount of money to qualify to live there.

[21:09] And with a rent cap or a price cap.

[21:11] So the rent has to be affordable to somebody at your income level or the sales price has

[21:16] to be affordable to somebody at your income level.

[21:18] And so we require some portion of the units in a new building or a new subdivision

[21:24] or a new townhouse development to be set aside as affordable.

[21:29] And we often allow other options, so if the developer prefers not to have some units on

[21:35] site, sometimes they can pay a fee to sort of opt out of the program, and then that fee

[21:41] gets put into with other money that the county has put into another affordable building somewhere

[21:46] else, and we still get affordable housing as a result.

[21:50] Sometimes there are other options like donating land or other ways of complying.

[21:57] And typically, this becomes part of the land use policy of the jurisdiction in a sort of

[22:02] an expectation across all new market rate development.

[22:07] Next slide, please.

[22:13] So you can see, just as this is kind of like illustrating the two different, most common options.

[22:17] And then one option, you have a new building in the little purple spot or the affordable units in the building.

[22:22] And the other option is developer pays a fee.

[22:24] The money goes into a trust fund and then gets

[22:26] invested in a building that's all affordable housing.

[22:31] And both of them result in affordable housing,

[22:34] they're slightly different outcome in terms of like

[22:36] what it looks like in the community.

[22:39] Excite.

[22:42] There are several hundred of these programs around the country.

[22:47] It's something that is common.

[22:49] But you'll notice when you look at the map that we have here,

[22:51] And it's most common in the high cost parts of the country on the coasts, right?

[22:55] This is a strategy that communities have used to respond to rapidly rising housing prices.

[23:03] And to try to ensure that there's at least some affordability that happens when we get new housing

[23:08] development. And so it's the places that have been most expensive that have been most likely to adopt these policies.

[23:15] And they're very different from one place to the next. There's not one model that's exactly the same everywhere.

[23:20] It's very much custom designed for the local market

[23:23] and the local community.

[23:25] Next slide.

[23:28] And then in the Bay Area, this is very common.

[23:31] So the majority of jurisdictions in the Bay Area

[23:33] have an inclusionary housing policy of one kind or another.

[23:36] I think it's 75%.

[23:39] And many of them have been around for several decades

[23:42] and some of them are fairly new.

[23:44] But it's become a very widespread way

[23:46] for jurisdictions to meet the obligations

[23:50] that the state imposes on housing production and affordable housing production and it's very

[23:54] difficult to really meet the sort of rena requirements without having something like an

[24:00] inclusion or housing policy. Next slide.

[24:07] Ministerial approval is the other policy we're talking

[24:09] about at the same time and the county already has a limited program and what we're talking about here

[24:13] is possibly expanding the reach of that program and ministerial approval is just kind of a

[24:19] technical way of saying, writing the rules for approval of new developments in advance and then

[24:27] having the staff in the planning department review for compliance rather than having a

[24:34] public process with a lot of hearings around each building.

[24:37] And so what that does is it gives you an opportunity to be clear up front about what the rules

[24:43] are and it gives the developers the ability to feel like if their project is going to meet

[24:47] of the rules who's set set out, it will get approved on a timeline that's, you know, predictable.

[24:54] And so it takes some of the uncertainty out of the development process. And that's valuable to

[24:59] with all.

[25:00] So what we're talking about in this context is offering that, as an incentive, only for projects that provide affordable housing.

[25:08] Right? So if you're providing more deeply affordable housing, you can have a streamlined approval process for your new development.

[25:16] As long as it meets all the rules that we've set out in advance.

[25:20] And when you do it that way, one of the benefits for the developer is that the project is then exempt from sequa.

[25:26] They still have to comply with the plans that were, you know, went through the SQL process,

[25:30] but each individual project doesn't have to go through SQL because it's ministerially approved,

[25:36] approved by, you know, administratively rather than through a public body.

[25:43] Next slide.

[25:46] So just to kind of highlight the benefits, what we're talking about is a way to generate affordable housing,

[25:53] and meet those rena obligations where the county has to provide a certain number of units at each income level.

[25:58] And so this is sort of how we go about achieving those goals, and we're able to do it without coming up with new tax money from the voters in Elameda County, where piggybacking on development that might happen.

[26:14] It's something that you already have in your housing elements, so we're being consistent, we're implementing the housing element, you've already adopted.

[26:20] And one of the benefits is we get a little more economic integration when new developments happen.

[26:28] It's really common for them to be very expensive.

[26:31] And for the people that are moving in to be, in some sense, like, you know, they're paying a lot more than people who've already lived in the community.

[26:37] And so an inclusionary policy can create a way to have a more economically integrated community.

[26:43] We're not all high-end or low-end housing.

[26:46] It's mixed.

[26:49] The in Luffy's, if we collect them, can also be a really important way for the county to leverage other money.

[26:56] So when we get those fees, yeah, we don't get units on site, but sometimes we're able to use that money to get state money and federal money so that we can build even more affordable housing.

[27:06] And so those fees can be really valuable.

[27:08] And then lastly, adopting this policy brings the incorporating county in line with the rest of the bay area.

[27:15] So it makes it more similar to the other jurisdictions, which may or may not be a valuable goal in and of itself, but it sort of makes it easier for the development community to sort of say, oh, this is how it works everywhere.

[27:28] Next slide.

[27:32] Just to kind of reiterate a couple of the goals of the specific, as we've been, we've been collecting information, doing financial analysis, looking at the plans and the existing policies and the development that's happened in the Unincorporated County.

[27:45] and we sort of articulated a set of goals that we think are sort of the framework for how you might think about adopting these two policies and the first is to try to incentivize both market rate and affordable housing production.

[27:58] One thing you'll notice about inclusionary housing is that we don't get any affordable housing unless we also get market rate housing.

[28:05] It doesn't work. We can't require affordable housing if they're not building market rate housing.

[28:11] So we have to we have to make a policy that works both to produce more market rate housing and to produce more affordable housing.

[28:22] The depth of affordability is one of the big differences between different jurisdictions and I'll show you that in a second.

[28:28] But for unincorporated alley meeting county, we think it's important to sort of target more deeply affordable housing.

[28:35] rents that are going to be lower than some of the other programs and some of the other places

[28:39] in the region, just to fit with the market need here. We're also thinking that it's important

[28:47] to prioritize rental production, like building new rental housing and trying to get onsite rental

[28:54] housing through the program and to try to design the program so it's not to get in the way of rental

[28:59] housing production which is a little harder to do right now and we're wanting to make it

[29:06] so that you can adopt something now and this is not actually the optimal time as I'll

[29:10] tell you in a minute but to set it up so that it's possible for the county to sort of check

[29:15] this off its list right now even though the market is changing and there's some details that

[29:19] actually are difficult to set in place right now. We want to create a way for the county to monitor

[29:28] the payment of in Luffy's and the expenditure of in Luffy's, because sometimes those fees have not always been accounted for as well as you might want.

[29:36] And so people feel like they can see the affordable units when they're built in a building, but they don't know what happens to the fees.

[29:42] So we're trying to design that in from the start so that you can as community members hold the county accountable for delivering the housing that the policy is supposed to deliver.

[29:53] We're trying to design the program so that it qualifies for the TOC policy that Olivia was talking about with the MTC.

[30:00] See, they're wanting a set of policies to sort of fit a framework that they've laid out and it seems like we can do that here.

[30:08] And then last we're wanting to let the data about what the needs are and the opportunities are here drive the design of the policy.

[30:16] So, next slide.

[30:19] Let me just say a little bit about the economics and I think you got more information in your packet, but at the very high level there's a couple of really important things to notice.

[30:28] The first is this chart shows the affordable rents for a rental project and you know in affordable housing we do all the rents all the affordability is percent of area median income.

[30:42] So there's an area median income.

[30:44] It's the typical average income for a household. It's different for each household size and then we calculate what the rent is that's affordable to that sort of median level.

[30:55] And then a more affordable rent is some percentage of that.

[30:59] So like 80% of median is a little bit below average 50%

[31:04] of median is half of the average, right?

[31:08] So the blue bars are the rents that are affordable

[31:11] for studios one and two bedrooms for 50% of median income.

[31:17] And the orange bars are 60.

[31:19] The gray bars are 80% of median.

[31:22] And then that yellow bar on the side is,

[31:23] What we think the current rent is basically in Castro Valley

[31:27] for a newly constructed building.

[31:31] And so what you'll see here is that the rents at 80% of AMI

[31:35] are actually above the current market.

[31:39] Does that make sense?

[31:41] So would be challenging for the county to adopt a policy

[31:44] that said we're going to require 80% of AMI affordable units.

[31:48] So you'll see a lot of the other jurisdictions

[31:50] in the Bay Area, that's exactly what they require.

[31:52] So, your market rents are already more affordable than some of the affordable housing and some of the other parts of the Bay Area.

[32:00] Next slide.

[32:03] But this is the same chart but for ownership, and it looks really different, right?

[32:07] So, the blue chart is the sales price is now that it's 80% of median income, and then the orange is 100 and the grey is 120% of median income.

[32:18] So those people are above average in their earnings, but the yellow bars are assumed sales

[32:27] prices for newly constructed for sale units.

[32:33] And what you see is those are actually well above the affordable prices.

[32:37] So you have a situation where the rents are fairly low relative to the affordability targets,

[32:42] but the sales prices are not.

[32:43] And that says it's going to be easier to implement a requirement that there be a affordable

[32:49] for sale units than rental units.

[32:52] Next slide, and I'm happy to take questions about that.

[32:55] I know it's a lot of math.

[32:58] So we did a detailed financial feasibility analysis.

[33:01] We looked at several different types of projects.

[33:04] We interviewed real estate developers and a realtor's and others that are working in

[33:09] community. And we compiled sort of a snapshot of what does it look like to try to build housing

[33:17] in unincorporated alimity county right now. It's difficult to do because unincorporated alimity

[33:21] county is not really one place. It's a lot of different markets. But nonetheless, we had to have

[33:27] something to work from. So we've constructed a model. We've constructed a model and then we used it

[33:33] tests, some assumptions about what would happen if you imposed these kind of affordable housing

[33:39] requirements.

[33:41] And so the first thing to say is, right now is a really challenging time.

[33:45] We found that rental housing, even with no affordable housing requirement, was mostly not

[33:50] feasible in unincorporated Alameda County right now.

[33:53] It doesn't pencil, you know, is what the developers say pencil.

[33:57] It doesn't rent for more than it would need to to pay for the cost of construction.

[34:04] today. It's likely that that will change, as the market changes, as interest rates change,

[34:08] as demand change, that has been cyclical, it will cycle again, but we don't have a crystal

[34:14] ball about when or how. So that makes it difficult to require affordable housing right now.

[34:20] On the ownership side, that's not the case. Right now you can build for sale housing and

[34:26] unincorporate del many county and get a price that covers your costs and what we found when

[34:32] looked at modest requirements for some affordable housing is that it's possible to require affordable

[34:38] housing and still have projects that work but it's sensitive if you require too much you could

[34:44] create a situation where the requirement was a reason why someone might not build and again we don't

[34:49] get any affordable housing if we set that requirement too high so that's what we were testing for

[34:53] How sensitive is the development economics to that requirement and we found there's

[35:00] It's room to have an affordable housing requirement but it has to be modest relative to the rest of the Bay Area, where prices are much higher.

