[0:04] Today is August 20th. This is a meeting of the 350 Midell affordable housing

[0:08] project subcommittee. Often we have our subcommittees meet upstairs, but because

[0:12] we knew we'd have a lot of folks here, we knew we'd be more comfortable in the

[0:15] chamber. So, it's a little bit more formal than we have for some committees,

[0:18] but uh it definitely serves what we're going to be doing today. So, I'm calling

[0:22] the meeting to order. As we uh before we start any meeting, we like open time for

[0:26] public expression. This is anything not on today's agenda. you have the

[0:29] opportunity to share with the subcommittee if you'd like to do that.

[0:32] Now is your opportunity to do so. If it's not on the agenda,

[0:38] okay, if it's not about anything that we're talking about and you're welcome,

[0:41] but not required to say your name and what part of Sanfell you're in and you

[0:45] have two minutes.

[0:50] » Good evening. I'm Gregory Andrew from Sarfell Meadows and I want to talk about

[0:54] the u make a comment about the timing of the posting of this meeting which is not

[0:59] on the agenda and that is to just let you know that

[1:04] uh to not have posted it on Friday when meetings are normally posted which we

[1:11] were looking for and to not get that posting until Monday is a tactic that

[1:18] does not build trust with us in the neighborhood. Several of us commented,

[1:22] "Why would they wait?" They knew this meeting was coming. It wasn't because

[1:27] it's summer and there seemed to have been a deliberate decision to postpone

[1:34] the noticeifica notification of this meeting. Now, you did it certainly

[1:39] within uh what you're allowed to do within the Brown Act, but I want to let

[1:43] you know that that approach is not a good way to build trust with us who have

[1:49] been engaged with you and following this and looking to get more confidence and

[1:56] more trust from you about your whole approach to uh this particular project.

[2:03] So, that's my comment. Thank you. I'm so glad they were able to make it even with

[2:07] the less than ideal from your perspective um noticing. Anyone else

[2:13] like to comment? Not seeing any other public comment. Uh we will get right

[2:18] into it because we have a big agenda even though it looks like it's only one

[2:22] item. So we will be discussing initial summary and discussion of responses for

[2:27] RFP which is request for proposals for the development of new affordable

[2:31] housing at 350 Maryale Road. And I'm going to turn it over to looks like

[2:36] Alexis and Greg. Oh, director Hinkle, the whole team. Okay.

[2:41] [snorts]

[2:48] Thank you. Good evening, mayor and council member. I'm Alexis Caption,

[2:53] housing manager for the city, and I'm here with assistant director Greg Miner

[2:56] and director Micah Hingle to present responses to the request for proposals

[3:00] or RFP for the development of affordable housing at 350 Midale Road.

[3:08] The purpose of this study session is to provide a summary of the top responses

[3:11] to the RFP and to receive feedback on the application of the selection

[3:16] criteria to inform staff's recommendation to the full city council.

[3:22] We'll start with brief background on the city's housing landscape. We'll review

[3:26] the 350 Midel acquisition and grant requirements, provide an overview of the

[3:31] RFP, and outline next steps. Following staff's presentation, we will hand it

[3:35] off to the development teams to provide brief presentations on their respective

[3:39] proposals.

[3:43] So, a little bit of background on where we are with housing in Sanfell and

[3:46] Marin. are in a constrained housing market in part because as you can see in

[3:51] this graph while the population of San Rafll continued to grow over the last

[3:54] several several decades construction dwindled.

[3:59] Limited supply has contributed to a lack of affordable housing and resulted in

[4:04] Marin being the second most expensive metropolitan area in the United States

[4:08] with the third highest median rent in California.

[4:11] Increases in housing costs have far outpaced wage growth. So that more more

[4:16] than four in 10 households in Marin qualify as low income. And the folks who

[4:21] are low income are the same people that provide critical services and make our

[4:26] community run. For example, based on their average

[4:29] salaries in 2025, home health aids fall into the extremely lowincome bracket.

[4:34] Preschool teachers are very low income and paramedics are low income.

[4:39] Not having affordable housing has qu uh enough affordable housing has

[4:43] consequences including homelessness, overcrowding and displacement,

[4:48] rent burden and severe rent burden, meaning households are spending more

[4:52] than 30% or more than 50% of their income on housing. And they may have to

[4:56] choose between paying rent and other necessities such as food and medication.

[5:02] Not enough affordable housing in Marin contributes to workforce shortages and

[5:06] means that workers have to commute from out of county, contributing to pollution

[5:10] and environmental impacts. We are also seeing a distortion of the

[5:15] county's population pyramid shown here with a deficit of working age adults and

[5:20] young families. And finally, we continue to see racial

[5:24] disparities across multiple indicators with black and Latino households

[5:28] experiencing higher levels of rent burden and lower rates of home

[5:32] ownership. For example, understanding these impacts and that

[5:36] affordable housing is important for the economic and cultural vitality of San

[5:40] Rafale, the city council adopted the following housing and homelessness

[5:44] priorities in their three-year strategic plan, including to facilitate new

[5:49] housing development, assist in ensuring housing stability, support a housing

[5:54] first model, and implement strategies that reduce homelessness. The project

[5:59] that we're about to discuss is grounded in these established priorities. I'll

[6:03] now hand it off to Greg to talk about 350 Midale.

[6:08] » All right. Good evening. Um, so in further in in furtherance of the the

[6:13] goals adopted by city council with respect to housing back in November, as

[6:17] the the subcommittee members are are well aware, the city acquired 350 Midale

[6:22] Road, a 2.5 acre property um shown here on the slide from a satellite view

[6:28] perspective. Um, thanks to funding from the county of Marin. Uh, the site itself

[6:33] was last used as an adult school. You can see three white structures in a

[6:37] surface parking lot. Uh it's bordered on the east by the 101 freeway. Uh to the

[6:43] north or above this picture, you have the smart station nearby and then you

[6:47] have residential uses to the to the west and a combination of residential

[6:52] commercial to the south. Uh the funding that the county provided

[6:58] came as part of a grant agreement uh entered into between the city and

[7:02] county. And with respect to Oh, I'm sorry. I glossed over the fact that this

[7:07] is a a two-phase project as part of the the uh collaboration with the county.

[7:12] The first phase being an interim shelter for unhoused individuals and the second

[7:16] phase being what we're discussing uh tonight, the permanent affordable

[7:20] housing development of at least 80 units. Um so in terms of the grant

[7:24] agreements requirements for this phase of the project, uh the grant agreement

[7:28] requires that the city must entitle the site for at least 80 housing units by

[7:33] the end of June 2028. It also requires that the incomes of the tenants may not

[7:39] exceed 80% of the area median median income. And just for a little

[7:43] perspective, we provided what that 80% of AMI means for a fourperson household

[7:49] here on the slide. And in terms of consequences, should the

[7:53] city fail to entitle 80 units, the city would be liable for $100,000 for every

[7:58] unit not entitled beyond u short of the 80 units.

[8:05] So, as a first step towards realizing this vision, staff released a request

[8:09] for proposals this spring to identify a developing an affordable housing

[8:14] developer that could help realize this vision.

[8:18] The RFP asked uh respondents to provide a number of

[8:24] um components as part of their proposal, including an overview of their proposal,

[8:29] such as their their vision, the site design, the affordability levels,

[8:33] services plan, and their development timeline. Additionally, information was

[8:38] requested about their teams and qualifications, the experience of their

[8:41] organization, and those working on the project, followed by information on

[8:46] their project financials, such as a pro-forma, information on their

[8:50] pre-development financing strategy, operating budget, proposed purchase or

[8:55] ground lease. And finally, information was requested regarding the financial

[9:00] capacity of each developing team s and which required financial statements from

[9:04] their most recent calendar or fiscal year as well as letters from the

[9:09] developers lenders attesting to their capacity to undertake this project. Um

[9:14] once the responses were received, a panel of city and county staff as well

[9:19] as a representative of the chamber of commerce independently reviewed and

[9:23] scored the proposals received based on the criteria that you see outlined on

[9:28] the screen. Um in terms of the responses received,

[9:33] there was uh there was a total of five responses altogether. The scoring across

[9:39] all panel members identified three strong uh candidates in EA, Eden and

[9:45] Saha. Across the while there were some uh

[9:49] unique components to each proposal there was a lot of similarities as well which

[9:54] was actually a good thing in the sense that all three provided commitments to

[9:58] covering pre-development costs. All three identified funding strategies that

[10:04] utilize state grants and federal tax credits. They all provided for community

[10:08] engagement as part of their proposal. They all provided a timeline that met

[10:13] the city and county's grant agreements of entitling at least 80 units by the

[10:17] end of June 2028. They all identified services for future residents. They all

[10:24] contain a mixture of unit types, including threebedroom units for

[10:28] families, and they all propose leasing the property for 99 years for $1

[10:33] annually. Um, all al all all that said, there were a couple differences as I

[10:39] alluded to a moment ago, including the number of units being proposed, the

[10:43] amount of parking provided, and neighborhood improvements.

[10:47] And those uh differences and some of those similarities are outlined here in

[10:51] this uh summary table. So for example, EAH um of the three uh candidates is

[10:58] proposing the lowest number of units and so understandably also the the shortest

[11:03] structure, a three-story structure. Um they are providing they also are

[11:08] offering to provide the lowest average affordability level of 45% and the

[11:14] lowest per unit cost. Um, in contrast, Eden is proposing the uh greatest number

[11:20] of housing units as well as the highest structure. Um, they're also proposing

[11:25] the largest amount of parking spaces per unit. And then they're and the most

[11:30] costly per unit um proposal. In terms of affordability level, Eden and Saha are

[11:36] proposing the same average affordability level. Um lastly, Saha is proposing uh a

[11:43] level of units and stories that falls in between the EAH and Eden proposals um

[11:48] while providing the the lowest number of parking spaces per unit.

[11:54] Um so in the end Eden did score the highest um by the the average of panel

[12:00] scores but they were followed closely by EAH and SAHA and ultimately all three

[12:06] are qualified to sati satisfy the city county's grant requirements and we feel

[12:10] lucky to have such strong respondents to our RFP. Um, at the same time, Eden's

[12:16] proposal offers the most housing, the most parking, and it included

[12:21] neighborhood improvements such as facilitating a permanent pedestrian

[12:25] bicycle path or or an official pedestrian and bicycle path

[12:30] between uh the 350 Midale site and the Midale community in the Smart Station.

[12:36] Um, and when we considered both the need for more housing, as

[12:41] Alexis described, the rare opportunity that we have before us with this uh

[12:48] sizable site, and the fact that the city's going to invest time and

[12:52] resources, whether or not we entitle 80 units or more than 80 units, these are

[12:57] some of the compelling factors that led the panel to um score Eden the highest.

[13:03] Um I will wrap up with just highlighting some next steps. This is this slide just

[13:08] kind of provides like a a general um overview of where

[13:13] the journey that we're going to be um commencing in terms of uh the steps

[13:19] needed to actually finalizing uh the housing and and leasing the site. The

[13:26] top half of this timeline identifies milestones related to the permanent

[13:31] affordable housing project and below are milestones related to the interim

[13:35] shelter. We're still in the very first milestone, the top left and today marks

[13:41] really just the beginning of that process of selecting a developer. Um

[13:46] hopefully uh after today's discussion staff will be in a position to present a

[13:51] recommendation to the full council to enter into an exclusive negotiating

[13:55] agreement and we'll be able to come to terms with the developer and uh move

[14:00] along this this process. And then for those interested in staying um a breast

[14:07] of this project and all the developments that uh including the next council

[14:12] meeting, this is the project web page here. And there's also the QR code that

[14:17] you can uh use to locate this web page. You can sign up for email updates um and

[14:23] news posts related to this. So if you're interested in staying up to date um this

[14:29] is the the place to go. So with that, if there's any more questions, if there are

[14:34] any questions for staff, we're happy to answer that. Um if not, as Alexis

[14:38] mentioned, the the three developer teams are ready to present and um we can hand

[14:43] it off to the presenters. >> And before [clears throat] we end on

[14:46] that and trans transfer over the development teams, one point of

[14:49] clarification want to really make tonight is this is really not selecting

[14:52] a project. Um, in essence, if you talk to these development teams, they can do

[14:57] all three of these projects in independently, but really that's their

[15:01] vision approach that when based on the input of our RFP, that's what they

[15:05] basically called out themselves. But really tonight is just to select the

[15:08] developer that'll actually be the city's partner in this. And then the project

[15:12] will actually be better defined through the process of due diligence and uh

[15:16] community input along with um the um uh exclusive negotiated rights agreement.

[15:23] There's a lot of other factors need to come play. That's why we're really on

[15:26] the early first phases of this, but this is just an indication of really what the

[15:29] developers um team saw within this site for themselves. So just want to make

[15:34] that point of clarification. >> Thank you. Any questions?

[15:39] » Yeah, go ahead. Just a couple quick questions. Um,

[15:45] it doesn't say in here anywhere, but I understand that all of these units will

[15:49] be rental units and none of these are anticipated to be sold. Is that correct?

[15:53] » Yes, that is correct. >> Okay. Building on that then um when you

[15:57] did your financial analysis the proformas was it focused just on the

[16:02] capital outlay necessary to get the building built or was there also a sort

[16:06] of operating proforma for the decades to come.

[16:14] » I mean my recollection has included both the construction and ongoing operations

[16:19] as well as part as part of their proposals.

[16:22] » Very good. Thank you. >> Thank you. I don't have any additional

[16:25] questions so we'll go right to it. So the next part is a presentation by

[16:30] affordable housing developers and it looks like you have slides for

[16:35] them and I understand it. So >> can I just a point of process so each

[16:39] fellow hi will have how much time have you allocated each

[16:45] applicant just so we can I can

[16:48] » I believe they're prepared to provide a 5 to 10 minute overview and then be

[16:51] available for questions. >> Okay. And then um EAH was listed first

[16:56] in our staff report just based on alphabetical order. And so but we defer

[17:02] to the subcommittee if you there's a specific order that you want to proceed.

[17:05] » No no this is great and so we'll hear the presentations five to 10 minutes for

[17:08] each. We'll have questions and then we'll have public comment both questions

[17:11] and comments and then there might be developers come back up and answer

[17:15] questions. So >> that sounds great. Um, should I um let

[17:19] you know when to for the slide or should I do it from

[17:22] » I think we're sorting through some we're trying to make it full screen.

[17:24] » Oh, sure. Sure. >> Um, well, while you're doing that, I

[17:29] guess I'll I'll just start quickly. Um, so good evening. Uh, my name is Nor

[17:33] Cauer and I had the opportunity to lead the EAH housing uh Maryale proposal. Um,

[17:39] EAH was really excited for the opportunity to build in our hometown

[17:42] again. Uh we own and operate 20 properties within 20 minutes of 350

[17:47] Maryale. So um even just the dozens of community partnerships we've had over

[17:51] the last you know 55 plus years are really great for us to tap into should

[17:56] we be able to move forward with with the city on this. Um with me in the audience

[18:00] I have our EAh development director Daniel Ry um and our architects Sema

[18:05] Muscar and Justin Wong from Studio Tsquare right here if um you had any

[18:09] questions for them. >> Yes. Oh, thank you. Perfect. Um, okay.

[18:14] So, uh, because the city, um, did a great job kind of frontloading and gave

[18:18] you a lot in the staff report about ourselves and our background, I'm just

[18:21] going to jump right into, um, I had five critical points basically that

[18:25] differentiate EAH and kind of reaffirm our ability to to execute what we've

[18:30] proposed. Um, so first, uh, the EH design

[18:35] acknowledges the Loscalinus Valley Sanitary District easement that's

[18:39] running through the center of the site. Um so because of that we did create a

[18:43] family oriented community with this constraint in mind um that fits the

[18:47] scale of the surrounding neighborhood at three stories ensures the city dollar

[18:51] goes as far as it can and leverage uh reflects the city's values on

[18:55] sustainability, speed, open space and innovation. Um we didn't want to start

[19:00] with a less timely potential option of the sanitary district relinquishing that

[19:04] easement without doing you know some additional due diligence with you all as

[19:08] a city partner and figuring out what they might want to do with that. So we

[19:11] really just started with that as a constraint in mind knowing that there's

[19:14] some flexibility should that change. Um so the EH design centers on an

[19:19] environmental approach. Uh we'd be offering a modular full electric

[19:24] execution. Um plus the potential for adaptive reuse of some of the existing

[19:28] structures should the city desire it. Um we have completed two modular

[19:32] developments in other parts of the Bay Area and are starting our third. So we

[19:35] do have some experience with that. Um, and this translates to no concrete, um,

[19:40] less noise, less waste, and less time during construction. Um, so that leads

[19:44] me to my next point here. Um, so our proposal does have the lowest

[19:50] cost of the three. Uh, tonight we rightsize the project to fit the

[19:54] criteria for four viable funding paths um to increase our chances of getting

[19:58] funded as quickly as possible or within the timeline that uh, Greg shared. Um so

[20:04] and plus to [clears throat] increase our along with that to also have a possible

[20:08] better interest rate and access to some upfront modular capital. So we would not

[20:12] be able to to offer that high level of certainty of getting awarded these

[20:16] particular types of funds um at the cost efficiency with a more expensive design.

[20:20] So that is really why we went with the three-story garden style with the

[20:24] potential for modular. Um in our proposal, EH had included a letter of

[20:28] support from the San Francisco Accelerator Fund, the housing

[20:31] accelerator fund. Um that fund requires family units stay under a $750,000 total

[20:36] development cost per unit. Um and it allows us to access a much better

[20:40] interest rate um than the market. And they also do have um a great modular

[20:44] program that we can access. Um so in addition to designing most cost

[20:48] effectively to have four viable financing paths, um EAH did want to

[20:55] design with the neighborhood character top of mind. Um, our goal was to reflect

[20:59] the values and priorities of the city with deeper affordability, larger family

[21:03] units, um, had a density and parking ratio that was practical for families.

[21:07] Um, the option to include permanent supportive housing with a potential

[21:11] health care partner should, um, one funding become available and should that

[21:14] be desired by the city. Um, and then also, you know, just a high level of

[21:19] sustainability and a lot of open space. Um and again three stories also gets us

[21:23] that cost savings but we left our design very flexible to add on uh or adjust as

[21:28] we refine with the city as Mr. Hinkle mentioned. Um so my last point then is

[21:34] uh uh collaboration with the city. Um so

[21:39] connection to the smart train and buses are critical for our residents. Eh plans

[21:43] to serve households at an average of 45% of the area median income which is just

[21:48] under 100,000 a year for a family of four. Um so because of that we really

[21:52] need to um prioritize state funding that can provide transit oriented development

[21:57] um that can provide uh subsidies and operating support and really prioritize

[22:02] state funds for lower-income households. Um eh has a very strong working

[22:07] knowledge regarding improvements to the pedestrian path to the smart uh train

[22:11] and to the bus station um and to downtown because of our prior

[22:14] partnership with the city um and with the transit agencies. Uh we were the

[22:18] partner for the affordable housing and sustainable communities program grant on

[22:21] a Northgate mall project that did not move forward. Um but we do have all of

[22:26] the the working knowledge and research and plans that we were going to be

[22:30] submitting for that application which would be relevant for this site as well.

[22:33] Um because it's the same station. Um and then with that, you know, so we'd be

[22:39] bringing all that with us. Um and also would want to work with the city to to

[22:43] ensure we understand how you'd like to build that path. um you know in the

[22:47] right infrastructure improvement funds that would be available um should state

[22:51] funding be allowed to to do that. Um so with that I'm going to end there um and

[22:56] then I don't know if you want us to do questions now or after.

[23:01] » Yeah if we have any top of the line questions or we just keep going through.

[23:05] » We'll just keep going through. >> Yeah. Thank you so much.

[23:16] Thank you.

[23:26] » Okay. Can you make that? Oh, cool. Thanks. So, good evening. Um, I'm Tammy

[23:31] Strauss from Eden Housing. We have a few more slides than our uh the previous

[23:37] presenter, so I might talk a little faster. Tonight, we're sharing Eden's

[23:41] vision for 350 Male Road. Our proposal is rooted in affordability, family

[23:47] housing, transit access, community engagement, and partnership, and long

[23:52] long-term stewardship.

[23:56] Eden has been addressing California's affordable housing housing crisis for

[24:01] since 1968. Our strength is that we're not only a developer, we're also a

[24:05] long-term owner, operator, property manager, and resident service provider.

[24:10] That means we remain accountable to the community well beyond construction.

[24:17] Uh we have a strong and growing presence in in Marin County and in San Raphael.

[24:22] Our recent work uh in San Raphael is our Vivivalon and Kasa Canal which uh was

[24:29] designed by Van Meter Williams Pollock who's here with us again tonight. Oakill

[24:34] in Marin City and Tamalco Homes and Point Rays. Um our local experience

[24:39] helps us understand the context partnerships and expectations in Marin

[24:44] County and in San Raphael. Okay. Uh, this project at a glance will

[24:50] include 111 homes exceeding the city's 80 unit requirement. The homes will

[24:55] serve households up to 60% of AMI with an average affordability of 49%. The

[25:01] proposal will meet the June 30th 28 entitlement deadline and the uh RTDC uh

[25:09] was mentioned RTDC was pretty high, but it reflects robust community engagement,

[25:13] parking, and the proposed public and neighborhood improvements.

[25:20] We've assembled a team with the experience needed to deliver a complex a

[25:24] complex affordable housing project. Eden brings affordable housing devel

[25:28] development, financing, ownership and operations and resident services

[25:32] experience. Van meter Williams Pollock brings strong affordable housing and

[25:37] mid-rise design exper expertise. and our engagement team engaged fora brings

[25:43] community engagement capacity grounded in equity, listening and local t

[25:47] context. Together our team is built for execution and partnership.

[25:54] I will hand it over to Sarah. Thank you Tammy. Thank you all for

[26:00] having us. My name is Sarah Vicaro. I'm principal with Engage for representing

[26:03] our team here tonight at engage. Oh, thank you.

[26:09] Um at engage fora we believe that design is better with diverse voices at the

[26:14] table. Engage for specializes in leading thoughtful and authentic community

[26:19] engagement that is not just informational but truly allows the

[26:22] community and future residents residents to meaningfully inform the project. Our

[26:27] approach will be to listen early while also being transparent about the project

[26:32] goals and non-negotiables. Identify community priorities and

[26:36] concerns and partner with the Eden and Ban meter Williams Pollock team to allow

[26:40] the community's input to inform the project design and development.

[26:47] Our engagement approach is rooted in deep listening and authentic

[26:50] co-creation. Phases two and three in the middle of this diagram are where we will

[26:55] spend most of our time engaging with the project neighbors, the broader San

[27:00] Raphael community, and potential future residents to shape the project. Phase

[27:05] one at the beginning is where we will gain valuable insights into the

[27:08] community through one-on-one interviews. And then phase four at the end,

[27:12] accountability. This is where we will report back to the community on how

[27:16] their specific input has been integrated into the design and celebrate that the

[27:21] project is stronger because of it. Our engagement process will be closely

[27:25] coordinated with the project team and the city um to ensure the timeline um to

[27:31] to to meet the entitlements timeline and to ensure that feedback can be

[27:35] meaningfully informed at specific design decision steps.

[27:43] Our team has developed a highly varied toolkit of events and exercises to

[27:46] quickly gain an understanding of the community's values to build trust with

[27:51] them and to explore design options to create a project vision together that

[27:54] strengthens the design. We anticipate using multiple ways to reach people, not

[27:59] just the traditional public meetings, but also neighbor outreach focus groups,

[28:03] popups at local city events, community workshops, all with inclusive and

[28:08] multilingual materials as needed. The intent is to meet people where they are

[28:13] and make the participation easily accessible.

[28:20] » Thanks, Rick Williams with Ban Meter Williams Pollock. Uh I've been a

[28:26] resident of San Rafale since uh pretty much since I was two or three years old

[28:31] and uh have lived here in the downtown for the last 25 years. and we've done a

[28:36] number of developments which we feel uh respond to the community input that

[28:42] we've received on those variety of projects uh in downtown and also in the

[28:47] canal area and throughout Marine County. We've also developed a number of

[28:53] streetscape projects that expand the impact of a development beyond just the

[29:00] housing into pedestrian safety, bicycle access to transit to neighborhood

[29:07] activities. And so that is another key feature of our proposal.

[29:12] And we've done that on a number of projects with Eden Housing as well. Our

[29:17] vision is really a family focused community uh affordable near transit

[29:23] taking advantage of the local services but really it's about giving

[29:27] opportunities for the residents and this will forward San Rafll's goals and give

[29:33] more families the opportunity to succeed in San Rafll.