[35:10] We found a big difference in how much it costs to set aside an affordable unit between rental and ownership, which says you probably should have two different rules for what you have to do for rental and what you have to do for ownership.

[35:22] And lastly, we found that ministerial approval

[35:26] could mean a lot of different things, depending on how it's designed.

[35:31] But it hasn't at least the potential to be significant

[35:34] to offer real savings to a developer.

[35:37] They can get their project approved faster,

[35:40] but also more reliably.

[35:42] There's less risk.

[35:43] And those things are valuable.

[35:45] They're not by themselves going to be enough

[35:47] to make affordable housing work when it otherwise wouldn't.

[35:51] What it looks like does is that you could use it to offset a portion of the cost of complying with inclusionary zoning requirements.

[35:59] And so if you put these two together, you probably can have a slightly more financially feasible package than if you just did requirements alone.

[36:07] Next slide.

[36:10] So this is, I don't know if you can see this chart, but this is the inclusionary requirements for rental properties for other jurisdictions in the Bay area.

[36:19] and we've sort of selected at the Anatolian alamedic county.

[36:22] And what you'll see is that the requirements range

[36:25] from 6% in Hayward to 20% in Berkeley

[36:30] and Union City, and that the colors of the bars

[36:37] show that there's different income levels targeted

[36:39] by different programs.

[36:41] Our sense based on the economics study we did

[36:43] is that any policy for unincorporate alamedic county

[36:46] has to be at the low end of this spectrum.

[36:48] You can't require the same kind of affordability

[36:50] that they require in Berkeley, in unincorporated

[36:53] Alameda County, and so we're looking at options

[36:57] that are down at the low end

[36:58] where your requirements are relatively modest.

[37:02] Next slide.

[37:06] So just to give an example, Hayward requires 6% of affordable housing.

[37:10] So this is a 6% example for a rental project.

[37:14] If you had a 40 unit rental development,

[37:17] you built 40 apartments, and you

[37:19] That did you 6% affordable, and in this example, and this is not actually exactly Hayward's policy,

[37:25] but in this example, 6% at 60% of median income, that would mean you had to do 2 and a half units that were affordable.

[37:34] And so you know, you've got your head about the half unit, maybe you could choose to do 3,

[37:39] or maybe the policy would allow you to do 2 and pay a fee for that half a unit, right?

[37:46] And what you could imagine that you could have a policy that also said, well, if you used the

[37:54] ministerial approval process, you'd have to do two and a half units, but instead of it's

[37:59] 60% of media, now they would be at 50%.

[38:02] So we get deeper affordability and exchange for the sort of streamlined approval process.

[38:07] That's just an example.

[38:09] This isn't specifically a proposal, but we're just trying to make it real so you can think

[38:13] about, like, how would this work in our community?

[38:17] Next slide.

[38:20] So this is the same thing for ownership.

[38:23] These are the requirements for ownership projects

[38:26] in other jurisdictions in Elameda County.

[38:28] And again, they range from six percent,

[38:30] all the way up to 20 percent,

[38:33] generally the income targets are higher for ownership.

[38:35] So there is high as 120 percent of median

[38:38] in some of the jurisdictions.

[38:41] And again, Hayward is at the lower end.

[38:44] And so we're suggesting here again that you would want to be at the lower end of this spectrum that you'd be closer to Hayward than Newark or Berkeley or Emeryville and next slide please.

[39:00] So here's an example for an ownership project, imagine a 16 unit townhouse development where you had a requirement that was 6% of the units at 100% of median income.

[39:13] So that would be one affordable unit.

[39:15] So you'd build a 16 unit project and you'd set aside one unit at a hundred percent of median.

[39:21] And at a hundred percent of median that'd be about a five hundred thousand dollar town hall for a three-bedroom town hall.

[39:28] So you'd have town homes that were closer to a million dollars and then one that was close to half a million dollars.

[39:35] And if you wanted to use the ministerial approval process and have streamlined permitting

[39:40] The policy could, for example, require a lower affordability target, so 80% of median.

[39:46] So now the price would be more like $400,000 instead of $500.

[39:50] And it would target a lower, you know, less well off-family.

[39:54] So that's the idea.

[39:57] Again, this is just an example. There's not a final.

[40:00] Proposal but just to sort of make it concrete. Next slide.

[40:08] So, just to sort of recap, we're suggesting

[40:11] that you would have an inclusionary zoning requirement that would apply to projects with 11 or more units.

[40:18] So, you know, there's small enough projects that wouldn't have to bother with the headache of it, really.

[40:24] That you, we're suggesting that because of the weakness in the rental market right now,

[40:29] that you would have a, you'd have, the sport of surprises would adopt a requirement today,

[40:34] but the requirement wouldn't take effect right away. It would phase in over time.

[40:38] And you, you want to leave some time for the market to adjust.

[40:42] And if, at the time it was ready to phase in, the market still wasn't recovering,

[40:46] and you might want to delay it.

[40:47] But the idea is not to impose a requirement on a market that can't produce housing,

[40:51] But to give developers notice now that this requirement is coming so that as they're thinking about projects that they're not going to bring online for another couple of years they can put this into their math and they're financing and think about it and say, okay, we know we're going to eventually have to provide affordable units so we want the policy to be clear so there's a runway.

[41:13] We're suggesting that you prioritize 50 and 60% of AMI for rental and 80 and 100% of AMI

[41:19] for ownership just based on where the market is in uncorporate delimity county right now.

[41:25] And that you tilt the requirements for ownership projects to pay the unloofium.

[41:31] What I mean by that is that the gap is really big between what the market prices and what

[41:38] affordable prices for home ownership.

[41:40] And so you could possibly collect that money and cash and get more units if you spent the money.

[41:47] Whereas on rental, it won't be like that. You want the units on site.

[41:52] So we're suggesting that you make it a little bit easier or more attractive for developers

[41:56] of ownership projects to pay the fee. And a little bit less attractive for developers of rental projects to pay the fee.

[42:03] And then last we're suggesting as I showed that you use the ministerial approval as a sort of bonus incentive to help offset some of the cost of complying it all and also to make it possible for them to go a little bit further down the affordability spectrum.

[42:19] Next slide.

[42:21] I think that's my last slide. So back to Olivia.

[42:24] So that was a lot of information that kind of concludes the dense part of this presentation.

[42:30] This is our second stop on this road show last month we presented essentially the same thing to the Eaton Mac.

[42:38] We'll be in the same room in less than two weeks at the Caster Valley Mac.

[42:43] We hope to take all of your comments to the Planning Commission and unincorporated services at the end of September.

[42:49] and we will be taking all those comments to the board supervisors planning meeting in October

[42:56] fingers crossed tentative date to kind of present them whatever by thinking and receive additional

[43:01] direction from them on what direction this policy should go. We I guess didn't include too much

[43:08] for engagement work in this presentation but as some of you may know we have a ad hoc subcommittee

[43:14] So, um, we are hoping to gather our ad hoc subcommittee members again later this fall once we've gathered all the speed back, um,

[43:23] preliminary go over ordnance stuff with them and then we're hoping to do the whole road show all over again with a draft ordinance ideally by December if not in 2027.

[43:35] Um, next slide please.

[43:37] So, that is it. We would love all of your comments and questions. What you like, what you

[43:44] hate, what you want to tell us to tell the board. Thank you.

[43:49] All right. Thank you so much. I will

[43:53] start with Chris. You have questions.

[43:58] Wait a minute. You need to pull your mic around and turn it on.

[44:03] Yeah, just just a couple, you know, over this whole process,

[44:13] what about like some incentives

[44:18] to consider rehabbing older housing? Is that makes sense to put something in the policies

[44:28] for that?

[44:32] From an overall county like focus on housing, yes from the planning department with regards

[44:39] to like inclusionary zoning, I think it's a little separate though. I think like our colleagues

[44:44] at the Housing and Community Development Department, that is kind of more of their focus by

[44:49] noting it. So thank you, Chris. So, and then, what do we lose in terms of public feedback

[44:58] with this minister?

[45:00] General approval. What specifically is happening or not happening, that makes the project make economic sense.

[45:22] Okay, so if I, you know, if this policy were adopted and I develop her, come forward with my 15 town homes wherever,

[45:34] if I am not expected to go to the Eden Mac twice and then to the planning commission that's, you know, two months maybe at least of meetings that I'm not paying my architect and develop her.

[45:52] I'm not the person to get into the nitty gritty of financing development, but my understanding

[45:56] is if you're in that line of work you take out money at the front at a very high interest level

[46:02] and then you have to like backfill it as you develop. So you are saving money and very expensive

[46:10] interest by shortening the amount of time that you're like waiting to move forward with actual

[46:17] construction in the permitting process.

[46:20] Of course, I don't know if we talked about this this time around the

[46:23] ministerial approval would that's only planning entitlements.

[46:28] So even if planning says, okay, thumbs up, matches everything it needs to in the

[46:32] plans, then of course they need to go to the building department and go through

[46:35] their whole process. So it's really trying to translate the shorter permitting

[46:43] turn around time with planning into potentially saving the developer money, theoretically making

[46:50] more developments more feasible, getting new housing and unincorporated.

[46:56] That's my short answer, Rick has more.

[46:58] I mean, you did the economics, but on the politics, the ideas that you have objective standards

[47:06] that are set in advance, and that you get all the public comment and feedback on the standards

[47:12] instead of getting it project by project,

[47:14] which is hard to do, but it's better in some sense.

[47:18] So you can say, we don't want this once and for all

[47:20] and have it apply everywhere, instead of having

[47:23] a fight each individual building,

[47:25] but it means you don't get the fight each individual building.

[47:32] So here's my concern with that.

[47:35] Of our experience here has been

[47:38] that developers bring these projects forward.

[47:41] And, you know, it's the staff passes it on like a, this is cool, everything's copacetic.

[47:50] And we, as Laman, go through these projects and we find major holes, you know, we've found

[47:57] at least three projects that had less than factual traffic studies, we've had projects that have

[48:09] This represented a red-nored soil studies, and this has gone all the way through the

[48:20] approvals that it's coming to us,

[48:26] and so, and these projects, none of them have ever

[48:31] been built and are coming back now, and we in the community are like, hold on, you know,

[48:39] This, you know, that I'm afraid to give that up, you know, I'm best just, what my, my feelings is we, we're dealing the, uh, the builders we're dealing with are, are, are lacking in ethics, you know, I hate to say that in a public meeting, but we,

[49:06] you know,

[49:07] as a public, you know, and this is before the Mac, and laymen, if a layman can go through these things and duplicate and run through those calculations and find stuff

[49:22] that's not factual.

[49:25] What are we doing? We're going to create hazards that we're going to create, you know, and things we run into very common is material understatement of

[49:40] impermeable surfaces, okay? And those of us that live around creeks, we get to live with it, right?

[49:50] So, that's kind of where I'm coming from. So, that's enough out of me.

[49:56] Okay, thank you, Chris.

[49:59] Beth.

[50:02] I think what Chris is talking about is that there's fear that local control is given up.

[50:12] When you do a large scale, this is rules that are pretty much unbendable, according to individual situations, that are brought up very often by local communities.

[50:28] And this is already been structured, new rules have been structured so that they're unassailable.

[50:35] I think you're going to come up with a lot of resistance to that.

[50:43] Thank you, Beth. Vanessa.

[50:49] Thank you for the presentation to both of you or all three of you.

[50:53] And I'm going to be a little repetitive, but I want to really drive this home,

[50:59] especially for Rick, because I don't know how much history you know, but this board

[51:07] did not support this cycle, and one of the major sticking points was around ministerial review

[51:15] and I want to just kind of highlight that. I really appreciate tonight's framing around a

[51:24] because I speak for myself but I think a lot of the community doesn't object to having a

[51:30] affordable housing in our communities. I think that's a really valuable thing that we all see

[51:36] that we want to cultivate.

[51:40] But as you pointed out in the studies, the market is not favorable

[51:44] in the moment. And so what I hear my understanding of this whole thing is the state wants us all to build

[51:56] more housing. And that's because we're in a housing crisis understood. The state doesn't care

[52:03] how we do it. The county wants to be able to access the money that we get from the state in order

[52:12] to make that housing, or to continue to get that money.

[52:16] And so the county is trying to figure out

[52:17] how to do that in a streamlined way.

[52:21] They look at a map, and they see a bunch of open space

[52:24] in the unincorporated areas.

[52:27] And they see that that is a place to put housing.

[52:30] And it makes sense.

[52:33] You're obviously going to butt up against a community

[52:35] that moved to this area because they value not

[52:40] being in a suburban or a more urban dense populated area.

[52:48] So that's like a value that people have in this area and why we moved out here.

[52:55] And so to Chris and I think to best point as well as like,

[53:01] I think we're recognizing that in this rough market,

[53:06] like the state has a mandate, the county's trying to satisfy it, and it's not optimal the market

[53:13] and so somebody's got to take a hit. Somebody's got to like figure it out. So what we're seeing

[53:22] in the community is, well we want to make it easy on the developers, and we already have a history

[53:29] of mistrust with the developers because just as Chris described, I don't need to repeat it.

[53:37] And it's been ugly over the years.

[53:40] And so when you all come to us and say,

[53:44] ministerial review, we're going to no longer come to you

[53:49] and talk to you about this and take away your opportunity

[53:52] to review that with your professionals in this.

[53:59] But we at least take a look at it

[54:01] and really try to see whether or not it

[54:04] for our communities.

[54:07] And you're just going to say trust us it's going to be subjective and we're

[54:11] going to make it work and we really need to do this because otherwise the developers won't

[54:17] develop. That doesn't hit right with us. And I appreciate that you all have put together these meetings

[54:25] with subcommittees. I know that you're getting community input I read in the report that you also

[54:31] got feedback from the developers and I'm hearing also that the developers aren't even like

[54:36] this isn't enough really, this isn't going to really work for us either. So I think from

[54:41] our perspective, we don't really want, if you're going to come to us and say this is our solution

[54:48] that we're just going to kind of grease the wheels for the developers, we don't, there's a lack of

[54:53] trust. And so we need to figure out, we need to know what does that mean? I mean to Chris's point.

[55:00] What specifically are the rules that you all are going to put in place to say, aye, or nay to something, because from our perspective, developers, even before ministerial review, when it was coming to us, they wanted to push things through.

[55:15] They didn't have enough water pressure for fires. Didn't have, you know, there's these issues that happen in our community, and that's just really important. So I know there is no question in there, and I know I repeated some of my fellow board members.

[55:28] I apologize, but I just wanted to frame that so that everybody is on the same page of like I hope I'm sharing the sentiment of the community there.

[55:41] Okay, thank you so much.

[55:43] I actually do have a series of questions and I think they're for Rick because I wrote them down during your part of the presentation.

[55:51] So, you mentioned affordable housing in terms of income level, and I'm wondering, currently,

[56:02] what is that income level that makes someone eligible for affordable housing, or is that

[56:08] going to be part of your plan?

[56:11] So, like the federal, HUD determines things, and then our state further, tweaks levels, and

[56:19] It's determined both by household size and like the percentage of the median income by household size.

[56:27] So the one I have memorized is right now in Alameda County for a family of four median income for 2026 is like 165,000 and it's on our website, it's on HCD's website.

[56:42] You could look at it for every county, so yeah, it's it's high.

[56:46] But for them what we're talking about for the rental, for example, would be half of that for family for or 60% of that for family for so still relatively high in combat, okay, yeah, yeah, okay

[57:01] So the fee option

[57:04] What I'm seeing is that none of the developers have to provide any affordable housing at all

[57:11] they pay a fee and then the fee goes into some dark dungeon and nobody ever uses it for anything.

[57:17] So where's the affordable housing?

[57:24] Well, no, I mean it shouldn't be returned to developers.

[57:28] Is that it happened? I don't know. Sorry, I believe you're referring to the park fee, which

[57:33] separate, heard. We are a cutely aware of what happened with the park fee.

[57:40] Our colleagues at the Housing and Community Development Department currently have among the many funds that they do run for affordable housing in an incorporated.

[57:50] The whole county, there is like an unincorporated specific fund. I don't know what's in it now.

[57:57] But right now we're internally talking about how this money would go to them. They have staff who do manage funds.

[58:02] Okay, so actually I'm the one asking the question, sorry, Chris.

[58:06] So I want to know what happens to those fees and have there, can you point to some affordable housing units that have been built from fees?

[58:17] Because I've heard stories about fees now. It's not in the stories I've heard don't happen to be in an incorporated album need a county, but it's still I think probably the same program.

[58:30] I did a statewide study where we monitored what happened to the fees for, you know, 40 some jurisdictions around the state.

[58:41] And what we found is that there were, oh sorry, and what we found is that there were some jurisdictions that did exactly what you said.

[58:47] They collected the money and it sat in a trust fund and they never spent it.

[58:51] But the vast majority of jurisdictions and all of the Alamedic County, all of the Central Bayer jurisdictions collected the money took a little while and then they spent it.

[59:00] And they spent it on the, you know, tax credit affordable housing, you know,

[59:06] like the nonprofit developed affordable housing developments.

[59:11] And those don't happen every single year, but you can point to them.

[59:13] And so the best practice and, and I would say the majority of Bay Area jurisdictions do this is that they

[59:20] publish on the city's website or the county's website.

[59:24] Here's the fees we collected and here's where we put them each year.

[59:28] So you can go on burglies or haywards or freemons, websites, and you can see where they put

[59:34] those dollars, and if a jurisdiction doesn't do that, you have a legitimate problem.

[59:40] Like it's an accountability, it's a basic level of accountability.

[59:44] You need to be able to see where the fees go in order to feel good about this as a policy.

[59:49] So how do we find out who do we ask to see what's going on and unincorporated, animated

[59:55] county?

[59:56] Our recommendation to the county is to put in the ordinance of the...

[1:00:00] County adopts a requirement to provide that impermanent. So it just doesn't happen. It's not there yet.

[1:00:05] It's just, it should be drafted ordinance. So, but we're, we've, like I had that on that slide because we're aware that this is a key thing that you're going to need for a policy like this to work.

[1:00:17] Okay. And then on your map that shows the various jurisdictions.

[1:00:22] So Gray, the gray area that we're apparently they're not doing any of this affordable housing step, which counties are those.

[1:00:35] Solano's one of a lot of that be the only one.

[1:00:37] Solano's the only county. Yes, I want to say it might be atherton or a similar jurisdiction on the peninsula.

[1:00:44] I think seven months ago the first time we came to you all to present this in December or January.

[1:00:51] Um, I could afford this effort for it. I have it all listed out like every jurisdiction. It was okay. Yeah. All right. So where do I get that?

[1:01:00] Um, I guess the, I can email it to you. That was not right. I'll do that tomorrow. Okay. Thank you.

[1:01:06] All right. Um, this is a great question. So yeah, I'm going to, this is going to be repetitious. And I guess it's not a question.

[1:01:19] You've made it really clear that this whole program is all about the developers.

[1:01:24] You've made that really clear.

[1:01:25] This is all about the developers and helping them to build without any sort of overview,

[1:01:32] except this sort of vague policy thing, and it gets approved anyway.

[1:01:37] And as far as us being able to do the math over the years, we've been doing the math.

[1:01:42] And we are the ones that have caught things.

[1:01:44] I'm not saying this council, I'm saying the community, okay, fairview community and the people that live here.

[1:01:52] So that's a given and it's a little frustrating because the whole reason that these

[1:01:59] max were set up was to bring in community involvement, to bring in community questions, concerns,

[1:02:08] Yes, to our panel, so we could forward them on, but this now which is huge for fair view.

[1:02:17] I mean, fair view is about maintaining a lifestyle and it's just not happening.

[1:02:23] There was an ADU built up the street for me.

[1:02:26] It covered up the entire backyard of that house.

[1:02:31] That ADU is like three, well, I'm not going to exaggerate.

[1:02:34] Maybe five feet from the house on the next property.

[1:02:38] It's just, and we never saw it, I never knew it was being built and I'd just down the street until all the sudden there it is.

[1:02:46] I know it didn't come to our panel because I've been on this panel for a few years now.

[1:02:51] So that's what Fairview is about and what you've done is rip that away.

[1:02:56] Like why are we even here?

[1:02:59] Right? If the community can't express concerns that are real.

[1:03:02] So, okay off my soapbox, but clear,

[1:03:09] I asked you about in Luffy's, I don't need to care about that.

[1:03:17] Oh, yeah, various charts for Hayward and the different communities.

[1:03:21] Do you have those charts for Fairview?

[1:03:24] Sorry, can you, which specific, there are, you know, the Randall charts, the market affordable,

[1:03:32] rents, the sales prices for these various communities.

[1:03:37] Fairview is its own thing now.

[1:03:39] I mean, we put fairview on our address label.

[1:03:42] So do you have those numbers for fairview?

[1:03:45] So short answer.

[1:03:47] No, the charts later in the presentation that are talking about inclusionary zoning policies that exist.

[1:03:54] Fairview doesn't currently have one.

[1:03:56] So we couldn't put that on the chart.

[1:03:58] The one that I see you have open right now is based on

[1:04:01] faster valley, which is not even actually wanted to, when Greg mentioned that, I want, I was hoping

[1:04:07] you'd bring it up, so we can further explain, we provided the existence, like relevant development

[1:04:14] data from the past like four years, essentially, since the pandemic, when we started working with

[1:04:18] street level advisors, the reality is that Caster Valley has the strongest development market.

[1:04:23] Even if we wanted to do a fair view specific policy, since we are only looking, since it's policy,

[1:04:30] How we're talking about right now would only apply to developments of 11 units or more that doesn't include a to use because the state doesn't let you do that.

[1:04:39] There's just aren't relevant projects in recent history and fair view.

[1:04:45] That we would be able to pull from.

[1:04:47] So right now, no, because there just isn't a town home of 11 units or more, for example, that from recent development history to relate to.

[1:04:57] And one of the things that I've been asking over

[1:05:00] And it kind of ties in a little bit about using older housing. And of course, what developer wants to rehab an older house, they don't. What sort of studies have been done about all of the vacant housing?

[1:05:13] You know, the vacant housing all over the Bay Area that are sometimes owned by people out of the country.

[1:05:19] They just hold ownership of these houses for their own tax purposes. Do we really have a housing project?