[29:40] The overall area site plan is a one of simple circulation. We respect and

[29:45] provide good access for the uh for the drainage way and all of that area

[29:55] as well as bike access and pedestrian access. Uh we looked at multiple

[30:00] projects, multiple different scenarios. There's many different uh opportunities

[30:05] here and we'll listen to the community to refine and and develop the design in

[30:11] its entirety. We've also used illustrations to give

[30:17] the community really a very clear understanding of what the development

[30:22] is. Here's a image on Maryale showing how the building relates to the street

[30:27] and relates to the adjacent neighborhood as well. We even went to

[30:34] uh into the neighborhood to Las Flores Avenue and took a picture of how the

[30:40] buildings just kind of peak over the top of the homes that are uh directly across

[30:45] the street the canal from it. We also because I live in Marin are

[30:50] sensitive to the uh sensitivity to the viewing of uh the developments from the

[30:57] freeway. And so we gave an initial image from how that would look as well.

[31:03] And then one of the key issues was that we really developed a strategy of a

[31:10] bicycle and pedestrian improvement access working very closely with the

[31:14] neighborhood and adjacent uh residents and adjacent businesses to gain access

[31:20] all the way to San Pedro Road. And it's also built with a vision of

[31:26] sustainability, resilience, and wellness. So that so the solar system

[31:30] will support a resilience hub. The bio swala will will provide the clean storm

[31:36] water management and bike storage and repair stations will also provide

[31:41] improvements and provide access both to transit and for the residents throughout

[31:47] the area.

[31:52] rather than repeat myself. Uh long-term deed restrictions will preserve the

[31:56] affordability for at least 99 years. The design is going to prioritize

[32:01] accessibility and inclusive design including accessible common areas,

[32:06] units, amenities, and circulation.

[32:11] Uh we're also have our own in-house resident services provider. Eden's res

[32:16] resident services model model is designed to support stability and

[32:20] community connection. Services may include on-site coordination, community

[32:24] building activities, referrals, workshops, family programming, and

[32:29] coordination with property management. The goal is not to provide just housing,

[32:33] but to support residents need to thrive. Uh here we go. Financing our favorite.

[32:40] We have deep experience assembling layered affordable housing financing.

[32:44] That's kind of Lasagna right there. This 111 unit concept was designed to support

[32:49] competitive funding applications while meeting the city's entitlement uh

[32:54] timeline. Our early feasibility work will confirm a SQA path, an entitlement

[32:58] path, design review, agency coordination, construction type, site

[33:03] conditions, and partnership structure. The schedule again is in structured to

[33:10] meet the city's requirement to be entitled by June 30th, 2028.

[33:15] Um, entitlements, financing, design, and construction sequencing will need to be

[33:19] carefully coordinated. Um, and lastly, thank you. Thank you for

[33:25] the opportunity to be here and to present our vision. And we're ready to

[33:29] deliver a feasible community responsive affordable housing development at 350

[33:33] Mary Road. >> Thank you. And I know we're holding

[33:36] questions, but Tammy, I have to ask. Yes.

[33:38] » So, I really appreciate the outreach and you spent quite a bit of time talking

[33:42] about that. Sarah did. And yet, or also you showed an image of what a building

[33:47] would look like. So, I'm trying to figure out how those two mesh when

[33:51] you're taking in input. And yet, there's and I know that design changes, but

[33:55] maybe you could speak to that because I'm sure other people in the room are

[33:57] » um I can give you an example. How about that?

[34:00] » That would be great. in another community, we presented a fivestory

[34:04] building um as our initial concept and through community engagement and all of

[34:11] the workshops and things that we did, we found out that the community really

[34:16] preferred a four-story building. So, what we did um through that feedback, we

[34:21] redesigned the building, made it wider, not taller, actually um designed for

[34:28] more units, but a shorter building. So that's it's just an initial concept and

[34:33] we refine that through all of the community engagement that we do.

[34:38] » Thank you. That help that's very helpful. Thank you so much.

[34:40] » And anything else? >> Uh there might be others but I I just

[34:43] had to reconcile that. So thank you. That was Yeah.

[34:46] » Thank you. [snorts]

[35:01] Okay. Good evening, mayor, council member, staff, community members. Thank

[35:05] you for the opportunity to be here. I'm Eve Stewart. I'm the senior vice

[35:09] president uh for real estate development with Saha. Um and also with our team

[35:15] here tonight, we have April Ty. And April and I will

[35:20] be sharing the presentation. And then our other team members naan my senior

[35:24] project manager Katie Akerly with our architect Chris Hess and Jonathan Stern

[35:29] are also here uh for questions later on. So quickly about SA uh we were founded

[35:35] over 60 years ago. We've developed approximately 80 properties across seven

[35:40] counties and in addition to our development activity we also provide

[35:44] property management services and robust on-site resident services. We run a

[35:49] volunteer program that brings in over 250 community volunteers annually to

[35:54] support our residents and strengthen our connections in the broader community.

[35:58] Because we're a long-term operator, we're always looking back to learn from

[36:02] what we've done, where we've been successful, where we can improve. And

[36:05] we're always looking forward to make sure that the new communities we develop

[36:08] are ready for future challenges and that they will be beautiful, thriving

[36:13] communities for decades to come. To do this, we collaborate with local experts.

[36:17] We invest in community engagement and we work with our design team to iterate to

[36:22] make sure that we are meeting community needs and can achieve broad-based

[36:26] support.

[36:30] We uh do have a strong presence in the North Bay. Uh we are not in Marin

[36:35] currently. Um but we have several projects in Napa and Soma. Um and we

[36:40] have local Sanfell expertise on our team. Um, and we've started to connect

[36:45] with key stakeholders and have received support and endorsements from the Ritter

[36:50] Center and Canal Alliance. Um, I'm going to pass it over to April to talk a

[36:55] little bit more about community engagement.

[37:00] Thank you, Eve, and good evening, Mayor Kate and Council Member Bushy, um, and

[37:06] city staff. I'm April Tally, and I'll be supporting SAHA's community engagement

[37:11] efforts for this project. I've worked on community engagement for large complex

[37:16] developments including Northgate Mall here in San Rafale and the Patrol

[37:20] redevelopment in San Francisco. As the city's project director for Northgate, I

[37:26] served as the primary point of contact for community related questions and

[37:30] communications, working alongside the developer to keep residents informed and

[37:35] ensure the city's engagement requirements were met. The experience

[37:39] that experience reinforced for me that engagement is most effective when it

[37:44] starts early while there is still real opportunity to shape the project. That's

[37:49] why our team plans to begin as soon as the ENA is executed. We'll work closely

[37:55] with the city and the uh the community partners, nearby residents and

[38:00] businesses to communicate early, listen to concerns, and offer different ways to

[38:05] participate. The proposed unit count and parking ratio are a starting point and

[38:11] we're open to refining both based on the input from the city and the community.

[38:16] Thank you.

[38:23] That's just a quick summary of the points April made. Um so getting into

[38:29] this opportunity um our team of course uh looked very closely at the site and

[38:34] there were several uh core values core principles that were informing our

[38:39] approach. So of course we want to achieve or exceed the city housing goals

[38:42] for the site in terms of number of units build an appropriate scale for the

[38:46] neighborhood. incorporate universal design principles so that we have an

[38:50] inclusive community for folks with a range of um abilities and challenges

[38:55] from mobility to uh sensory and neurode divergent challenges. Um we are working

[39:01] to enhance the urban design and street presence along Midale, improve smart

[39:06] station connectivity and secure state funds for transit improvements. I'll

[39:10] talk a little bit more about that in a minute. Um, and of course we want to

[39:14] ensure the long-term climate resilience of our building and this community. Uh,

[39:19] and also establish a financable pathway to getting this project done.

[39:25] And importantly, as we looked at the site, so this is a massing study. It's

[39:30] not a design. It just gives a sense of what could fit on the site and the

[39:36] scale. Um so here you can see that we are

[39:41] initially thinking about a fourstory design that would have um

[39:47] bridge the scale of the neighborhood. There's you know different densities

[39:50] there. So while this does add density to the neighborhood, it is um still kind of

[39:56] a gentle like ramping um and not um we feel too out of scale with what's

[40:02] already built there. Um we have primarily two and threebedroom

[40:07] apartments in the scheme so that we can serve families um households with young

[40:12] children or extended um families that might have elders also living with them.

[40:18] The um parking approach is to do surface parking and that offers advantages

[40:24] including cost effectiveness um and providing a buffer for the

[40:30] neighbors to the south as well as the freeway. um the 101 there to the east.

[40:36] Our bedroom count is 185 bedrooms in this scheme. Um and that's sometimes a

[40:40] helpful metric to consider. Um the building itself of course will have a

[40:44] lobby, spacious community and multi-purpose spaces as well as smaller

[40:49] activity and meeting spaces. All upper floors will be served by an elevator.

[40:53] And we will have on-site property management, an on-site

[40:57] resident representative, so a staff person who lives on site uh with

[41:02] maintenance and resident services offices. And again, inclusive and

[41:05] universal design features will be incorporated throughout.

[41:10] Um we've also taken an approach of orienting views toward the creek um and

[41:15] preserving existing trees to emphasize connections with the existing ecosystem.

[41:21] bringing in these bofilic features that enhance wellness um and also provide an

[41:26] important buffer for flood control and storm water management.

[41:30] We envision an active street frontage. Um and very importantly, we're focused

[41:34] on active transportation connections and improvements to get this neighborhood

[41:39] even more conveniently linked to the smart station. It is so very close. Uh

[41:44] but there currently isn't um a formal way to expediently access the station

[41:49] without, you know, going out and around. Um,

[41:53] next slide is the same site plan, but uh, we wanted to emphasize the

[41:58] sustainability features and the thinking that that we're bringing to this

[42:02] project. And again, this is just the early initial thoughts and we're really

[42:07] looking forward to engaging with the community and stakeholders to get their

[42:09] input. But we envision an all-electric building that was energy efficient with

[42:14] solar PV array to offset as much of our energy use as possible with on-site

[42:18] generation. Uh we have opportunities to use panelized construction andor mass

[42:22] frame building technologies to reduce construction waste and also speed up

[42:26] construction schedule. Uh superior indoor air quality will be a goal uh

[42:31] especially to address the potential impacts of being close to the 101 and to

[42:35] protect against future smoke events. We've increased increased tree cover for

[42:40] passive cooling, promoting biodiversity, um preserving site permeability, and

[42:46] contributing to again improved mental health and well-being as studies have

[42:49] shown when you have access to nature. Um and then back to this connection with um

[42:55] the the active transportation network to facilitate biking, walking, scootering,

[43:00] ways to get around uh that don't involve driving alone in your car essentially.

[43:05] Um and of course the Disaster resilience and preparedness is something that's top

[43:09] of mind for our operations um where we operate housing and we have a lot of

[43:14] elders, seniors, people with special needs um and we want to be there to

[43:18] support them um when the worst happens. Um so some of the features that we will

[43:24] work to include um is a micro grid and that essentially provides an opportunity

[43:30] to power the building through either a battery system or a portable generator

[43:36] to ensure key functions um in the event of prolonged power outage or other

[43:41] shelter in place um requirements. And that allows both our building residents

[43:45] as well as other folks in the neighborhood to have a um a place of

[43:50] refuge where you can charge your phones, store medication, get relief if it's

[43:56] very hot out, um receive essential supplies, and also receive emotional

[44:00] support. Now, we didn't do a design of the

[44:05] building because again, it's a it's a massing study, but we have included

[44:08] these precedent images just to give a sense of what we're thinking in terms of

[44:12] architectural style, uh, materials, colors, and again, this um the scale of

[44:18] the building and how it relates to the site and the open space.

[44:25] our uh financing package and and as we heard includes um tax credits, taxes and

[44:31] bonds and this state program which we fondly refer to as ASIC, the affordable

[44:36] housing and sustainable communities. It's not the only way to fund this

[44:40] project, but um the exciting part about ASIC is it comes with housing funds and

[44:45] also transportation grant funds. Um SAHA has been very successful using this

[44:51] program. We've built six communities so far with this money from San Jose to um

[44:58] uh to to Napa and with Berkeley and Oakland in between. And so in addition

[45:04] to the housing funds, you can include a package um for things like station

[45:09] connectivity, bike ped improvements, uh transit passes. Up in the corner, you

[45:14] can see some of the improvements we were able to do in San Jose. And it will also

[45:18] fund uh fund um community events, you know, such as street closures um and

[45:24] festivals. >> And thank you, Eve. Do you have any

[45:26] closing comments? Because >> my time is up.