[1:05:26] do we have a situation where people are holding houses hostage if you will? No one has responded

[1:05:32] to that with any sort of of an answer. You know, so I kind of question how much of a housing

[1:05:39] problem we actually have and what about, what about, and I've asked this before in terms of a

[1:05:45] affordable housing mobile home parks. You know, both my sister and my grandfather have lived in nice

[1:05:51] mobile home parks. They are not little, little trailer parks that, you know, or people have a really bad opinion of, but mobile home parks. You know, that's affordable housing for a lot of people that can afford to buy or rent in these markets. So where are those? Where are the mobile home parks? I don't know what else to call them, but they're nice. You know, there's no reason that they have to be looked down on those are nice housing.

[1:06:22] 100%. I think of another word people use as manufactured housing development too. Yeah, and no,

[1:06:28] I've learned through some of the mobile home advocates very cheap rent. Some people have

[1:06:32] depending on what it's incredible. Yeah, this specific policy we're talking about today doesn't

[1:06:37] happen to speak to those, but the county is for if people want to open them. They should only my sister

[1:06:42] owned her. She ran to the property is sat on, right? So, so why are we so bit anyway? I'd like to have that

[1:06:51] response to that. Because I think that's an honest question. It's, I'm not just

[1:06:55] jabbing in. I think that's an honest question about providing affordable housing in

[1:07:00] our communities. And I've not heard any response to that. And I don't think we should

[1:07:06] be running headlong into the developer style developments without looking seriously at

[1:07:13] that affordable housing. If we're serious about helping low-income people, right?

[1:07:20] 100%. No, I think, so on the surface with regards to the mobile home park, I don't know if somebody has come forward to the county, for example, asking to open a new one recently.

[1:07:32] So that's part of that. We, we, even, our families, families, you know, put out incentives. Okay, note it.

[1:07:40] I think I can make a comment about that.

[1:07:44] Yes, some mobile home parts of being destroyed because the return for the owners of the property isn't high enough.

[1:07:52] So you're not going to see those kind of things developed unless those funds are taken and used to develop the property.

[1:08:01] But then you're going to have to decide who's going to be the owner of the property.

[1:08:05] It's going to be a nonprofit. It's going to be the county.

[1:08:08] You know, it's a little more involved than that.

[1:08:11] Now, I think somebody should look into it.

[1:08:14] I'd like to hear response on it.

[1:08:17] Okay, anything else from anybody else, Chris?

[1:08:22] So, this is a bit tangential, but it's important.

[1:08:28] So, why is Fairview in the Eden General Plan?

[1:08:32] Okay, Fairview got placed in the Eden General Plan

[1:08:36] without consultation to the community of Fairview

[1:08:40] without consultation to the community, you know, the Eden community. And, you know, a number of us

[1:08:49] have brought the topic up. I mean, the Eden General Plan, the Eden area is far more urban than

[1:08:59] fair view is. We are not contiguous in any way. I mean, it makes sense that fair view would

[1:09:08] It has to be under a general plan, and I've heard from the head of the planning department

[1:09:18] that, oh, well, that's not a problem because you've got a specific plan yet we have

[1:09:24] had developments that got approved because they said, oh, hey, this is a fair view silent

[1:09:33] on this so we can apply the less stringent requirements for space and setbacks and things like

[1:09:41] that in Eden. And that hurts us. And we

[1:09:52] need to bring this up. And it needs to be discussed

[1:09:58] at it.

[1:10:00] For both communities, I mean, you should have, should be its own general plan or the probably

[1:10:09] it makes much more sense that it would be part of the Castro Valley general plan. But that's in my mind,

[1:10:17] but you know, I'm not an expert on those kind of things. Okay, thank you, Chris. I think I'd like to now open

[1:10:25] the floor for community public comment.

[1:10:31] Rita Duncan.

[1:10:38] I guess my first I'm good to tip that just tip it down a little bit.

[1:10:46] Okay.

[1:10:48] Thank you.

[1:10:51] This is near into your to my heart.

[1:10:53] So I guess I'm not clear.

[1:10:55] Well, what does TLC stand for?

[1:10:58] I'm sorry.

[1:10:59] I did not.

[1:11:00] I don't know.

[1:11:08] Okay, and then the other is.

[1:11:11] Is there has been any.

[1:11:13] Question.

[1:11:13] Or any community, a transit oriented community.

[1:11:17] Okay.

[1:11:18] Thank you.

[1:11:18] Has there been any.

[1:11:21] Studies that shows the correlation.

[1:11:25] Between the vacancies.

[1:11:27] Need it.

[1:11:28] An alamni county.

[1:11:30] And the.

[1:11:32] Income.

[1:11:36] Okay, because when you say the average.

[1:11:39] I mean, a large percentage of the unhoused people in Elameda County, their income is not that high.

[1:11:51] And so I'm just wondering when you say the market is that considered that the market may be up here,

[1:12:01] but if people can't afford it, building these houses doesn't make any sense.

[1:12:06] And the last thing I want to say, particularly for Fairview, when developers are looking at our community, do they understand that there's only maybe two ways out of this community, which is a safety issue, and when you're talking about bringing more people in, it increases the safety hazard for us getting out.

[1:12:35] And then my last question is, is there any way that we can

[1:12:39] require more from these developers,

[1:12:45] you know, sending them back to the table,

[1:12:49] particularly around how much profit they may be making.

[1:12:55] Just like questions.

[1:12:58] Thank you.

[1:13:00] Kathy, Kathy Langley.

[1:13:22] Kathy Langley, Fairview, resident over 26 years. I want to thank our Mac members for their work.

[1:13:33] And my name is Kathy Langley, but you can call me Debbie Downer today.

[1:13:41] Everyone wants to live in California.

[1:13:45] Not everyone can afford to do so.

[1:13:47] If you're saying that it's low income at $165,000 a year,

[1:13:55] your delusional.

[1:14:00] California is too expensive. If you can't afford to live here, find somewhere else to live.

[1:14:09] No housing element. No state takeover of local authority in zoning matters.

[1:14:18] I moved here 26 years ago to live in a rural community and now you want to build apartment houses next to me.

[1:14:27] a

[1:14:31] affordable housing production policies initiative is eminent domain. That's what it is.

[1:14:40] And Alameda County is threatened by the state with fines. And that's what you all

[1:14:46] are doing as caving into them.

[1:14:53] Okay.

[1:14:55] Here's converting non-essential, non-residential.

[1:15:00] Building into homes. The malls are dying. This is not about affordable housing at 165,000 a year. It's about the unhoused people. The mentally ill, the drug addicted. Open up the malls to rebuild them into homes for those people.

[1:15:22] Like the Regis Senior Housing Development and Hayward that is working now to house our homeless people, our unhoused.

[1:15:36] There's a group called our neighborhood voices right that down, OMV.

[1:15:42] They are nonprofit group working in California to get on the ballot to overturn the housing element.

[1:15:55] What else can I say in 27 seconds?

[1:16:03] Yeah, take back our zoning.

[1:16:05] That's ridiculous.

[1:16:07] To have fair view, to have fair view having apartment houses all over the place in areas that are not built upon.

[1:16:17] That's just wrong.

[1:16:27] I have thank you Kathy.

[1:16:28] Thank you.

[1:16:29] No additional speakers for item one.

[1:16:32] No additional either place.

[1:16:35] Okay. So I will now close public comment. Excuse me. Okay. And since this is not an action item. I think that's it for item number one.

[1:16:47] Thank you all very much for coming to present. And you are not popular. So just know it. Okay.

[1:16:58] No, I know, I know, and I understand, it's fine, but just say you understand what you're walking into.

[1:17:09] Yeah, we thank you very much.

[1:17:12] Okay, now, are we ready to talk about the minutes?

[1:17:22] Yes, we can go back to the minutes.

[1:17:24] I did review the audio from your last meeting and the minutes work continued.

[1:17:29] you don't have them in front of you. So we will put those the June minutes on your October

[1:17:36] agenda. Thank you. Okay, so June minutes on the October agenda, because we don't have them

[1:17:44] to look at. Okay, so now we need to review and decide about approving the July minutes and those

[1:17:56] are in front of us. So what I'd like, do I have a motion? I'll start with that. Do I have a motion to approve?

[1:18:06] Sorry, chair, before you take any action, you'll want to open public comment. Oh, that you're

[1:18:11] coming forward. So it's not within the conversation. You can have discussion, but no actions like

[1:18:18] making a motion before public comment. Okay. Well, then let's have public comment on the minutes.

[1:18:23] Does anyone have any comments, changes about the July minutes?

[1:18:30] I have no public speakers for the minutes.

[1:18:34] Okay, no public speakers either place.

[1:18:36] So I will close public comment on the minutes.

[1:18:40] And now I would like to entertain a motion to approve these minutes.

[1:18:48] I'm motion that we approve the minutes from the last month.

[1:18:52] Okay, do I have a second?

[1:18:55] Okay, we have a first in a second.

[1:18:58] Do I have any comments or conversations about that?

[1:19:05] Okay, I have just one thing.

[1:19:09] And this may be considered a nitpick, but there you go.

[1:19:14] Number one, you don't motion an item, you move.

[1:19:18] So everywhere in the minutes where it says somebody motion,

[1:19:21] it should be changed if they moved.

[1:19:23] So if you could do that, I'm not, there's nothing actually of substance but it's a thing.

[1:19:32] Okay, all right, so do you accept my amendment to the motion to approve these minutes to say approved with the change in the wording of motions?

[1:19:52] So, graphic steps, Vanessa accepts.

[1:19:57] You know the way you're really supposed to do it is now vote.

[1:20:00] On this little amendment thing, can we just vote on the, yeah, that's just do it that way. Okay. My, my people don't like me to cut corners, but I'd like to just go now. We have an amended motion to approve the July minutes with the word change every time you see somebody motion something. It will say they moved it. All right. So may we take the roll on this vote, please.

[1:20:29] Council Member Farmer. Yes. Council Member Higgins. Yes. Vice Chair Rhodes.

[1:20:36] Okay. Chair Chair Filbin. I approve as corrected for July 7th minutes.

[1:20:45] I'm upset. Thank you so much.

[1:20:54] I have so much paper staff here, so I apologize for

[1:20:58] sort of bumbling around.

[1:21:03] This isn't what I want. We're now going to take the next item,

[1:21:08] which is an action item, and I believe it is the application for PLN, no it's not that one.

[1:21:29] I thought I had these stacked in the right order.

[1:21:35] All right, you're right, you're right.

[1:21:37] I was right.

[1:21:38] Thank you.

[1:21:40] All right, so the next item we're going to take up is application number PLN 2026-0045.

[1:21:49] four or five site development review.

[1:21:54] It is for the address, I guess it doesn't have an address

[1:21:59] in the minute zero corpus court between 2805-8 and 28065. And where's my cheat sheet here?

[1:22:15] So

[1:22:15] do I open, I don't open public comment before they make their presentation do I? Okay, so

[1:22:21] Please introduce yourself and present.

[1:22:25] Thank you, Aubrey Rose, Alameda County Planning Department.

[1:22:28] Tell me your name one more time.

[1:22:30] Aubrey Rose, Alameda County Planning Department.

[1:22:33] It's my first time presenting in front of this council.

[1:22:37] Good evening, council members and members of the public.

[1:22:39] So again, this is case number PLN 2026-0045 at zero,

[1:22:46] Quirkus Court in Fairview, the proposals for a site development review planning permit

[1:22:52] to allow construction of a new one story, 1,698 square foot home, one bedroom, one bath,

[1:22:59] within attached two car, 516 square foot garage on a down slope lot in the L limited rural uses

[1:23:07] combining zone district. Application was submitted March 19th of this year.