[45:29] » I heard I heard a little dinging over there. That [laughter]

[45:32] » Well, in conclusion, I will just say that we are ready to get started. Uh we

[45:36] would be delighted to work with you and the community to see this project

[45:40] through. [clears throat] Excuse me. Um and we can certainly meet uh the

[45:44] timelines that the city has established. Thank you, Eid. Thank you, April. Thank

[45:49] you. >> So, I know I have some questions. I

[45:53] think my questions are broad, but I will hand it over to you first, but I just

[45:58] want staff to speak to a moment. I was thinking, and both Council Member Bushy

[46:02] and I were on the planning commission prior to being on the council, so we've

[46:05] been in land use for a very, very long time, and this seems like a really

[46:08] unusual situation. I don't think I've ever been on the receiving side of

[46:12] hearing three incredible presentations. So could you just speak to that because

[46:17] it it does feel unusual and just to maybe I don't know put that in context

[46:21] for the community. >> I I don't mind taking that as a startup

[46:24] and really for my colleagues if you want to add to that it it really is a unique

[46:28] opportunity for Sanfell. I'm actually excited to bring this forward and you

[46:32] can see what a hard like I'll pick all three. Um the the key is finding

[46:37] location sites and lining up. And I do think we really do have to look at

[46:42] really our land assets a little closer to see which ones we can evaluate over

[46:46] time. It is one of our targeted ends for our our housing program to really look

[46:51] at city- owned sites really looking at for surplus lands for affordable housing

[46:55] development. I think I was most pleased with the level and quality of developers

[46:59] who put on uh this project and I think it's really key about the size. We have

[47:04] a lot of smaller portion parcels within our that are on our own asset, but the

[47:08] ability to assemble a larger scale project near transit I think is really

[47:12] why we got a nice robust kind of um put for for the development affordable

[47:16] housing development community. Uh you got to remember this is the the top

[47:19] three. We actually had five. Um so um and I anticipate really evaluating other

[47:26] potential projects to bring in this level of developers if not others um in

[47:31] the future. So, this here's really kind of a unique opportunity, but and I said,

[47:35] it really is a um a real opportunity to try to bring forward needed housing to

[47:41] this community. These developers uh are been successful across the Bay Area and

[47:46] even some have not done projects we're in and they want to be and I'm I'd like

[47:50] to try to find opportunities to broaden our uh opportunities for multiple

[47:55] developers to bring housing to this community.

[47:58] So just to follow up, so because the city owns the site, we're having this

[48:01] conversation because it could be a private developer who wants to build

[48:06] affordable housing and none of this would be daylighted. They would come

[48:10] forward and say this is we've chosen. So again, for the community, this is a very

[48:14] unusual situation, right? Am I correct? Because the city owns the property.

[48:18] » Correct. If this was private property, in many ways it'd be simpler because

[48:22] developers would simply say, "I'm entitled to XYZ under these different

[48:26] state laws." But because it's public property, we have a little bit more um

[48:31] flexibility in terms of shaping the project. At the same time, we've agreed

[48:35] to certain terms with the the county, the the 80 units for example, and then

[48:39] we've certain um citywide goals that Alexis highlighted. So those are sort of

[48:44] shaping the conversation, but um it's much broader than say a private

[48:49] development um proposal. >> And I would imagine that there are other

[48:53] cities that have this possibility of um that owns a parcel and that they don't

[48:58] have a public conversation that staff goes and selects and then they just

[49:01] bring it to the council for approval. So again, we're adding something to the

[49:06] process that's a little different. So okay, because that's it feels different

[49:10] to me. So, you want to start off with questions and I have a bunch of broad

[49:13] ones, but nothing specific. >> Uh, well, I want to concentrate on one

[49:17] particular area and uh just to um uh follow up on um your comments. Yes, it

[49:24] feels like we're on the other side of the table um in making um these

[49:29] decisions. Um my questions um are focusing on the long term. Um and I

[49:36] noticed we're we're approving a 99-year lease. Um, and I'm wondering if is there

[49:43] a general like highle plan for the 99 years? Um, is the plan that we're going

[49:50] to build whatever structure is built now will be repaired and maintained for 99

[49:55] years. Um, will there be a rebuilding at some point? What is the um what is the

[50:03] the long-term concept? And then to compare the different developers, my

[50:09] question would be how long is each develop how what is the longest duration

[50:15] of any functioning site that they've built to to compare them? How long have

[50:20] they been functioning? So th that's that's where my question

[50:24] is. Um do should we have staff take a a crack at

[50:28] » I think I can try to respond to the first part of the question then the

[50:31] developing teams can probably answer more specifically. Um, so I believe that

[50:36] level th those kinds of details and those terms are what the city and the

[50:40] developer team would finalize as part of their development disposition agreement

[50:44] the next phase once we entered into the exclusive negotiating agreement and

[50:48] that's what we would later bring back to council to approve

[50:52] » in terms of like the the details for the long-term vision of the project

[50:56] long-term operations rather. >> Okay. Thank you.

[51:01] Did you want to hear how >> everyone runs up? I'm not sure how we're

[51:05] gonna do this. >> Yeah, I guess [laughter]

[51:08] » it's a little clunky. Sorry. As I said, that's why I wanted to level set this in

[51:11] the beginning. That's an unusual situation.

[51:14] » Um, well, so EA has been in San Rafll since 1968. Um, and we own and operate

[51:20] all of the developments that we've built and keep them affordable in perpetuity.

[51:26] Um, so when they come time for rehabilitation or maintenance, we'll,

[51:30] you know, um, go through the the typical rehab process, maybe refinance, get some

[51:35] tax credits, and upkeep the property. Um, I think the latest one in Sanfell

[51:39] was Centertown. We just rehabbed that and looks great. Um, and to my

[51:44] knowledge, >> so I'm I don't think you quite exactly

[51:48] answered my question. >> What is the longest duration of a

[51:52] functioning site that you've had? not how long you've been here.

[51:56] » Okay. Uh I think our first one came online in 1972

[52:01] and we still own it. >> It's in Marin somewhere. I believe it's

[52:05] in Sano. I have to check. We We have a lot. Our portfolio just in Marin is over

[52:11] 2,000 units and we've got over 14,000 in our portfolio. So, but we our first

[52:17] property we do still own it was from the early 70s.

[52:20] » Thank you. >> Yeah.

[52:21] » Thanks.

[52:25] Thank you. >> Hello, I'm Dixie Bell, senior director

[52:28] of real estate development for Eden Housing. Our first born on property was

[52:33] born in 1968 uh which was the founding of um Eden. It's uh affectionately known

[52:40] as JL around our office which is Josephine Lodge uh lum and it's uh

[52:45] located in Hayward. Uh it's been uh rehabbed through the years three times.

[52:52] So, um, we like our other colleagues here, um, are very strong arm. We don't

[52:58] sell. That's it. We just don't. We're nonprofit developer and we'll go down

[53:04] with the property as well. There are times in which we've had to feed our own

[53:08] properties and uh where the properties can't sustain uh some sort of damage or

[53:14] some sort of uh the operations doesn't uh doesn't sustain uh the operations of

[53:20] it. some Yes. And we have to write those checks because the most important thing

[53:25] is that our residents are served with clean housing. It's uh and and we're

[53:32] there. We are there. We have we have fed properties for many years until we could

[53:38] find a state funding program that could help uh renew the properties. So,

[53:43] » and just for clarity, when you say you fed properties, you mean that you used

[53:48] corporate funds? >> We used corporate funds

[53:50] » to Thank you. >> Absolutely.

[53:52] » Thank you, Dixie.

[53:57] » Thank you. So, uh Saha similar vintage our original buildings uh were the first

[54:03] building was completed in 1968. The vision at the time was to do five

[54:07] buildings that with one that was slightly larger that would serve as a

[54:11] hub. everyone could come and have services and activities and then four

[54:14] smaller um properties in the vicinity um were kind of feeding into that. Um those

[54:21] were all located in Oakland. They were originally financed through HUD and so

[54:26] you know they were simple modest design but they have held up remarkably well.

[54:31] They have been continuously operating and tenited and beloved by residents.

[54:36] Um, and they have been renovated and some of them were renovated about 10

[54:40] years ago and are still looking beautiful. And we're sort of finishing

[54:44] out the final two that um, well actually there were originally five and then

[54:49] there were about three more that came along in the early 70s and so we're

[54:52] finishing out rehabs on those. So some of those buildings have persisted as

[54:57] very nice communities for over 50 years without having a major capital um,

[55:04] investment. they've been things have been, you know, the units get turned

[55:07] every time someone moves out. We've replaced boilers, we've replaced roofs,

[55:11] we've done painting, but in terms of doing a fullscale large renovation that

[55:15] requires people to move out. Um, in in some cases, buildings have been um very

[55:21] functional and comfortable for 50 years. >> Thank you.

[55:24] » Thank you. >> That's your one. Okay. Well, I have a I

[55:28] have a couple questions and they're for the staff just more um understanding. I

[55:32] think it applies to all three of these incredible proposals. So, one of the

[55:36] applicants talked about the sanitary district easement. So, is that something

[55:40] that um I'm just wondering how that's going to manifest in this project

[55:43] because we do have time to work [snorts] with them.

[55:47] Yeah, that's really um it's part of the the selection of the the development

[55:53] partner is to understand really the due diligence standpoint or the I guess the

[55:59] parameters for the development of the project moving forward. You know, there

[56:02] is an opportunity to modify that easement. There is or is not. It really

[56:06] depends on the ability of the the district and desire, but it's also to

[56:09] look at the utility pieces, design uh approaches, neighborhood feedback that

[56:14] really will shape a lot of the project and their approach. Um, but I, as I

[56:19] said, I if there's any specific questions related to it seems like, you

[56:22] know, um, the designers actually acknowledge that and like they was part

[56:27] of the package information that we put out in the RFP. So, it really is just

[56:31] kind of project approach. Um but it does require you know coordination and we

[56:37] actually um have been coordinating with philos valley sanation district on

[56:40] multiple projects um resolving various easements. Pione is also another factor

[56:45] for this site. So it's just really just kind of recognizing the development

[56:49] constraints. Um we are actively engaged in this because at the end of the day we

[56:54] want to deliver housing in this community. So we are working with that

[56:57] end but um it's really is up to other decision makers and then constraints

[57:02] that come about. So >> okay so in the RFP um there was a

[57:07] discussion about neighborhood improvements. So I'm curious the staff

[57:11] was looking at that you don't have to go through the rubric that you used but was

[57:14] that part of it that so be transit or sorry access to transit or pedestrian or

[57:21] whatever that might be. Was that already one of the criteria?

[57:26] » Um, no. It wasn't explicitly requested, but it it fell under I I think the the

[57:31] proposal scoring criteria. >> Okay.

[57:34] » And as through the the last 10 months or so, one of the themes was what from the

[57:41] adjacent community was are there any opportunities for benefits to the larger

[57:46] neighborhood beyond just the provision of housing? and uh Eden proactively

[57:51] identified formalizing that smart pathway the pathway to the smart station

[57:56] and should that the city are I understand our public works department

[57:59] is are is pursuing that independently so if um when when uh one of the follow-up

[58:06] questions was okay if the city is able to address that um is there are you is

[58:12] even capable of um improving bicycle and pedestrian improvements along Maryale um

[58:18] the other direction and they they responded yes. Um we have heard from

[58:23] some of the the other teams that they're familiar with the same some of the same

[58:26] funding sources. Um but it was that uh Eden proactively identified that in

[58:31] their proposal >> and that's something when you did the

[58:32] ENA that could also be talked about with Okay Zen. Okay. So there was um people

[58:40] some of the developers um alluded to unit mix about threebedroom two-bedroom

[58:44] was that again another part of the criteria. Is there something that the

[58:47] city with your expertise that we want this many threebedroom, this many two,

[58:51] this many one or studio or was it more let's see what comes forward and what

[58:58] came forward does it match with what you all are thinking we should be asking

[59:01] for. Yes. So, we weren't prescriptive in um

[59:07] the number of bedrooms uh that we were looking for, but we did direct um

[59:12] applicants in our sort of workshop before, you know, when the RFP was

[59:17] released before submissions were received um to look at the needs

[59:21] identified in our housing element needs assessment. And one of those needs is

[59:25] rental housing for larger families. And so, um, the top three proposals were,

[59:32] um, responsive to working in those three-bedroom units. Okay.

[59:36] » And so, that was a that was also a factor, a positive factor.

[59:40] » Okay. So, that was included. So, on a related, is it your expertise, and maybe

[59:44] the applicants would know better, do the number of units ever influence the

[59:48] ability to get financing? I mean, you're talking about how this works for what we

[59:52] have identified as needing our community, but you got to be able to

[59:55] build the thing. So is there ever a correlation to the unit mix and types of

[59:59] financing or not really? and my I don't know if that's a question you can answer

[1:00:03] or the >> so the the best people to answer that

[1:00:06] question are over here but I will tell you that um yes my understanding is for

[1:00:11] instance like the ASIC opportunity that was mentioned there's a certain sweet

[1:00:15] spot based on the last nine rounds of of you know the number of units and so um

[1:00:19] our developers certainly were looking at um you know plugandplay what's what's

[1:00:24] going to work right um but yes again they can definitely expand

[1:00:28] » I saw nodding heads okay it seems that way But again trying to look at all the

[1:00:32] different aspects of this. Um another question is around sustainability

[1:00:38] features. So um s was talking a lot about the sustainability. Was that

[1:00:43] another part of the again I know the RF is written a certain way but I'm curious

[1:00:47] how staff responded to that because sustainability is important to the city

[1:00:51] of Sanfal. We have it in our goals and objectives. So I'm curious how that

[1:00:55] plays out in these applications. Um I believe that was one of the similarities

[1:01:00] across the three proposals. There might be distinct approaches unique to each.

[1:01:04] Um but you I feel like you're encountering some of the ch same

[1:01:08] challenges the review panel encountered that we had three strong proposals that

[1:01:11] had some significant similarities. >> So again just also understanding that

[1:01:16] when we get when it gets to the ENA those are also things that can be talked

[1:01:21] about as it's important to the city. Okay.

[1:01:26] And talked about that and then director Engle I think you alluded to this

[1:01:30] because Saha has done a lot of work in the region um but hasn't done anything

[1:01:35] in Marin and I'm curious from a staff standpoint from a development standpoint

[1:01:41] how does that I mean how do you react to that having folks that have been here a

[1:01:44] very long time that know Samal to someone who's new but also been

[1:01:47] successful and I know it's part of that grappling of the review panel but I'm

[1:01:50] I'm curious about that >> um I think like for all housing

[1:01:54] development we're looking for who can deliver a project. Um, you know, we've

[1:01:59] gone through this whole proposals for many years for Sanfell of entitlement

[1:02:03] but not constructed. So, for me, bringing in um

[1:02:08] seasoned development groups that actually can build and have housing

[1:02:11] occupied, that's that's really what we're looking for. So, um, both, you

[1:02:16] know, existing uh, partners who have been working Marin and Center for a long

[1:02:20] time, they've continuously done, but even for outside groups, we welcome them

[1:02:24] all. Um really what's the bigger question is what's what's Marin County

[1:02:28] need? We need all housing. Um okay. And really trying to find ways to get this

[1:02:33] particularly affordable housing. So that's why this you know kind of does

[1:02:36] open the door for us to be strategic about our approaches really looking at

[1:02:40] what other opportunities do we have within this community to find ways to

[1:02:44] bring in multiple development partners to bring this type of housing to the

[1:02:47] community. >> That's great. That's very helpful. And

[1:02:49] then my last question is and I know for sure each of the applicants referred to

[1:02:53] this the whole financing what do they call stack of it. So we know that

[1:02:59] because these three have come forward that you all looked at those financing

[1:03:03] stacks and that like these are all achievable. I mean for us we don't have

[1:03:06] enough information to Okay, because that is to your point, director, we have to

[1:03:11] be able it has to be able to be able Okay. So there wasn't a certain type of

[1:03:19] financing stack. It's just that it made sense to what we're asking for.

[1:03:23] » Yes. And and what I would say is these developers, all super experienced, all

[1:03:29] developers who work with tax credits, um and had a lot of similarities in the

[1:03:36] types of funding that they identified. And I think one of the things that we've

[1:03:39] seen with projects, affordable housing projects, is um there's

[1:03:46] the funding is also we're in a moment of change with state funding. And so I

[1:03:51] think like everyone has identified multiple opportunities. You saw one

[1:03:54] proposal that had like four different scenarios. Um and so it's kind of like

[1:03:59] depending on how the dust settles, >> we're going to, you know, we're going to

[1:04:03] go with um one of those funding scenarios and and there were um similar

[1:04:07] buckets identified across the teams. >> Okay, that's helpful. I don't have any

[1:04:12] questions at the moment. Do you have any other council member Bashi? Okay. So,

[1:04:16] with that, uh, we'll open up public Oh, yeah. Sorry. City Manager Natio. Yeah.

[1:04:24] » Yeah. Thank you. Uh, Paul Natio, city manager, as we move to the public

[1:04:28] comment, I wanted to go back to Mayor Kate's comment about, uh, this being an

[1:04:33] unusual process. Um, just want to add two more points. Uh, one, we're the

[1:04:38] owners of the property. Um, so that has certain implications. Um, also, uh,

[1:04:46] because we went through the RFP process and received some really strong

[1:04:50] proposals, we're also in this position because if any one proposal was head and

[1:04:54] shoulders, uh, we may be bringing that right to the city council. Um, the other

[1:04:59] part is wanting to have as transparent a process as possible. We could have had a

[1:05:06] um ad hoc subcommittee that's not required to meet uh under the Brown Act,

[1:05:11] but we chose to set it up this way in order to have as transparent a process

[1:05:15] as possible. So that with that comes some challenges.

[1:05:20] » Thank you. And I think it makes sense. I think then everyone understands what a

[1:05:23] good um issue to have of these three fantastic options.

[1:05:28] Um okay, so I'll open up public comment and as usual it's two minutes. You know,

[1:05:33] there's a timer. You're welcome, but not required to say your name and what part

[1:05:36] of Sanfell you're in. And you can both provide comments or input or question.

[1:05:40] We are interested in what you have to say.

[1:05:45] » Good evening. My name is Ken Dickinson. I'm a Sandrafell small business owner

[1:05:48] Bay Area Computer Training. For over 20 years, I worked directly with EH Housing

[1:05:53] as their enterprise systems trainer. From former CEO Mary MAG down to the

[1:05:58] property and maintenance teams on the ground across California and Hawaii.

[1:06:03] I've seen how they operate. That matters because a permanent

[1:06:07] supportive housing unit is only a home if someone is there to keep the tenants

[1:06:11] stable in the building safe. The June 2023 UC Berkeley Turner Center study,

[1:06:18] which Eden and Saha both participated in, found that understaffed supportive

[1:06:23] housing suffers nearly double the rate of rental delinquencies. And yet Eden is

[1:06:28] proposing 111 units with no documented on-site staff planning that I could see

[1:06:33] in their proposal. EA is the only finalist that answers this. A full-time

[1:06:40] resident service coordinator, a part-time case manager through Episcopal

[1:06:44] Community Services and a rent-free on-site manager unit guaranteed for the

[1:06:49] full 99-year lease. That's not a brochure promise. It's a staffing

[1:06:54] commitment on paper for the life of the building. Eh also wins on every other

[1:07:01] front. Deepest affordability at 45% AMI so residents can actually stay housed

[1:07:07] the lowest cost per unit. A three-story design that fits ordinance 1979's

[1:07:14] negotiated height limits. the neighborhood already bought into

[1:07:19] that proposal there and a faster timeline that avoids the litigation risk

[1:07:24] and six figure per unit penalties tied to Eden's high density design which by

[1:07:30] the way they have the option to expand that as I understand it six stories

[1:07:35] they're local accountable already proven in neighborhoods like ours for 350

[1:07:40] mirale I urge this subcommittee to support EAH housing thank Thank you.

[1:07:49] » Thank you. And thank you for providing very

[1:07:52] specific input. And what I'm thinking again, this is such an unusual

[1:07:55] situation. So after we have all the public comment, so each of the the

[1:07:59] applicants will have an opportunity to not have a long speech, but two or three

[1:08:03] minutes to just maybe respond to what you're hearing because um especially if

[1:08:06] it's that specific. So thank you. Go ahead, Mariana.

[1:08:09] » Good evening, uh council staff. Um [clears throat] I am Marian Nanastad

[1:08:16] from San Rafal Meadows and um [clears throat] I first want to comment

[1:08:21] on the community engagement that both Mr. Hinkle and each of the presenters

[1:08:25] have presented that I am looking forward to that we will have uh community

[1:08:30] engagement with this. So thank you. While density is a valuable goal, the

[1:08:35] primary mission of the 350 Midel project is to provide a permanent home for our

[1:08:41] unhoused and special needs neighbors. For this mission to succeed, EAH housing

[1:08:46] is the only developer that has submitted a proposal built on operational reality.

[1:08:52] The June 2023 Turner Center study, which actually included data from the other

[1:08:57] finalist, reveals that under re underresourced properties with fewer

[1:09:01] on-site staff suffer from nearly double the rate of rental delinquencies and

[1:09:06] significantly higher moveout rates. Without intens intensive on-site

[1:09:11] stewardship, the most valuable residents are at high risk of cycling back into

[1:09:16] homelessness. Eahh proposal directly addresses these

[1:09:20] risks. First, they target the deepest level of affordability with an average

[1:09:24] of 45% AMI, ensuring units remain re [clears throat]

[1:09:29] uh reachable for those with the greatest needs. Second, they are the only

[1:09:32] finalist to document a clear tiered on-site support team, a full-time

[1:09:36] resident services coordinator, a dedicated case manager through Episcopal

[1:09:40] Community Services, and a rent-free on-site manager unit to ensure 247

[1:09:45] building stewardship. A 99-year lease is a century long commitment. We should not

[1:09:50] select a developer offering a vague menu of services without a documented

[1:09:54] headcount. I urge this sub subcommittee to prioritize long-term stability over

[1:09:59] mere units counts by advancing the EA proposal. Thank you.

[1:10:05] » Thank you.

[1:10:11] » Hi, my name is Jennifer Wallace. I don't know if it's possible to go to the Eden

[1:10:15] deck uh and bring up the slide where they showed the rendering from the yard

[1:10:20] if that's possible while I make some comments. Um I too support the EAH

[1:10:25] proposal. They seem to have addressed all the elements in the most balanced

[1:10:29] way and um you know really excited to see their commitment to the

[1:10:35] environmental aspect of this and um really loved the concept of the three

[1:10:41] stories you know uh and the reason I was hoping to bring up the Eden deck is that

[1:10:46] rendering from that was my house by the way in the picture um that's not what

[1:10:51] five and six stories looks like and to count in their rendering that was is a

[1:10:55] six-story building that they modeled and that's not what five and six stories

[1:10:59] looks like from my backyard and from our street and a couple streets over. It's

[1:11:04] it's a lot more imposing than that. So what I saw from the EAH version and also

[1:11:10] understanding that designs can shift um but but that their opening approach was

[1:11:17] recognizing the neighborhood feel and trying to fit into that as the other

[1:11:22] apartments do along Maryale already at two and three stories plus also

[1:11:27] addressing parking all the other elements. Um really appreciated that. So

[1:11:31] thank you. >> Thank you.

[1:11:40] Good evening. My name is Gregory Andrew and I live in Sanfell Meadows. And um I

[1:11:44] think you just heard uh three very powerful and compelling reasons to

[1:11:49] support the EAH uh uh proposal and uh select EAH as the developer for this

[1:11:55] site. I uh find that after reviewing these that uh the eh proposal would be

[1:12:00] the most uh affordable housing for the targeted population and it would be the

[1:12:06] most compatible with the neighborhood. I think what you have before you is a

[1:12:11] choice of uh we do own this property and so there is an opportunity to develop a

[1:12:20] site that is compatible with the neighborhood or a project that imposes

[1:12:26] upon the neighborhood. And I find that I find that the uh the Eden and Saha

[1:12:32] developments seem to be out of character. they're too big and just

[1:12:36] their look of them are out of character with the neighborhood. I did hear EAH

[1:12:40] talk about the environmental approach and utilizing um uh what's already

[1:12:46] there. I found that to be very uh interesting. I also heard EAH make

[1:12:50] reference to the pedestrian path. So I don't think that is unique to uh to uh

[1:12:57] actually all three of them did. So I don't think that is unique to Eden. I

[1:13:01] have uh some questions I'd like to address and I'll hand these over to to

[1:13:05] the staff which is what uh what were the proposals of the two developers that

[1:13:09] were not selected in finalists Pacific Companies and Samuel Group please give

[1:13:13] us some detail on those proposals uh a pedestrian path for the smart Meridale

[1:13:19] smart station was not part of the EF RFP. How was it that Eden came to to

[1:13:24] propose developing this path and were the other developers aware of this? Um

[1:13:29] the evaluation group, the evaluation committee panel was uh city, county and

[1:13:35] chamber of commerce. So with the chamber of commerce, why was no community

[1:13:39] neighborhood u representative where there there could have been and there

[1:13:43] should have been. So why don't you finish with No, go ahead and finish your

[1:13:46] questions because this is a chance >> and then uh what I'd like to see more

[1:13:50] detail on the development scores. You summarized them. They were Eden and EAH

[1:13:55] were extremely close. So I'd like to see uh if I could the details on those

[1:14:00] developments on those scoring. That's it. Thank you very much.