[1:23:18] Property owner is

[1:23:19] is Mr. Pendra Morathae, who is present,

[1:23:25] as is the applicant, Adolfo M. Martinez.

[1:23:28] And General Plan is role residential

[1:23:31] within the Fairview specific plan,

[1:23:34] zoning within the Fairview area specific plan

[1:23:36] is R1 single family residence

[1:23:39] with a combining zone of L,

[1:23:41] limited uses of a rule nature,

[1:23:43] and B.E. which in this case is a five acre minimum building

[1:23:47] site area 300 foot medium median lot with minimum 30 foot minimum required front yard and

[1:23:54] 20 foot minimum side yard.

[1:23:56] This project is exempt from environmental review under SQL as a class 3 new construction

[1:24:02] project for a single family home.

[1:24:08] And so here is the general location.

[1:24:11] Here's fair view inside the light blue if you can see that and the project site is all the way

[1:24:17] in that southerly tip and beyond that is city of hayward

[1:24:26] and zooming into the site a little bit

[1:24:29] in the left side and further on the right it's this triangular shaped parcel that flares out as

[1:24:37] it runs downhill at the end of Quirk discord which is an easement over properties accessed by

[1:24:46] another easement street that leads from Fairview Avenue.

[1:24:53] And so here's a

[1:24:54] street view of the project site at this dead end of Quarkis Court, the other.

[1:25:00] Parts on the street are developed.

[1:25:07] Here's some site photo. So this is on the left side facing north.

[1:25:13] You can see the top of the site towards the street is more level than the lower part of the parcel and on the right is the opposite view facing to the south.

[1:25:34] So, in terms of our sowning history, the location was originally zoned in 1956, it was

[1:25:43] rezoned to its current designation in 1975 and this is a conforming lot even though it measures

[1:25:51] 1.77 acres where otherwise any new lot in the district must measure a minimum of five

[1:25:58] acres due to the time at which it was legally subdivided.

[1:26:04] And so there is a certificate of compliance to authenticate that on file.

[1:26:14] As far as referrals to other departments and agencies for the project,

[1:26:19] the Hayward Fire Department, which has jurisdiction,

[1:26:22] is requiring fire sprinklers in the home, which are proposed.

[1:26:26] and the county public works has several requirements in terms of road connection and safety

[1:26:34] and also erosion and drainage controls which are already incorporated into the proposal

[1:26:39] and the plan set that's attached to your staff report.

[1:26:47] So here's the proposal.

[1:26:53] Sight improvements would include insulation of a driveway home proposed home design would feature a

[1:26:58] roof open floor plan horizontal sighting and a rear balcony landscaping would be installed throughout

[1:27:05] the front yard and alongside the driveway. So here's some architectural renditions on the left side

[1:27:13] and different 3D views on the right.

[1:27:22] Here is a site plan. The entire site with a nearly 400 feet

[1:27:28] rear yard from the back of the proposed home to the rear latline and the upper left and then

[1:27:36] zoomed in to the foot print area on the right and so again this is designed to take advantage

[1:27:44] of the least steep portion of the lat which is also the closest to the street or the easement

[1:27:56] And this is zoomed into the floor plan, so this is a one bedroom, one bath home with a open floor plan, rear balcony to take advantage of the views and an attached two car garage that's set back from the facade of the proposed home.

[1:28:21] And it's so here's some elevations. So what you'd see from the entrance would be

[1:28:30] on the, I'm going to have to refer to my, right now,

[1:28:42] on the lower left is the, uh,

[1:28:46] ventilation facing north.

[1:28:54] And just in terms of some of the other development standards,

[1:28:57] the proposal meets or exceeds all of the development standards and no

[1:29:03] variances are requested.

[1:29:07] And so this is indicating in the upper row for the

[1:29:14] zoning district and the lower row for the site and the proposed building.

[1:29:24] So not

[1:29:24] as large as is otherwise allowed under the specific plan.

[1:29:34] And then just a few points in terms of analysis.

[1:29:42] So the proposed design features an attractive low profile design with minimal bulk.

[1:29:48] It would not be located on a ridge line, so it would be no siloating effect in involves

[1:29:52] minimal greeting. The majority of the striding parcels are developed and the proposed and

[1:29:58] we're not exceed the size or height.

[1:30:00] 8 of the majority of the adjacent homes. Utilities for water and sanitary sewer are available, and septic's not necessary.

[1:30:07] And again, fire sprinklers would be provided. So the project is consistent with the low density neighborhood layout, featuring deep rear lots that preserve trees and creeks.

[1:30:18] Again, the proposed rear setback is nearly 400 feet. So the project would help to meet the areas housing needs.

[1:30:24] And the site would also be eligible in the future for a smaller ADU.

[1:30:31] Also, all standards are met from the Casa Homes D restriction, namely a minimum 35 foot set back from the edge of the roadway.

[1:30:41] To the rear, the property budding the site is a large and developed property that's located in the city of Hayward as not zone for development.

[1:30:51] And in terms of public notice notices, we're distributed, no correspondence was received.

[1:30:58] I'm sorry to interrupt. What did you just say about the city of Hayward?

[1:31:02] The abutting property to the rear of this site is located in the city of Hayward.

[1:31:10] It's a large parcel that's undeveloped and is not zoned for development.

[1:31:20] Thank you. Sorry.

[1:31:21] Absolutely. So in conclusion, staff recommends that the Fairview Municipal Advisory Council

[1:31:27] recommend approval of case number PLN 2026-0045 to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors.

[1:31:35] Planning Department staff will convey the Fairview Max recommendation to the planning director.

[1:31:41] This particular permit type of site development review is ultimately decided by the planning director.

[1:31:50] So the recommendation here will be taken to the director during their deliberations of the item.

[1:31:56] So that concludes staff's report.

[1:31:58] I've available to answer any questions you may have and again, the architect and the property owner are both present as well.

[1:32:06] Thank you.

[1:32:09] Okay.

[1:32:09] Beth, do you have any questions?

[1:32:23] I would like to go back to the how a one acre parcel in an area that's zone for five acre

[1:32:36] parcels is conforming. I just I wasn't clear on how that happened. So was subdivided legally

[1:32:46] when the minimum lot size was less than what it is now. So any future subdivisions would

[1:32:54] have to be a minimum of five acres. So starting with at least 10 acres for a lot split, for

[1:33:00] example. This lot is we don't say non-conforming in this instance where the lots were legally

[1:33:08] subdivided under a prior regulation. So we term it conforming in this regard.

[1:33:16] Okay. That's okay. So it's grandfathered in. Correct.

[1:33:20] Okay. So I need your help because I drove out there to look and I want to make sure

[1:33:27] That what I was that I was looking at the right parcel. So when you drive down to the end of that cul-de-sac

[1:33:35] You're right at the end you're pointing right at the end. There's a house to the right

[1:33:42] Okay, but straight on there's a

[1:33:46] Submit pad that seems to drop off is that the property that is not

[1:33:50] I'm not ever going to be developed or there's no development plan.

[1:33:54] Oh, no.

[1:33:55] That was the property at the bottom of the hill that's behind this lot.

[1:34:00] That I was referring to.

[1:34:02] So it's why I looked to the left.

[1:34:04] There's a piece of property that has some sheds on it.

[1:34:07] It has kids play equipment.

[1:34:09] Is that the property we're talking about?

[1:34:16] I'm sorry.

[1:34:20] Please.

[1:34:21] Can you?

[1:34:29] Yes.

[1:34:30] The property is this.

[1:34:33] which you saw is the cement pad and the land behind that is the property. And then

[1:34:41] what Rosa or Mr. Aubrey was referring to is when that property ends there is the property which is

[1:34:49] in the Herbert city area. The one to the right or run behind it behind the both the left and right

[1:34:56] properties are in the fair view area.

[1:35:00] Okay, so I didn't trespass, so I didn't go walking to the edge to look. But behind that cement pad, it looked to me like it was a drop off. Is it not a drop off behind the pad?

[1:35:12] Yeah, and that area is not going to be dull.

[1:35:15] It is not, it's just that front area.

[1:35:17] Front area, really beautiful. Because it is blocked.

[1:35:21] Right. Right. Okay. Thank you.

[1:35:25] Okay.

[1:35:30] I guess I don't have any questions either. I just want to make sure that I was looking at the right place, and I looked at both of those, so wasn't sure.

[1:35:40] Can we have, this is an action item, so can we have a...

[1:35:45] No, no, no, you're right. I'm sorry. I know, I know.

[1:35:51] I know. I know. Can I please now stop laughing, Ashley.

[1:35:56] Okay, can I please now open for public comment?

[1:36:00] Jill Angel and then Richmond Villain-Villa and are they here?

[1:36:07] Okay, please.

[1:36:08] Thank you.

[1:36:18] Jill Angel are our Buddhist court.

[1:36:21] I just have a couple of questions on that particular piece of property and it's not necessarily

[1:36:27] just that property but it's the roads between our butis and then you turn off to go to

[1:36:34] and that's a very susceptible part of our road.

[1:36:39] And I'm quite concerned with all of the development

[1:36:42] and all of the equipment that's going to be continuing to use that area

[1:36:49] while the home is being built.

[1:36:52] Matter of fact, we're discussing what we need to do with that.

[1:36:56] And I'm quite concerned, as are many of the other neighbors,

[1:37:00] We're worried about what all this heavy equipment will do to that road and if we have a heavy rain like that predicting this year and I don't know when you're starting to build we have no problem with the building the house is okay, but what that will do to the road.

[1:37:17] And I think we need to have some further discussion not necessarily here but with the neighbors and whatever that will develop on the road.

[1:37:25] So is Quivis private or public road both both are private?

[1:37:30] Okay, thank you.

[1:37:31] Percus and our beautis because he's just off.

[1:37:34] I know where it is.

[1:37:35] I was out there.

[1:37:36] Yeah, if you were just down there, you see that and when you turned off of our beautis to go down

[1:37:41] the quirkis, that road is already quite damaged from a bunch of, I guess, at the green

[1:37:47] age of the last year.

[1:37:49] And we just three did that road five years ago, yeah.

[1:37:53] And you know, already it got some concerns and we're looking at what we need to do, but if we have all this heavy equipment going down there this year, it's going to totally destroy that corner.

[1:38:05] Okay. Thank you.

[1:38:06] Do you have a road agreement?

[1:38:08] Do I have a road agreement with the neighborhood on the street?

[1:38:14] Well, I guess we call it an agreement.

[1:38:18] You don't have anything filed with the county.

[1:38:21] because they're taking we pay taxes to the county. I have to look on that years and years ago before my husband passed away. He was all involved in that. Okay, and so I know there's stuff on it. I've got a whole book of it there. So I might want to go into that.

[1:38:35] But we have a lot of papers on it. Yeah, because private roads aren't covered by taxes, right?

[1:38:41] it. We pay taxes for that road. Okay. All right. We have a clause that we, you know,

[1:38:48] part of our taxes go. Okay. I think that's one part of what she said. The road originally

[1:38:53] then they started taxing so we'd have money to continue. Okay. Of course it's never enough,

[1:38:58] you know. No, that's right. Thank you. Oops.

[1:39:05] Do you have anyone else? Anyone on the way,

[1:39:08] Okay,

[1:39:32] hi. My name is Risminovo. I live on for this port. And I also had concerns with the road.

[1:39:39] It's a very narrow street.

[1:39:44] And fire trucks or, you know, the garbage truck comes down and has to reverse all the way back out of the road because there's no real turnaround.

[1:39:53] I mean, there's cars parked everywhere and kind of everyone has to use like the UPS guy FedEx guy.

[1:40:00] Amazon, they all use my driveway to turn around, because I leave it open. And my only concern, I guess, with this building

[1:40:09] processes, all that equipment, like she mentioned, all like, where's it going to be staged and

[1:40:16] part, and it's very narrow.

[1:40:21] And yeah, so, and like, and in future, when it is built, and they,

[1:40:25] they have guests and they have a party over because it's a nice house and where are

[1:40:30] their guests going to park their vehicles if not on my bit of land that's where the

[1:40:37] cars turn around, you know, where the big trucks turn out like if cars don't need to.

[1:40:43] And yeah, some of the other things that I had questions on was addressed by this form

[1:40:51] and

[1:40:52] other concerns. This property value can go down. I mean, it's a small bedroom house. Sandwich

[1:40:59] between two, I have two million dollar homes. And I don't know. What else do I have? Oh,

[1:41:07] how long is a project going to take to build? Is it okay? I saw that it was Monday,

[1:41:12] three Friday business hours, but for how long? Three years, five years, one year,

[1:41:21] And I saw that they can have access to septic?

[1:41:27] Can I have access to septic?

[1:41:29] I didn't know.

[1:41:30] I'm new.

[1:41:31] Oh, do I have access to the sewer system also

[1:41:36] with I have a septic tank on my property?

[1:41:39] And I just read that they have access to sewers?

[1:41:44] Can I tap into that during the process?

[1:41:46] I don't know how that works.

[1:41:51] Okay, so I can do that on my own, I suppose.

[1:41:56] Oh, you can answer that today, yeah, can I?

[1:41:57] Oh, you can answer it today.

[1:41:59] I can't tap into that.

[1:42:01] But yes, my only concern is the street,

[1:42:04] parking for guests, construction supplies,

[1:42:07] and just big things going down that road that can't turn around

[1:42:11] without coming on to my bit of luck.

[1:42:13] You know, you may want to just think about it.

[1:42:18] Well, then there you go, can I?

[1:42:20] Can I get like a tax of bit of it?

[1:42:21] You know, or I don't know, can I have access to the, the creek that no one else does

[1:42:26] and my time is almost up.

[1:42:29] So, so I got, so I, so this is for the, the owner, there's a requirement for parking

[1:42:39] whenever you build a house as your, is your plan consistent with off-street parking for

[1:42:45] your home. So you have the two car garage so you've got the two spots off the street.

[1:42:53] Hmm. Please.

[1:42:55] I can address some of the concerns I have with like a answer. Quick one.

[1:43:05] So in front of the house, the the pad and the area that we are left has space for

[1:43:14] parking four to five cars and we will have enough space in the garage so totally six cars

[1:43:22] which we can easily park without putting any car on the on the road. Okay. Thank you. And then

[1:43:29] just because potential neighbors. So we intend to have the contractor manage the construction

[1:43:39] access very responsibly, and if there is a damage, we are responsible and if we were to address

[1:43:47] that appropriate.

[1:43:54] Okay, thank you so much. Are there any other public comment?

[1:44:01] Okay, if we have

[1:44:02] no other public comment that I'll close public comment, thank you very much everyone for your participation.

[1:44:08] Now is there anything further from the council?

[1:44:19] Speak up because I'm about to shut you down.

[1:44:25] Okay,

[1:44:25] So no other comments from the council, so is there a motion to approve this request as requested?

[1:44:36] I move to approve the request as presented.

[1:44:42] Thank you.

[1:44:43] Do we have a second?

[1:44:44] All second.

[1:44:46] Okay.

[1:44:47] Do you have a second?

[1:44:49] Okay.

[1:44:50] May we now have...

[1:44:53] For approval of item two, Council Member Farmer.

[1:45:01] Council member Higgins? Aye. Vice chair votes. Aye. Chair, Philbin. Aye. Approved. Okay. Excuse us, everybody, but we are about to have a five-minute restroom break.

[1:45:25] Hello. I would like to call the meeting back to order. May we please have a roll call? Council member Farmer.

[1:45:33] Present council member Higgins vice chair Rose here chair Philbin here. We have a quorum. Thank you

[1:45:44] The next item on our agenda is

[1:45:50] PLN 2026-004 one site development reviews sand-a-ball crescendo

[1:45:59] T.R. Helen Yang, Fun, Action Item, and this is for 3247 D Street.

[1:46:12] It is, let's see. Well, you're going to tell me what it is when you present. So maybe I'll just let it go with that and ask you to please present the project. Thank you and start with your name, of course.

[1:46:22] Sure. Hello. My name is Michael Fleming. I'm with the Almey County Planning Department. I'm a

[1:46:29] planner. This is I have number three PLN 2026.

[1:46:34] Serves are a four one. It's a site development review to allow construction of it

[1:46:40] for an addition over 50% of the existing space of single-family home.

[1:46:46] The owner is sand-evaled, crescendo, trust, and the applicant is Helen Yang-Bung.

[1:46:53] It's at 3247-D Street, APN-417-240-1-3.

[1:47:00] It's a category exempt from SQA, under 15303, a new construction of small structures.

[1:47:10] Here you can see, or the red dot is, is where the existing home is, its own R1BE, it has

[1:47:22] a minimum building site area of 10,000 feet, and being locked with the 70 feet, it's in

[1:47:30] the e-in-genital plan as very low-density residential.

[1:47:35] Next slide.

[1:47:36] Actually, I'm going to interrupt you just a moment ago back to that slide.

[1:47:42] How far back does the property go that's associated with this home?

[1:47:46] I went and looked at, I didn't see any fencing, so I wasn't sure.

[1:47:50] It goes pretty far back.

[1:47:54] So that dark line that goes down is that a property line or does their property drop down to the next?

[1:48:00] I think rectangle.

[1:48:01] I think see the grass disconnected with the home?

[1:48:04] Yes, follow that all the way back and it just keeps going back. Right. It's goes back pretty far.

[1:48:14] I want to say it goes it. I have it right here. It goes back 683 feet. Okay, and so that the property below that that dark line that. Yeah, that's what I'm saying is is not part of it. It's just straight back. Okay.

[1:48:31] And where the development is happening is right where the house is right by the road.

[1:48:38] Thank you.

[1:48:38] No problem.

[1:48:41] Okay.

[1:48:44] Some planning considerations.

[1:48:47] So the project consists of converting the first floor into an 813 square foot ADU.

[1:48:54] Adding 1386 square feet to the second floor, or total second floor of 2,253 feet.

[1:49:03] adding 292 square feet to the first floor, besides the ADU conversion, and then adding

[1:49:12] to make it a first floor, 1,012 square feet, and adding a 860 square foot

[1:49:18] garage. You'll see in the plans to follow, I'll explain it a little bit better. One

[1:49:23] other thing that we insisted that they made the porch 100 square feet, because when you

[1:49:30] In fact, the front of the home is a minimum requirement of 5% needs to be porch up to

[1:49:35] 100 to our feet.

[1:49:37] So as long as you have 100 square feet you're fine, they didn't have 100 to our feet to

[1:49:40] have like 89 so they're going to add a little bit more.

[1:49:46] The main floor will have a master bedroom, master bath, dressing and second bathroom, laundry

[1:49:53] office and large open room that contains a kitchen dining and living room.

[1:50:00] Okay, next slide. Well, you got it.

[1:50:06] So part of the things that we are looking at for this project were the development standards, that basically every project needs to follow, and in favor of you, they have their own specific rules by the Fairview Society plan.

[1:50:22] So, the Floority Ratio for this project was, they were allowed to go up to, with a lot

[1:50:32] being 62,747 feet, they were allowed to build a home up to 8,774.

[1:50:39] Their home is going to be 3,265 plus a garage.

[1:50:45] So, they're under less than half of the FAR requirement.

[1:50:53] The lock coverage allows max lock coverage is 12,549.

[1:51:00] There are a lot of coverage is only 1881.

[1:51:05] So, it's severely below their setbacks.

[1:51:11] We're the next thing to consider.

[1:51:15] They do have the required 20 front and 20 rear and 10 front on the sides.

[1:51:21] In that, except for one of the sides is the existing setback,

[1:51:26] which has a six foot side, but since it's 50% of what's required,

[1:51:32] they're allowed to continue on their project.

[1:51:34] If it was less than they'd have to add a variance.

[1:51:36] So, but there's setbacks, our greater than what's required, has a 35 foot front setback,

[1:51:46] a 610 foot rear setback, and 23 foot on the one side, and then six foot on the side,

[1:51:54] that's saying that it's within 50% of requirement.

[1:51:58] Next slide, please.

[1:52:02] A little hard to see from here.

[1:52:05] You have some drawings here. I do have one set of plants in the room if anyone needs this would like to see him.

[1:52:14] But basically, if you look at my hands, here's the house looking from coming from the street looking at it.

[1:52:21] On the bottom floor on the left side is going to be an ADU, which was already on the bottom side of the left side.

[1:52:34] The bottom on left side is going to be ADU.

[1:52:36] On the right side is going to be a garage.

[1:52:40] And then above both of that, there's going to be

[1:52:43] in between the ADU and the garage,

[1:52:45] there's going to be a center stairs and some storage there.

[1:52:48] And then above the ADU is going to be where the bedrooms are

[1:52:52] for the main floor for the house.

[1:52:55] And then above the garage, this where it's going to be

[1:52:58] dining, entertaining kitchen.

[1:53:02] It's as simple as I could put it, it's basically what the house is going to be.

[1:53:08] You can go ahead and go to the next side.

[1:53:11] So this shows the existing first floor, which is not much, too much going on.

[1:53:18] It's a scrubber, a small house footprint, and then on the right side is a proposed where

[1:53:24] that small house footprint is going to be turned into an ADU, and then on the right side,

[1:53:29] There's of the aid you there's gonna be some stairways

[1:53:31] as access ways to get up to the second floor

[1:53:35] and a garage to hold three cars.

[1:53:39] And the next slide.

[1:53:48] So, on the left side is the existing main floor.

[1:53:52] Like I said, it's kind of a small footprint of a house.

[1:53:55] This is a very modest home.

[1:53:57] And now, on the second floor, as I read,

[1:54:02] description of before. There's going to be master bath. I'm a master bedroom, it's sort of

[1:54:11] a shared master bathroom, and a second bath, a second bedroom and office, and then across

[1:54:21] from where the stairs are above the garage, on the second level, is the dining kitchen and

[1:54:28] entertainment space.

[1:54:32] And so you can see here that it is going to make the house

[1:54:38] a little bit more impressive on the street. I would say this is not out of character of the area.

[1:54:46] There are some various different size homes in the area. Some are obviously more modest,

[1:54:52] Some are larger, but I think they presented a fairly decent.

[1:55:00] Our architectural job is making it look cohesive and make sense as both foreign function.

[1:55:09] So you can go to the next slide,

[1:55:16] and this is just a side view, not too much to see here, but

[1:55:20] the top drawings are the left drawings are the existing, what east and west elevation and the right are the proposed east and west elevation.