[1:14:05] » Okay. Thank you. >> Other questions or comments?

[1:14:18] Good evening. My name is Janet Shirley and I live two blocks from the 350

[1:14:23] Midell site in Sanfeld Meadows. I'm here to not to talk about floor

[1:14:29] plans or how many units. I'm here to talk about what happens after the ribbon

[1:14:34] is cut on this project because that's when the project actually becomes

[1:14:39] somebody's home. I've watched our city change. I've

[1:14:43] watched buildings go up with big promises that disappear once the

[1:14:48] developer moves on to the next site. What I haven't seen enough of is a

[1:14:54] promise to actually stay, to have someone on site when a senior falls or

[1:15:00] when a crisis develops at 2:00 a.m. in the morning.

[1:15:04] EA is the only proposal with full-time

[1:15:09] onsite staff and a resident manager who actually is going to live there, not one

[1:15:15] who simply clocks in and clocks out. It's the only one reaching the deepest

[1:15:20] affordability so that families who need this housing most can afford to stay.

[1:15:27] And it does this at the lowest cost to taxpayers in a design that fits the

[1:15:33] scale that this neighborhood already agreed to and wants. This community

[1:15:38] deserves more than just a building. We deserve a partner who will be answering

[1:15:42] the phone year after year after year for years to come.

[1:15:48] not just a partner who wins the bid. So when this council weighs these

[1:15:53] proposals, I'm asking you to look past the rendering and the unit counts. EAH

[1:16:00] housing is local. EH housing has already proven itself in

[1:16:05] our neighborhoods and EH EAH housing is the only finalist

[1:16:11] that has built in the promise of long-term care into its proposal instead

[1:16:16] of just a pitch. Because the difference between a housing

[1:16:21] project and a home isn't the number of units, it's whether somebody's there to

[1:16:26] answer the door year after year. I urge you to select eh housing as the

[1:16:33] developer 3 for 350 Mary. Thank you. >> Thank you. And to be clear, we're not

[1:16:37] making any selection this evening, but I appreciate the phrasing. Okay. Just want

[1:16:42] to make that very clear. Anyone else?

[1:16:49] » My name is Wayne Rabin. I live in San Meadows. Good evening members of

[1:16:53] subcommittee staff. While Eden Housing has rec been

[1:16:58] recognized with its 111 units density, we must look beyond physical blueprints

[1:17:04] and long-term operation safety. Despite pre o proposing the largest, most

[1:17:09] expensive project at $98 million. Eden proposal fails to document a dedicated

[1:17:15] on-site manager or residential service staff member. We cannot run highdensity

[1:17:21] housing on autopilot. The June 2023 terror center report, a study Eden

[1:17:28] itself participated in, reveals that underresourced, understaffed properties

[1:17:33] suffer nearly double the rate of rental discrepancies, delinquencies, and

[1:17:38] sufficiently higher early exit rates. Without trained on staff personnel to

[1:17:44] bring community and descalate crisis, these projects face severe

[1:17:50] tenant instability, rapid staff burnout and costly property damagement

[1:17:55] preventable by fires and flooding. So developers as developers present the

[1:18:01] proposal tonight urge the subcommittee to demand absolute transparent team

[1:18:06] regarding the staff and gap. Before we proceed the developer section this fall,

[1:18:11] we must secure binding commitments for on staff staffing, headc counts,

[1:18:17] accountability measures, and operational budgets. We must prioritize long-term

[1:18:22] neighborhood safety and tenant safety over mere unit counts. Also, needen has

[1:18:29] the most units. More units equal more traffic, which we do not need.

[1:18:37] Thank you. Any other comments?

[1:18:46] » Good evening. Uh Joe O'Hare and I'm a 36-year resident of the eastern part of

[1:18:52] San Rafell and Peacock Gap. Uh I was the former CEO of Vivivalon. And when I

[1:18:58] retired, I decided what I was going to do with my volunteer community service

[1:19:03] work. And what was presented by the staff at the beginning of this

[1:19:07] presentation is what really made me passionate about working and trying to

[1:19:12] get more affordable and the right type of housing in in uh in San Rafale and in

[1:19:17] Marin County. Um as a result um I went on the board of directors of Eden

[1:19:23] Housing. I've served there for three years and I'm also on the board of

[1:19:26] directors of Calmer and Home which is a strategic collaborative initiative of 40

[1:19:32] nonprofits with the intent to try to remove the barriers so we can build more

[1:19:38] affordable and workforce housing in all of our communities in Mirin. Uh why Eden

[1:19:45] Housing? Why did I choose them? Obviously I did a project with them. I

[1:19:48] spent 15 years working with them as the city did in building the the healthy

[1:19:53] aging campus in downtown San Rafale and I welcome anybody to go look at uh the

[1:19:59] residents, talk to the residents there, see what's done there. The mission of

[1:20:02] Eden Housing is home is just the beginning and if you go over and see

[1:20:07] what the services and the support and the full-time resident services that are

[1:20:10] there, it'll answer many of the questions that the community has. Um,

[1:20:15] also the city has worked with Eden Housing. As pointed out, we've we've

[1:20:19] built over a hundred affordable housing units. Not only that one, but the one in

[1:20:22] Cass Canal. They have over 200 other projects in development.

[1:20:28] And I can tell you that um when we were selecting our affordable housing

[1:20:32] partner, I spent a year going all over the Bay Area and looking at affordable h

[1:20:36] nonprofit affordable housing developers. And when we just kept coming back and we

[1:20:41] did an RFP like the city did and we selected Eden Housing because we saw

[1:20:46] they were problem solvers. They're in their communities for a long period of

[1:20:50] time. And uh I I do believe and I will tell you all that as a board member and

[1:20:55] as a resident, I'll make sure that this project is the best that it can be and

[1:21:00] be as good as the one we did at at the Healthy Aging Campus. Thank you.

[1:21:05] » Thank you. Anyone else like to speak?

[1:21:18] » Good evening, mayor, council members, staff. My name is Nicole Gardillo. I am

[1:21:23] a field representative with the North Coast State Carpenters Union at Lago

[1:21:26] 751, which covers Marin County. I'm here tonight to talk about labor standards

[1:21:32] and why it should be implemented here in San Rafael. We all agree that we need

[1:21:36] more affordable housing in Min County, but we must also pay attention on how it

[1:21:40] is built. Meaningful labor labor standards in play means that there will

[1:21:45] be responsible con contractor that provides livable wages, health care, and

[1:21:50] apprenticeship programs that may help build the future. These are not just

[1:21:55] protection for workers. They are investments in the quality, safety, and

[1:21:59] durability of the structures that are being built for our community. Let us

[1:22:04] make sure that this project reflects our city's values. Please ensure that this

[1:22:09] project will be built by a responsible contractor that includes labor

[1:22:12] standards. Thank you. >> Thank you.

[1:22:18] Any other comments or questions that anyone has?

[1:22:24] Okay, I don't see any. I'll close the public comment. And as I said at the

[1:22:28] beginning, I would have thought about it in the very beginning, but as I said,

[1:22:31] it's an unusual proceeding. Um, I would like to give the each of the applicants

[1:22:36] an opportunity just to say a few more words. You you heard public comment.

[1:22:39] You've been sitting there thinking about other things like, "Oh, I should have

[1:22:41] said that or I'd like to say this." This is your chance to do that. And we'll

[1:22:45] just go in the same order. So, Nor, if you want to go up or or someone from

[1:22:50] your team, however you want to do it. >> Uh, no, thank you. uh just really

[1:22:55] appreciate this opportunity um to be here. I agree this is um unique

[1:23:01] um for San Rafll to go through this process, but I think it's great. I will

[1:23:04] say um I've gone through some similar processes now in other cities where they

[1:23:09] put out an RFP and we come and do this and so uh you're right in line with with

[1:23:14] a lot of other cities doing a lot of really cool things. So

[1:23:16] » very awesome. Um uh I I think really the only other thing I wanted to mention was

[1:23:22] um you know we even though we're waiting to see this process through we are still

[1:23:27] you know wanting to consider our own due diligence as well. And so you know we

[1:23:30] are in touch with the Lascalina sanitary district I would like to also find out

[1:23:34] what that easement is if it's necessary not necessary you know that is why we

[1:23:39] designed it in a way where um you know we didn't have to worry about it should

[1:23:42] they need it. Um but you know we are in conversation with them and and we'll

[1:23:47] we've sent them some of our plans just so they can let us know like oh yeah

[1:23:50] this is what we're doing with it or not. Um uh and then um as far as uh you know

[1:23:56] the the pedestrian path um I know that that did come up and um yeah absolutely

[1:24:02] like our goal um like I mentioned is to make sure that we have good connection

[1:24:06] to transit because our residents are going to need it. Um and so it's just

[1:24:10] very critical for us. Um, I will say the the reason maybe we didn't bring up um

[1:24:14] AHSC specifically in our funding stack that you saw is because it is um uh for

[1:24:21] now it it no longer exists. Um there is a possibility maybe it'll come back in a

[1:24:25] different form or they'll reverse their decision on the greenhouse gas reduction

[1:24:29] fund at the state but as of now um we are not counting on AHSC. So, we wanted

[1:24:35] to think through what else do we have available to us. Um, and you know, we we

[1:24:40] will also keep an eye on what kind of funding will come through should Prop 1

[1:24:44] pass on the ballot in November and the programs that'll get funded, which will

[1:24:47] include some infrastructure grant funding. Um, so that might be a

[1:24:50] possibility. Um, but again, you know, we just wanted to make sure we had enough

[1:24:54] paths forward where, you know, if one didn't work, we had another one that we

[1:24:57] could fall back on. And so that's why you saw those four paths um and not the

[1:25:00] the ASIC program in there. Um, don't think I had anything else. If there's

[1:25:06] any other questions that you had for me, happy to answer those, but any I don't

[1:25:10] know if the team had anything else to add.

[1:25:13] » Oh, yes. The Yeah, we we were very um intentional about the adaptive reuse is

[1:25:18] just, you know, something I'm very interested in trying out um in our team,

[1:25:22] Studio Tsquare, which we also worked on on the Northgate Mall project. So

[1:25:25] they're very um well verssed in the area and in the in the land and the the law

[1:25:29] itself and also the the connectivity to transit um because they were our part

[1:25:33] our thought partner there. Um but yeah, we would love to keep exploring that

[1:25:37] with the city because we we don't actually know what the plan is for your

[1:25:40] interim housing. And so if those are not going to be around, that's okay. We'll

[1:25:44] we'll figure something out. But if they are available, it'd be great to think

[1:25:47] through what we can do with those. um you know as community center space um as

[1:25:52] you know um just space for the the residents to be able to to do really fun

[1:25:56] activities um potentially use it for neighborhood meetings that kind of

[1:26:00] thing. So >> yeah, thank you.

[1:26:01] » Thank you. Thank you for that. >> Tammy, do you want to speak or member of

[1:26:07] your team? Thank you. >> Hi. Thanks again. Thanks for having us

[1:26:10] back to uh respond. Uh I heard three things tonight uh about resident

[1:26:15] services, the path to the smart train uh station and the height of the building.