[1:55:31] on

[1:55:33] the next slide. And so in summary, the proposed project from East Alameda County

[1:55:38] is owning ordinance, the Edenary General Plan, the Fairviews, the area's district plan,

[1:55:43] and the residential design gardens, the centers and guidelines. Therefore, the planning staff

[1:55:48] supports this project for approval. Next slide, please.

[1:55:54] Staff recommends the Fairview and Missile

[1:55:56] Advisory Council recommend approval of the site development of you, PLN 2026, Serious

[1:56:01] of 0.41 to the county board supervisors, the planning department staff will convey the Fairview

[1:56:07] area and the useful advisory council's recommendation to the planning director during his deliberations

[1:56:11] of this item to a law construction of additional 50% of existing space in the single-family home

[1:56:18] based on drawing Mark Zuckeray and received March 18 to 0.26.

[1:56:26] So the Fairview and the useful advisory council's recommendation and the following conditions

[1:56:30] approval should be considered or maybe considered.

[1:56:36] And the conditions are attached to the staff

[1:56:40] report, which we would have received in your packet, which are right at the end of where I guess

[1:56:50] this is page the first conditions on page number five of the staff report. And there are

[1:56:57] or 17 conditions, mostly most of them are standard conditions,

[1:57:03] like getting fired apart from approval

[1:57:06] or that kind of thing, having a chance

[1:57:09] to make minimal changes if they need to with the,

[1:57:15] if they get it through the planning director

[1:57:17] and he says it's okay, I'm not saying key

[1:57:20] because our planning director is Albert, so.

[1:57:25] What else you

[1:57:33] could go ahead and look at any conditions if you want if you have any questions

[1:57:38] and a staff available for any questions I do believe we have Hell and Yangtze fan fun on virtual

[1:57:51] And the Santa Barbara here today, does he make it?

[1:57:56] I don't think the owner, they were trying to have them come, but I guess he'll make it.

[1:58:04] What are you in the back?

[1:58:05] I didn't see you.

[1:58:07] Okay.

[1:58:08] Okay.

[1:58:10] So, that's your presentation.

[1:58:12] Okay.

[1:58:12] So, Chris, do you have any questions or comments?

[1:58:17] Well.

[1:58:21] One of the things is parking, right?

[1:58:26] So you've got a three-car garage,

[1:58:30] and how many cars could you get in the driveway?

[1:58:35] Well, not exactly sure, but I would assume at least two,

[1:58:40] but if not three, they have a 35-foot setback.

[1:58:43] So I would think you could probably get at least three in there.

[1:58:47] Again, it's parking gets tight there at times, the nursing home has the classes there.

[1:59:00] I don't know how many times a month they are at the end.

[1:59:04] the, you know, the, these trees just packed at that time. And, uh,

[1:59:13] and I, I, the, the

[1:59:15] aerial photos, I saw six cars in the, part of the lot, uh, whatever, whatever time,

[1:59:22] that was taken. And, uh, I suppose, uh,

[1:59:29] well, they don't call it basards, they're, they're

[1:59:34] more, but I still call it the SARTs. I suppose those classes are during the day and if you had

[1:59:42] just sober. That's the evening. So I'm just trying to, you know, throw spaghetti at the parking situation.

[1:59:52] I understand your concern. I would think in rest home activities probably earlier in the morning to

[1:59:59] I mean, rest on.

[2:00:00] It's usually cut off pretty early from my understanding, you know, by eight or nine o'clock most people are going to bed or in bed and probably

[2:00:10] raising hours or probably already over. So I think it would probably be okay. Was that being the major concern up there?

[2:00:21] Yeah, I mean, the design, I think it's fine. And it's a huge lot. I mean, are they going to have?

[2:00:29] maybe they'll put a tennis court back there or something out of them.

[2:00:36] Well, it's not tennis.

[2:00:38] Take a ball, take a ball.

[2:00:40] Yeah, are you done?

[2:00:41] Yeah, I'm done.

[2:00:42] Okay.

[2:00:43] Vanessa, do you have anything?

[2:00:47] Yeah, I'm your neighbor.

[2:00:49] I'm right up there.

[2:00:50] So I share Chris's concern about the parking.

[2:00:54] There is absolutely, it's a very hard to pass through there.

[2:01:01] As you know, and concerned about if there's six cars parked here and there's a three car garage, like if there's going to be additional parking on the street.

[2:01:15] By main question when I looked it up, it said that it was the VISTA point facility at that location. There's no relationship, right? Just other than it being right next to it.

[2:01:25] It's not owned by the history.

[2:01:28] No, just the VISTA point assisted living facility.

[2:01:31] I don't have that thing that's no relation.

[2:01:35] It used to be.

[2:01:36] That's maybe why Google Maps thinks that that's what it is.

[2:01:41] Oh, I see.

[2:01:42] Okay, that's helpful.

[2:01:46] So the, okay, so that's the part that I share the parking concern.

[2:01:52] And I don't, I don't know that quite what you said.

[2:01:54] Because I know when the parking is a problem, which is from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. anytime that people are basically driving through there. It's a problem.

[2:02:03] So I continue to share that concern.

[2:02:06] The other question I had was, and this might just be because I don't understand.

[2:02:10] But why is the proposed project being referred to as an ADU?

[2:02:19] because it has a second kitchen, so it has to be ADU, otherwise you couldn't exist as a

[2:02:25] cabin kitchen there.

[2:02:28] I'm sorry. So this came up when they were designing the project,

[2:02:33] they had a kitchen and an existing home that they wanted to keep, and the only way to keep

[2:02:38] it would would be to make it an ADU, have an exterior entrance to the ADU, and allow them to keep

[2:02:46] the kitchen that was there. Otherwise, you're going to have one kitchen. So that was an innovative way

[2:02:52] of creating more housing also out. I'm to keep not have to change so much of the original house.

[2:02:58] At least the lower floor.

[2:03:01] Just in.

[2:03:03] Okay.

[2:03:03] Thank you for that.

[2:03:05] The other question I have is, this property is located adjacent to that large open area.

[2:03:16] Off of D Street that it runs perpendicular all the way back.

[2:03:24] It's open space and there was a development that was proposed in that area a few years back.

[2:03:31] And I know that the fire department had weighed in on there being concerns about the water pressure and case of a fire.

[2:03:40] And I do see that there was a fire recommendation at the end that was pretty basic around like just having.

[2:03:49] fire sprinklers which is pretty standard but was there did that come up at all for this home

[2:03:55] in terms of the water pressure issue? No. I think because they're going to be forced to

[2:04:06] have fire sprinklers so in order to have fire sprinklers you have to like refit all your water

[2:04:13] piping to a higher size.

[2:04:16] So with the higher size, water piping, I think

[2:04:18] has to be one inch, one normal, it has to be three quarters.

[2:04:22] So I don't think there's going to be an issue of water.

[2:04:27] Thank you for your presentation, and thank you for the answers.

[2:04:33] I pass the knowledge and then move it.

[2:04:36] Yeah, in terms of the water supply,

[2:04:40] the problem with the development that the fire department

[2:04:45] kind of shut down was the the number of houses. So that that was there was a

[2:04:56] advisable development right before this is just so once you

[2:05:00] Yeah, there's an existing house there. And then on the upper part of that piece, there's like maybe two or three houses. So, yeah, this is going to be, this is an existing house that's got already has water supply and that's the basics.

[2:05:20] Okay, Beth, please.

[2:05:23] Yeah, I was just going to comment on the water.

[2:05:26] When you go to one inch line, you're going to have more flow, but you might necessarily

[2:05:31] not have the same pressure.

[2:05:33] Good point.

[2:05:33] I think that's what we were alluding to, especially for the neighborhood.

[2:05:38] Good point.

[2:05:39] That's my only comment.

[2:05:42] Okay.

[2:05:43] I do have a question.

[2:05:45] So, in this picture that you have where you have the big green arrow, you can be one second.

[2:05:54] Yes. So can you tell, you see the picture of the roof of the house and you've got cars parked

[2:06:01] in next to the house? How far out is the addition going to go? Will it take up the first row,

[2:06:06] hat cars, the second row cars? I would say at least the second row cars.

[2:06:14] It's pretty much,

[2:06:15] If you go to the drawings where it shows elevation, I would say probably third row cars,

[2:06:27] third row cars.

[2:06:29] Okay, so looking at that picture, do you see that dark line going down the length of the property?

[2:06:36] Is that the property line?

[2:06:38] I believe so.

[2:06:39] Okay, so the question I have is does this housing unit allow for for you to drive a vehicle like a pickup truck or something of a size, maybe a one time pickup truck to have access on the far side.

[2:06:55] like on the looking from the street on the right side yes on the right side because on the left side

[2:07:01] no I was on the right on this the short side there's not a spade yet on the right on the right side as you're standing on the

[2:07:13] street you look there's a 25 foot setback on the from the building to the right side the property line

[2:07:21] Yeah. Okay. I mean, I think that's our clean up for any kind of vehicle. Okay. Good. That's. That was one question I had and I was a little confused. I get about the sync situation. We ran into that 30 years ago when we added on to our house, they made us put it in a put in a bar sink instead of a kitchen sink so that we could have that.

[2:07:47] So when I look at these views from, I think it's from the side looking east, where I can see the double garage door.

[2:08:00] And I can see a door going in downstairs.

[2:08:02] I think that leads to the interior staircase that takes you up to the top.

[2:08:07] I can't really see from your, the picture of the interior.

[2:08:15] How do you get on the second floor?

[2:08:18] How do you get from the bedroom office area over to the kitchen?

[2:08:22] The little, yes, I was looking at that myself.

[2:08:27] It's a little confusing.

[2:08:31] Um, give me one second,

[2:08:35] it looks like

[2:08:39] there's a second floor landing, do you see that

[2:08:44] where it says new second floor landing?

[2:08:48] Um, the box.

[2:08:49] I see,

[2:08:55] oh back here, right here.

[2:08:58] This is where it goes through.

[2:09:00] Oh, this is all open, this is a door, goes through there.

[2:09:04] Okay.

[2:09:08] Is the intention to rent the, maybe this doesn't matter, I don't know, but to rent the 80 out as a separate thing, you don't know.

[2:09:15] You can ask it.

[2:09:18] I'm just curious.

[2:09:20] Are you going to use the ADU as an ADU for the future?

[2:09:25] Okay.

[2:09:26] That's what I was trying to do in my house, too, for an in-law.

[2:09:34] I think that's all I have. I was just concerned about access to the back and you're right

[2:09:38] if I'd read it more closely, I would have known.

[2:09:43] And the parking when I went there today, there was no parking. I had to park up a street to

[2:09:49] the side, up a street to the side and ordered and then walked down. And then cross the street

[2:09:55] right where the hill was, I was really thinking I was going to get taken out by somebody flying

[2:10:00] So I know that that kind of thing is tough. So hopefully, one thing I noticed that three car garages, really a four car garage, right, because it's stacked parking. So really it's four cars is from what I can tell from the design.

[2:10:18] the vehicle also. Well, yeah, but okay. And then, and then in that 25 feet across, you can park

[2:10:25] other vehicles. Yeah, exactly. Well, I was just going to say, if they're having a, if they're having

[2:10:31] a party or something, they could probably have people just go on that 25 foot part, even park in the

[2:10:37] backyard and park around. Yeah, park out in the back. Yeah, you know, I think I think it's sort of

[2:10:42] a circus tense for the big party. Yeah, I got it. Okay. I'll let it drop. Thank you. Okay. Thank you

[2:10:48] the presentation now, is there any public comment on this item?

[2:10:56] Did you fill out a card?

[2:11:01] Kathy Langley?

[2:11:25] Three, two, four, seven, D Street is at historic property.

[2:11:31] It was owned by the brochards and it's a beautiful building.

[2:11:36] My concern is are you going to beat knocking out walls,

[2:11:42] reconfiguring the property in a severe

[2:11:45] way?

[2:11:45] It's my understanding in conversation with Michael Fleming

[2:11:53] that this home is owned by a trust

[2:11:57] and owned by a very high-end architect.

[2:12:04] It appears to be a rental home, but I'm suspect that why would they pay a high-end architect

[2:12:12] like Ms. Yang to reconfigure the property and that let it be a rental property,

[2:12:24] doesn't

[2:12:24] make sense to me. In addition, I'm suspect that the property below or west that they

[2:12:33] own will be developed one day. So I see this as adding up to a very complicated situation

[2:12:43] in the future which we can't predict. But that being said, the number of cars for four bedroom

[2:12:50] can be up to three cars per bedroom. That would be 12 cars. The number of parking places that they

[2:12:57] have would not be adequate. That overflow would go onto the street, which above that house is at a

[2:13:04] care, and ambulances go up there at least three times a week. I live on Mod Avenue near

[2:13:11] D Street, and they would be obstructed from helping those people. If there was a situation

[2:13:18] where evacuation were required up there, the ambulances would not be able to get to those people.

[2:13:31] I'm concerned about the equipment and how it will damage that upper portion of D Street,

[2:13:37] which is a very endangered area in terms of asphalt.

[2:13:51] So I'd like to know if that secondary lot would be involved.

[2:13:55] Thank you.

[2:13:57] What are you calling a secondary lot?

[2:14:02] The land west of the home is quite large.

[2:14:08] So that's what you're calling a secondary lot.

[2:14:10] Yeah, okay.

[2:14:11] It's still part of three, two, four, seven, D street.

[2:14:14] But it is undeveloped at this point, and I'm just suspect that this is going to be something we will see come up in the future.

[2:14:23] So that lower property carries the same address.

[2:14:34] So it sounds like really the property that we're talking about is all of that property.

[2:14:39] It's all too far away.

[2:14:45] Well, but not if it includes that second block that goes back, then it's a lot more.

[2:14:50] Color, you're on the line. You have three minutes, Brenda. Hi, I wanted to say that Kathy Langley has just made my point.

[2:15:00] About taking public comments before the Board has the opportunity to question the applicant, because this, her question should have been asked in your questions and answers. We can't speak directly to the presenter. That's why public comments must be taken before the Board's comments to the applicant, because you see we don't have a Q&A with them.

[2:15:26] And I think you've already closed your comments.

[2:15:29] I hope not because I don't have a comment about this in particular.

[2:15:35] I just have a comment about the spirit of public comments being done in order.

[2:15:43] So they can be inclusive in what you ask and get answers for your community.

[2:15:51] So, I just thank you, Kathy, what she said should be, I guess you'll have to ask questions

[2:15:58] on her behalf now because by the way, the Brown Act refers to state and local ordinances,

[2:16:10] general code ordinances that have been in place for years.

[2:16:13] The Brown Act's requirement to have these public comments before or during the board deliberation

[2:16:21] is ancient. It's not something invented by the Brown Act. So please, I have nothing to say about that other than I hope that you can circle back to the applicant and ask Ms. Lightly's question. Thank you.

[2:16:39] Call her. You're on the line. You have three minutes. Helen? Yes. Hi.

[2:16:45] Can you hear me? Yes. Okay. I'm not sure who recently spoke on the podium, but she has a very incorrect information.

[2:16:55] I am not an owner of that property and as far as I'm concerned that property is not historically significant.

[2:17:04] If there are any documents, please provide that.

[2:17:08] And also, Crescent revealed the owner does not own the adjacent property that she speaks of.

[2:17:16] And Crescent revealed trust.

[2:17:20] You can have any property that's deemed trust, and that does not mean that he is renting.

[2:17:27] He owns that property, him and his wife and their young son own their property.

[2:17:32] And they have outgrown their small modest home, and they wanted to turn that lower floor unit into an ADU for future housing, affordable housing, and turn the upstairs unit so that their young growing family can enjoy that home.

[2:17:55] And I'm not understanding how she came up with the calculation that one bedroom equals three parking.

[2:18:02] I've been an architect and working in the state of California for a very long time and that is the first time I've heard of it.

[2:18:11] So I would like the council members to look into her accusations and correct it please.

[2:18:19] Thank you.

[2:18:28] I have no digital speakers for the side

[2:18:33] of.

[2:18:34] Sorry chair. Just to address the comment about public comment. Yes. You are doing the right thing. You are taking public comment during deliberation. If something comes up during public comment. You can always ask staff or the applicant to come back to the podium and answer. We do not do as you know back and forth between public comment and staff. But you are in the correct.

[2:19:03] Thank you. And I think earlier this evening, we did in fact ask our presenters questions that we're coming up during public comments. I feel like we're covering our bases on that.

[2:19:17] Thank you. Thank you everybody who stood up for public comment. I appreciate that.

[2:19:26] Yes, Vanessa.

[2:19:27] Yeah, I just based on Kathy's comments. I just wanted to clarify in question. So my understanding is that the property that is right. What would that be? South.

[2:19:39] No, you, West.

[2:19:43] Downhill.

[2:19:44] Yes, West.

[2:19:46] Downhill. I mean, I, I, the sun comes up over here. The sun comes up over here. So that's east.

[2:19:53] It's gotta be south. Pretty sure it's south, but if you're going up, D, it's the first-

[2:20:00] First property that's empty, and then you have the property in question. When I heard Kathy saying, I want to understand, is that that empty lot that opens up into a much larger empty lot behind further back. That's the property that I believe was part of this developmental potential development years ago.

[2:20:28] And so what I'm hearing is that now, the open lot right along D, just underneath the property and question, is also owned by the same owner.

[2:20:44] Okay, so because what I was hearing then is like then there was potential for additional development beyond what you're proposing right now, but you don't own that land.

[2:20:58] Do you have intention of owning that lens?

[2:21:01] Okay, no, I'm sorry, back and forth, sorry.

[2:21:03] Okay, so that was what I was trying to get clarity on.

[2:21:07] Thank you.

[2:21:09] And thank you for asking the question because me too.

[2:21:13] So, where am I?

[2:21:16] Do you have any comment?

[2:21:18] No, no.

[2:21:18] Okay, do you have anything else?

[2:21:20] Chris, do you have anything else?

[2:21:28] And frankly, because they have the property behind and they have access to the property behind,

[2:21:34] they can park back there.

[2:21:37] So they really given the size of that parcel.

[2:21:39] They have practically unlimited parking for this single family home.

[2:21:46] And is there direct access between the ADE portion

[2:21:53] and the family home portion in interior?

[2:21:58] Interior?

[2:22:00] That's staircase goes, oh, because it's behind the front door.

[2:22:04] OK, got it.

[2:22:05] Thank you.

[2:22:07] If there's nothing further, can I entertain a motion

[2:22:11] concerning this request?

[2:22:17] Anyone?

[2:22:18] I'll, I'll move to approve. Assimited.

[2:22:24] Assimited. Okay. Do I have a second?

[2:22:27] I'll second that. All right. We have a first and a second. Is there any further discussion

[2:22:32] amongst the panel?

[2:22:36] All right. May we take a roll call, please?

[2:22:39] Council Member Farmer. Yes. Council Member Higgins.

[2:22:43] All right.

[2:22:45] Vice chair Roads.

[2:22:47] Chair Filbin.

[2:22:48] Hi.

[2:22:48] Approved.

[2:22:51] All right.

[2:22:51] So we have an approval on that item.

[2:22:54] Thank you very much.

[2:22:56] And next.

[2:22:58] Let me get my agenda out here.

[2:23:00] I think it's the chair report next.

[2:23:08] Okay.

[2:23:16] All right.

[2:23:17] So do I ask for public comment after I make my comments?

[2:23:20] Is that what I do?

[2:23:22] Yes.

[2:23:22] You will give your chair's report.

[2:23:24] if you have one and then you will open it up for public comment and then close it.

[2:23:29] Okay. So my chair report is frankly just my standard. Please mark your calendars for

[2:23:37] November. I hope it's the eighthest stuck in my head for the annual veterans event

[2:23:43] up at Lone Tree Cemetery starting at 1 o'clock. We would love to see you and your families there.

[2:23:50] If there are items that you would like to see brought before the Fairview Municipal Advisory Council, please get in touch with Ashley and let her know or if you have general concerns about things going on in the community, you can get in touch with any of the council members here today.

[2:24:07] That's my report. Is there any public comment on my report?

[2:24:20] Yes, I have one speaker.

[2:24:24] Coeur, you're on the line where I'm shares report.

[2:24:28] Hi, everyone, Bob Coeur.

[2:24:30] Fairview.

[2:24:31] Just wanted to mention, as I was talking about public events,

[2:24:36] the Fairview Fire District hasn't opened house coming up.

[2:24:40] As they do every year, September the 16th

[2:24:43] from three o'clock to seven o'clock and that will be at fire station number eight five

[2:24:51] gangens and that's a great event for children as well as adults and community

[2:24:57] members. Thank you.

[2:25:00] Oh, thank you for that. Um, because I'll be there. Thank you so much. Is there any other public comment? No. Okay, then I am closing public comment. I will move on to our council members. If you have any comments, I'll start with Beth.

[2:25:17] other than the open house, no. Okay, and Vanessa.

[2:25:23] Two quick things. One is

[2:25:25] hooray. We got lines on upper D. Did I really see it? So awesome. We know when the

[2:25:31] bump is coming now. So yay, thank you Public Works. And then also just wanted to

[2:25:36] note, I know that Officer Paps did bring this up at the public comment in the

[2:25:41] beginning, that they are doing kind of more enforcement around the schools and

[2:25:47] They have been doing enforcement around fair view elementary, which has been very helpful.

[2:25:51] I wanted to commend their efforts and continue to encourage all of us drivers out there driving around schools to be careful and safe.

[2:26:02] Thank you. Can I ask Chris before I open comment?

[2:26:05] You can take all council comments and then do public comment once you guys are okay. Chris, do you have anything?

[2:26:12] Yeah, well, maybe we could like for some future meeting,

[2:26:20] open up consideration about why our specific plan is attached to the Eden general plan.

[2:26:29] I mean, it just, it doesn't make, there's no logic to it.

[2:26:34] And, and it was done with no public input.

[2:26:38] Okay, thank you. I will put that on the list and we'll chat about that. I would now like to open public comment on any of the comments made by the council.

[2:26:52] I have no speakers. Are there any speakers in the room?

[2:26:56] With that, I will close public comment and ask if there is anything from staff.

[2:27:02] Nothing from staff.

[2:27:05] Okay, may I have public comment on the staff report, please?

[2:27:09] No speakers. No speakers. No speakers in the room. Then I will close public comment and guess what we are adjourned

Fairview Municipal Advisory Council

Agenda

Transcript