[1:26:21] Um it is amazing to have this level of involvement from neighbors um this early

[1:26:27] in the process and thank you all for coming um to express your concerns and I

[1:26:35] uh would really encourage everybody to take up Joe Joe's invitation to visit

[1:26:40] Vivolon or to visit Kasa Canal because you will see at those uh properties like

[1:26:46] all of our 160 properties there are on-site resident services managers who

[1:26:51] live at the property 24 hours a day. So, um we have on staff janitorial, property

[1:26:58] management, resident services, and even third party services whose jobs are to

[1:27:04] be at our building 24 hours. I mean, not well, it's se seven days a week. Um but

[1:27:10] there is a 24-hour resident services manager on site at all of our

[1:27:15] properties. Um because that is um that is the true because all of our uh our

[1:27:23] residents need services and they need support so that we can um keep them

[1:27:27] there happily and sustainably. Um I'm going to turn it over. Oh, I one thing

[1:27:33] about path station. Our proposal originally talked about establishing a

[1:27:39] pedestrian connection from the property to the path station. Uh the city got

[1:27:45] back to us and said, "You know what? The city's already thinking about this. If

[1:27:49] the city should um find the money to do this to do this path, would you consider

[1:27:55] doing bicycle and pedestrian improvements according to the city's uh

[1:28:00] pedestrian and bicycle plan that go north to San Pedro Road?" And that is we

[1:28:04] said yes, and we will take a look at that. Um I just wanted to clear that up

[1:28:08] because I know there was two different slides on that. And I'm going to turn it

[1:28:12] over to Rick to talk about the height of the building because

[1:28:15] » just a short response out of my wheelhouse.

[1:28:18] » Okay. Just a short response. >> Very short. So, one of the things we did

[1:28:22] is we tried to show the uh we modeled the building, placed it in the the site

[1:28:29] so that people could get a real honest appearance of what it looks like at

[1:28:34] different heights. It was actually a fivetory scheme that we modeled. We

[1:28:38] actually modeled a six-story scheme, too. and we saw the height of it and

[1:28:41] lessened it. People get honest tradeoffs. We did that with Bivivalon

[1:28:46] and we do it with Fairfax Mil Valley. We do it with all of our projects. So, they

[1:28:50] get an honest review and it's very transparent and if they ask us to take

[1:28:56] it from the backyard, we will take the image from the backyard and show it to

[1:29:00] them personally. Um, also there are a lot of people in the community of San

[1:29:05] Rafale. The community isn't just along Midell. it's within the whole city and

[1:29:12] you're providing housing for the whole community. So, there are tradeoffs to be

[1:29:17] had. Do you how do you maximize the value of the site for the city to use uh

[1:29:23] their dollars in purchasing the property? There are also community

[1:29:28] members that will live here eventually. And every time I complete a project, I

[1:29:34] think, well, yes, we took we got the project approved

[1:29:38] and we took a story off the building and we can do that and still achieve a high

[1:29:43] unit count. If you remove 30 units from the development and it's 80 unit

[1:29:49] project, the one group of people you don't ever have to ask a question or

[1:29:55] answer a question of is why don't I have a house to live in? and those residents,

[1:30:01] future residents, many of who might have already been

[1:30:05] Sanfell residents don't get to speak for that answer. And

[1:30:11] I think that's a really important thing to consider. So there'll be tradeoffs in

[1:30:14] this process. Y >> nobody's wetted to the new design and

[1:30:19] each of the developers would do a good job. we were a we decided to proceed

[1:30:25] with a larger development so that we could have the conversation, have the

[1:30:30] tradeoffs and work with the community on it.

[1:30:32] » Thank you. >> Thank you, Ray.

[1:30:35] And then um Eve. Yeah. Thank you.

[1:30:44] » Thank you again. I guess it just in conclusion um I'd like you to take away

[1:30:49] um from our proposal that you know Saha has a very strong presence in the

[1:30:53] region. We have an excellent track record. We are a very hands-on um

[1:30:58] organization and and developer. Myself, my CEO and all our senior leadership

[1:31:03] team are involved in these projects. We have a really experienced staff. Um our

[1:31:08] senior project manager Naan who's here um has worked on several ASIC projects

[1:31:12] and done really beautiful communities again from San Jose to penol um and

[1:31:17] we've augmented our team with uh folks who have a long history in the city um

[1:31:23] and a lot of local expertise. So April Paley who will be part of our community

[1:31:26] outreach and planning and design work going forward as well as Chris Hes. Um,

[1:31:31] and I do want to clarify that we have budgeted for this project to have

[1:31:35] full-time property management, full-time services coordination as well as

[1:31:39] maintenance. Um, and we do have capacity within our services department to

[1:31:44] provide case management for folks who need a little extra support. We do have

[1:31:48] um a licensed clinical uh social worker who supervises all our resident service

[1:31:53] coordinators so that they can get support and um extra resources when

[1:31:58] families or individuals are needing that support. Um, we're also very adept at

[1:32:02] working with other community partners and we've already started that process

[1:32:05] by communicating and reaching out to Canel Alliance and Ritter Center to

[1:32:09] think about, oh, folks need additional help, what are the resources in the

[1:32:13] community and sort of building those connections um and broad-based community

[1:32:17] support. Uh, one last thing is we do have uh 24-hour coverage for maintenance

[1:32:23] or other emergencies and we um have a a way to we have a text system so that we

[1:32:30] can communicate directly with residents so folks can sign up to get alerts and

[1:32:33] announcements from us about activities um opportunities as well as important

[1:32:38] safety alerts again if something happens. A couple last fall we had a

[1:32:42] tsunami warning um for the bay and uh we immediately were able to push out to all

[1:32:48] our residents who lived potentially in that zone and let them know make sure

[1:32:51] they had seen the county warnings um and mobilize quickly there. So um again,

[1:32:56] we'd love to work with you and we welcome the opportunity to engage with

[1:33:00] neighbors as soon as we can so that we can plan um for their needs and be

[1:33:04] responsive and deliver a really outstanding project for the community.

[1:33:09] Thank you. Thank you and thank you for providing

[1:33:12] that additional information. I think it's nice to have the opportunity to add

[1:33:16] in and to respond. So, we'll bring it back for subcommittee

[1:33:22] discussion and comments. I can see why you wanted to bring all of us into this

[1:33:27] conversation. This is not an easy one. I do have two questions. Um, and maybe you

[1:33:31] can just speak to this. There were assumptions being made about who will be

[1:33:34] living here and I know we have other 100% affordable projects in Sanfell and

[1:33:40] so I don't know if the assumption is always accurate that there are people

[1:33:42] that were formerly homeless. So maybe you could just speak to who the 80

[1:33:46] people might be and it might change over time. Um and then I would also be

[1:33:52] curious what height is allowable by current zoning standards.

[1:34:00] Yeah, thank you for the clarifying question. Um, because affordable housing

[1:34:05] certainly can serve people who were formerly homeless um or at risk of

[1:34:11] homelessness. um but also often serves um

[1:34:17] every everyone really like um some of the examples we gave we gave in our

[1:34:21] slides right were home health aids and um you know people who work retail or

[1:34:26] people who are in food service or so it's it's an expansive

[1:34:31] group that can live there and is a part of the community

[1:34:36] » and so do our other affordable I'm just saying center town are there um onsite

[1:34:41] case managers because I I'm just trying to figure out because I think that's a

[1:34:45] really interesting comment that the community talked about or on-site

[1:34:49] property managers or just the stability part the additional staffing. Do our

[1:34:52] other affordable 100% affordable projects have that.

[1:34:56] » So I think it depends on the project and the sort of level affordability and like

[1:35:02] if there's permanent supportive housing, right? So, permit supportive housing is

[1:35:05] going to have an additional um layer of support or like um more robust support.

[1:35:12] Um and I think some of these proposals had said,

[1:35:17] you know, if vouchers become available, we're happy to look at additional

[1:35:21] permanent supportive housing, right? Ramping that up. Right now, we don't

[1:35:24] have that voucher availability. And so I think that's why um it might have come

[1:35:29] across as um unclear what the level of services would be,

[1:35:33] » right? Because I know that this project when we when the city purchased property

[1:35:37] was not to be permanent supportive housing, which does have a higher level

[1:35:40] of care, >> right? And I will say um I believe all

[1:35:43] three proposals noted that that they were um targeting family housing. So

[1:35:47] which is again a little bit different than um individual PSH.

[1:35:56] And I think the second question was about height. I believe the default

[1:35:59] maximum height for this zone is 36 feet if I'm not mistaken. But under um state

[1:36:05] density bonus law um affordable housing projects are entitled to increase the

[1:36:10] density on site and given its proximity to transit and the level of

[1:36:14] affordability. Um if this were a private development for example, I don't believe

[1:36:18] the city could impose any density restrictions

[1:36:21] » or any height restrictions >> or a waiver. Yeah, they ask for height.

[1:36:23] Height becomes a waiver concern, but that's kind of the difference nuance on

[1:36:28] this one is we actually do get an opportunity to basically set kind of

[1:36:31] like the scale and >> size of this project. So,

[1:36:35] » okay. And then we also had I'm looking at my notes here. There were some

[1:36:38] questions about going through the projects not selected. I actually don't

[1:36:42] want to spend subcommittee time. I can't even parse through the three that we

[1:36:45] have here. So, um but there was uh information if you could share. I don't

[1:36:50] know how much of that is public information. So, if you could speak to

[1:36:53] the to that didn't and I do realize there's a proprietary aspect to these.

[1:36:57] These are all pitches. So, I I again, but if you could speak to that. So, we

[1:37:01] already talked about um smart path that was addressed. Oh, the resident uh again

[1:37:08] for the finalist that there was a chamber of commerce and staff, but why

[1:37:13] there wasn't a community member? Never heard of I don't know if we've done

[1:37:17] that. Maybe maybe some of the developers have experienced that in other cities.

[1:37:21] As I said, this is a brave new world for us, but if you could speak to that and

[1:37:24] then the other one, oh, the development score. So again, I know we're trying to

[1:37:28] also be sensitive to the fact that that some of this information is confidential

[1:37:32] to the Anyway, but if you could answer kind of those those questions and as

[1:37:37] much as transparent as we can be. >> Yeah, sure. So this uh we received five

[1:37:41] responses. is the two that didn't rise to the top. Um some lacked exper

[1:37:45] experience that the these developer teams have and some of the proposals

[1:37:51] were maybe underdeveloped or they didn't provide um any they didn't out identify

[1:37:55] any community engagement or any three-bedroom units. Some of some of the

[1:37:59] factors that led to higher scores for the other proposals. Um and then the the

[1:38:04] panel consisted of of members that had different um levels and different

[1:38:09] specialties with housing background. Um so even though we did have a member of

[1:38:13] the Chamber of Commerce, they they had affordable housing experiences which is

[1:38:17] what they brought to the panel.

[1:38:21] » And then >> and then in respect to some of the

[1:38:23] scoring or details and this is really typical for the city when we do an RFP

[1:38:27] process. uh those will become public information or at least not proprietary

[1:38:31] information once uh the council actually selects a developer to move forward that

[1:38:36] point then we could release additional information because as we noticed some

[1:38:40] of these competitive process RFPs maybe the first one doesn't work out we know

[1:38:44] the second one so we're still at give that opportunity to uh select the

[1:38:48] various groups um but that that's why the information is put out once we've

[1:38:52] actually made that selection and enter into the NA and DDA so

[1:38:57] Fantastic discussion or questions. >> I just want to follow up just to to

[1:39:02] clarify that if this property if the site were being developed by a private

[1:39:07] developer that had enough um concessions there would be no height limit. The

[1:39:17] sky's the limit. >> No, it'd be a little different. We do

[1:39:19] have density uh would be actually because there is a density standard uh

[1:39:23] outside the downtown. So there would be a limitation based on the base allowance

[1:39:27] density. Even when you put the the bonus stacking on there, there would be a

[1:39:31] limitation as compared to some of our downtown zones.

[1:39:34] » And do you have any idea what that would be? That would be a number of units.

[1:39:38] » Um there would be, but I I really always feel when we start talking about things,

[1:39:42] I think there's other factors that would limit really this kind of like maximum

[1:39:45] sky's limit approach and really is some of the built infrastructure and also

[1:39:48] what the site can actually handle. M >> um so uh in this case it's a sizable

[1:39:53] parcel but uh some of these questions do come to play but there is actually a

[1:39:57] height allowance a base density project you would actually have to call out what

[1:40:00] the maximum density allowance is for this parcel I think we calculated in

[1:40:05] like 140 range I can't recall off top of my head but um there is there would be a

[1:40:10] box that actually would have to maintained if a um private developer had

[1:40:15] acquired the site and move forward with development of this

[1:40:17] » okay thank

[1:40:21] Now we're to the discussion part. >> Trying to think how we can help um guide

[1:40:27] the discussion. I I really want the entire council to be up here because

[1:40:30] this is uh very much a challenge. So I'm trying to figure out how we can give

[1:40:34] input that's helpful. Um it's well I'll start because I'm already starting. Um I

[1:40:40] I'm just thank you to all three applicants that want to build and invest

[1:40:45] in San Rafll. Um, I just want to start with that. And this is a new area for

[1:40:50] the city of Sanfal for us to be owning this property. Um, and so as we find our

[1:40:55] way through this process, whether you've been working in Sanfal or you're new to

[1:41:00] uh, working in here, I think you can already tell that we care very deeply

[1:41:04] about what's built here and what it looks like and how it responds both to

[1:41:07] adjacent neighbors, but as well as to the entire community. I think that's a

[1:41:10] good point. Um we've been doing this work between us many many decades and

[1:41:16] the reality is um any change in use often is met with resistance for folks

[1:41:20] that might be nearest and that's what it is and recognizing that impact is real.

[1:41:25] So, how do you balance? Uh, both of those are true. Um, and this council has

[1:41:31] been very very committed to having affordable housing. And the fact we're

[1:41:34] even doing this, 80 units at the very minimum is a lot of units. And I and I

[1:41:39] want to make sure that we don't in the pursuit of perfection lose sight of the

[1:41:44] fact that no matter what, we're going to get 80 units because that is what our

[1:41:47] agreement is. So, I want to just be clear that for me that was um that's a

[1:41:53] very important uh number that I'm I want to say I'm fixated on but I'm thinking

[1:41:56] about I we didn't talk about parking and part of this is my other questions I

[1:42:02] know get worked out I want to say worked out but you have additional

[1:42:05] conversations in the ENA what I heard over all three was a willingness to take

[1:42:11] in that input and a willingness to have the project morph and as I said at the

[1:42:15] very beginning and put um Eden on the spot it's very difficult to s to believe

[1:42:21] like oh we're going to take input when you have really beautiful renderings

[1:42:24] And again, it's hard for people unless you're very wellversed in looking at

[1:42:29] architectural drawings to understand how those could be changed. And so, there's

[1:42:35] always going to be a tension there. And that's just the reality. So, thank you

[1:42:38] for being brave and putting pictures on the on in the document because I know

[1:42:42] that soon as you put a picture out there, people are going to start to

[1:42:45] respond to it uh either positively or negatively. Um, I'll just stop by saying

[1:42:50] or close by saying I do think the stability of the residents is a is a

[1:42:54] critical part. And I recognize the folks in this area. It's going to morph over

[1:42:58] time. It's a 99-year lease. Hate to break it to you, none of us are going to

[1:43:02] be here. We're at the end of this, right? And so, how do we have the

[1:43:05] flexibility recognizing whether it's service workers or our teachers or

[1:43:09] nurses are going to be there. So, I don't want to have it. It's not

[1:43:12] permanent supportive housing. So, I don't want it to be built that way.

[1:43:15] That's a whole other realm. That is not what we're talking about here. um even

[1:43:19] though there are folks who have been formerly homeless who will be offered

[1:43:23] spots, but that that's very different than 100% um permanent supportive

[1:43:27] housing. The environmental aspect is incredibly important. Once it's built,

[1:43:30] it's not going away. So, um paying attention to that and the designs, we

[1:43:34] didn't get it in designs. We're not going to do that to you. Setbacks,

[1:43:37] things like that. I do think the pedestrian experience as well as a

[1:43:41] community experience is important. Um and a lot of that can be addressed

[1:43:45] through setbacks and through good design. So that's why I didn't want us

[1:43:48] to get hung up on design. And then I do think uh having the character of the

[1:43:53] neighborhood respected it. It's an unusual site because it's very

[1:43:58] industrial in some ways. You have an old Chevron, you have fast food, you have

[1:44:03] multif family housing, you have public storage. There's kind of a lot going on

[1:44:07] there. So having ultimately the design and whoever's chosen recognizing that

[1:44:12] you're in this liinal space between you know the freeways on one side and how do

[1:44:17] you recognize that there's an established neighborhood there that has

[1:44:21] its own architectural language and yet this other buildings that are kind of

[1:44:25] all over the board. I think that's really challenging actually um from a

[1:44:29] design perspective and this is not just throw up a big box and call it a day at

[1:44:34] all. So, um I'm actually really pleased that the city will have the ability to

[1:44:38] influence that design because we've seen some other designs recently come across

[1:44:42] that, um to me have not been as respectful from what we want in terms of

[1:44:46] good design. So, I know that's not all helpful in terms of delineating. Um and

[1:44:50] I'll just stop at one more thing. The whole financial stack of it all and that

[1:44:55] is it was talked about how that's a changing landscape. Um I am fully

[1:44:59] convinced that all three that presented tonight would figure it out. you have

[1:45:03] all had records of doing this for decades and decades and decades and

[1:45:07] you've been meaning you've been figuring it out year after year after year. So I

[1:45:10] am completely confident um that was something that was really important to

[1:45:13] me to hear and I heard that tonight. So um so I like I agree with you all three.

[1:45:20] [laughter] Yeah, council member Busheen.

[1:45:24] » I totally agree that would that would be the simplest um thing would be to um

[1:45:29] take all three of you because that you all have um are incredibly qualified.

[1:45:34] We're thrilled and honored that um you have um um made the effort to um and and

[1:45:41] they have the desire to be in San Rafel. But we do need to make a decision um and

[1:45:47] we can't have all three. Um, and I think what would most help be most helpful

[1:45:52] because as a subcommittee our job is to give you staff direction for what will

[1:45:58] be brought forward to the entire council. So with thinking along that

[1:46:02] what can I give you for feedback? Um, my feedback is that I agree with your prior

[1:46:10] or the way you're approaching it. the items that you've listed on page three

[1:46:14] about in the middle of the page um where you say the strength of the proposal is

[1:46:18] it would provide the most housing the the reason I think that should be the

[1:46:24] first um criterion addressed the purpose of this is low-income

[1:46:31] housing and one of the other groups the the people who wouldn't get to live here

[1:46:36] are one group that aren't here but in addition

[1:46:40] um the taxpayers of Marin County that have provided $8 million that allow us

[1:46:46] to be in this happy position of having to choose which developer we want. Those

[1:46:53] taxpayers I believe want the most value for their investment and that's why I

[1:46:59] think we should be focused on the number of units in making sure that there are

[1:47:04] familysiz units included in that mix. But the the numbers matter here. Um we

[1:47:10] we need numbers. Um we need many many many units. So I think focusing on the

[1:47:16] number of the units is the uh the the the correct first criterion. And and one

[1:47:22] the next one you have is parking which is something we did haven't talked about

[1:47:26] a lot about here although heaven help us have we heard about parking for those

[1:47:32] many decades. So, I I would offer for the neighborhood consideration that park

[1:47:39] off-site parking is a huge issue and the the um amount of onsite parking is

[1:47:49] extremely important and the closely related to that is the ability

[1:47:57] to get to transit so you don't have to have so many cars. Um those two things

[1:48:02] work together to um uh keep the trans the transportation on

[1:48:10] site that that can be and and provide the neighborhood benefit of paths to uh

[1:48:16] for everyone to use to get to transit, not to mention the greater environmental

[1:48:20] benefit. And then that that plays into the the neighborhood improvement. And

[1:48:26] finally, I think too you um maybe should add a criterion that's been talked a lot

[1:48:31] about today. The the next one would be the on-site services. Um because as I

[1:48:37] was listening to many of the um specifics of the development,

[1:48:43] particularly the environmental ones, maybe it's because I come from the

[1:48:46] electricity industry. I hear all these things micro grids photobotic [laughter]

[1:48:52] and it's like these are very complicated very dangerous things. These are not

[1:48:58] something even your on-site manager you you need expertise

[1:49:02] to maintain and to um be able to fully utilize the resistant the resilience

[1:49:10] potential of these facilities. And if we're going to put these complex,

[1:49:16] expensive, and dangerous um items on these sites,

[1:49:22] we need to have um staff with expertise and training that are able to safely um

[1:49:29] interact with these um features. So um those are the criteria. That's how I

[1:49:35] would approach it um for for the rest of the council so that we have a way of um

[1:49:40] looking at the information in a sequence.

[1:49:42] » And would you we had talked about units but also bedrooms. I'm trying I'm trying

[1:49:47] to figure out how we get at the mix piece and I know you said they all had

[1:49:50] the mix. Are you or would your response to that be like that would be figured

[1:49:53] out in the ENA? >> Again, just trying to get our hands

[1:49:57] around. Yeah, I think you have to look at this is the concept plans that

[1:50:02] they've kind of like for their own project. What what if okay everything's

[1:50:05] held equal. This is what we would pursue. Okay.

[1:50:07] » The hard part is really the due diligence.

[1:50:10] » What what capacity or what sewer allocation? There's a lot of questions

[1:50:14] that come into play >> about getting there. So that's why it's

[1:50:16] hard to get unit mix, but I think we just that's why we really are focused on

[1:50:20] the developer and then recognizing all three developers could deliver what the

[1:50:25] city is looking to deliver. Okay. >> But we don't want

[1:50:31] all, you know, a whole bunch of of um studios, you know, exclusive studios. We

[1:50:36] do want some family units. >> Agree.

[1:50:39] » At at some fraction. >> Agreed. And then that's really made me

[1:50:43] look at the percentages proposed to say whatever the actual build approach was

[1:50:47] the same percentages of the intermix of units and then all three of them

[1:50:51] actually gave a mix of units. So that's why I said that's the benefit bit versus

[1:50:55] just one single type. And we've seen that uh in actual market rate projects

[1:50:59] um coming in that were just one type of unit typology.

[1:51:04] » Any city manager? Anyone else want I'm trying to figure out how we um don't

[1:51:09] just have we can have a repeat of this meeting, but I'm I'm trying to figure

[1:51:12] out what the next steps would be. I know in terms of these timelines, they're

[1:51:17] very I mean the starting one was August 2026 and we're not selecting a partner

[1:51:21] tonight and as far as I know August ends in a week and a half. So I I'm just tell

[1:51:28] all of us from what you've heard how you want what's going to happen next. Is

[1:51:33] staff going to make an a proposal of two of the finalists maybe? I mean that

[1:51:38] would be to me as opposed to having three having maybe two I don't know but

[1:51:43] I don't know. >> You know I believe based on the input

[1:51:47] provided from the subcommittee that staff's prepared to actually bring

[1:51:50] forward um a recommendation to council. Um I think um as I said we we do have a

[1:51:58] luxury of three qualified firms. Okay. >> Um but I do believe we have um staff is

[1:52:03] comfortable making a recommendation for council. So

[1:52:06] » Okay. And then being prepared to answer or talk to the other ones. I'm sure.

[1:52:09] Okay. >> Yes.

[1:52:11] » City manager. Anything else? Being that this is a brave new world for all of us

[1:52:16] in this room. Well, maybe not for the applicants. They've been they've done

[1:52:19] this before, but for us on this side for a long time, right?

[1:52:24] » No, I think uh staff's gotten some good feedback both in presentations

[1:52:30] and from the uh subcommittee. um we'll work on uh most likely bringing forward

[1:52:35] a recommendation to the full council which ultimately uh will make the

[1:52:39] decision and as we typically do with all of our staff recommendations will likely

[1:52:45] be our recommendation and maybe uh option or alternative should the council

[1:52:50] discussion >> um warrant um going in that direction

[1:52:55] » and will that be September October again I'm just trying to not to put you can

[1:52:59] say by the month you don't have to say the exact meeting day because I know

[1:53:02] there's a lot going on. >> We would be targeting uh September,

[1:53:06] October for bringing that forward >> and so folks can know when it's coming

[1:53:09] forward by subscribing to snapshot because again we we want to give people

[1:53:14] as much when we know that it's coming forward. We want people to be able to

[1:53:17] know how would they know when it's coming forward.

[1:53:20] Um well, we'll communicate it on our um project web page and uh we can talk

[1:53:27] about um maybe teasing out a long range calendar as part of our agenda process

[1:53:32] so people can see what items are coming up.

[1:53:34] » I think that would be great. >> Yeah.

[1:53:36] » Okay. Well, with that um again, thank you all for being here. We appreciate

[1:53:40] everything from both the applicants as well as the public that came and

[1:53:43] provided their input. Uh this meeting is adjourned. Good night.

350 Merrydale Affordable Housing Development Project Subcommittee – August 20, 2026

Agenda

Transcript