[0:02] Good afternoon. Um, the Hillsboro City
[0:04] Council meeting is called to order. Um,
[0:07] city clerk, may we please have a roll
[0:09] call.
[0:10] >> Thank you, Mayor Cole. Adams,
[0:12] >> present.
[0:12] >> Schwang,
[0:13] >> present.
[0:14] >> Crow,
[0:14] >> present.
[0:15] >> Ragdale,
[0:16] >> present.
[0:16] >> Cole,
[0:17] >> present.
[0:17] >> Thank you. Um just to um let our
[0:22] residents who are in chambers as well as
[0:25] residents listening from home first of
[0:26] all welcome and um we have a long
[0:29] afternoon today long afternoon into the
[0:31] evening. We will be starting uh the
[0:33] study session specifically um around um
[0:37] the town hall redesign and we will
[0:40] subsequently around 4:30 um adjourn to
[0:43] close session and then come back for the
[0:46] regular city council meeting at 6 p.m.
[0:49] So, um, we will start this study session
[0:57] regarding the town hall, excuse me,
[1:00] regarding the town hall plan
[1:02] alternatives review and discussion and
[1:05] that will be presented by our assistant
[1:07] director of building and planning, Liz
[1:09] Ruiz.
[1:10] >> Hello, Ruiz.
[1:12] >> Good evening or I guess afternoon still.
[1:14] >> Good afternoon. Yes,
[1:14] >> thank you for coming early for this.
[1:16] >> Yeah. Um this afternoon the council will
[1:20] receive a presentation from the
[1:21] consultants that have been working on
[1:23] the town hall um complex project with
[1:26] that's EHDD and Red Dot Studio. Um, but
[1:29] I just wanted to provide a brief
[1:31] reminder for the council and for any
[1:32] members of the public um that at the
[1:35] September 8th meeting in 2025, the city
[1:38] council received an update on the
[1:41] project's uh development and the council
[1:44] confirmed several assumptions about the
[1:46] project at that time and provided
[1:49] direction to staff and to the
[1:50] consultants to continue exploring
[1:52] opportunities
[1:54] um to develop site alternative plans. Uh
[1:58] since that time, the city council
[1:59] subcommittee has met. Those were public
[2:02] meetings that were open to members of
[2:04] the community. Um and ultimately the
[2:08] subcommittee has worked with the
[2:10] consultant and utilizing feedback from
[2:12] the members of the community have
[2:14] identified two preferred site plans and
[2:17] those are going to be presented to the
[2:18] full council and the community this
[2:20] evening or afternoon.
[2:22] Um and then there will be an opportunity
[2:26] for discussion. Staff is seeking policy
[2:30] direction from the council regarding the
[2:33] conceptual plans. Um and I'm happy to
[2:36] after the presentation remind the
[2:37] council of of what that is, but
[2:39] ultimately um there's no decision being
[2:44] requested of the city council this
[2:46] afternoon. We're hoping that the council
[2:48] will receive the presentation and then
[2:50] discuss the site plan alternatives and
[2:53] ultimately provide direction to staff,
[2:55] but there'll be opportunity after the
[2:57] presentation to ask staff and the
[2:59] consultants any questions um that arise.
[3:03] With that, I would like to introduce um
[3:05] y uh Karen from Red Dot Studio.
[3:13] » Thank you very much. It's a pleasure to
[3:14] be back here today and thank my
[3:16] colleagues as well from EHD with um
[3:19] thank you Mayor Cole, Vice Mayor
[3:20] Rexdale, Supervisor Cole. It's been nice
[3:22] to get you and other council members. As
[3:25] we run through this, um, we're going to
[3:27] start with a really brief overview of
[3:30] how we came up with a with the
[3:32] qualitative the quantitative metrics
[3:35] that went into the study between
[3:36] establishing the data that you received
[3:39] from that was that you already had
[3:42] before we got started um documenting
[3:45] conducting site visits. We conducted um
[3:51] we conducted a survey to to the town's
[3:54] people and then the the council contin
[3:56] excuse me the town continued to conduct
[3:59] constituent surveys. We refined it. We
[4:02] looked at scopes and that began the
[4:05] process. Um last time we were here was a
[4:07] visioning session in the council
[4:09] chambers. We had a subcommittee meeting
[4:11] that took us all the way through
[4:13] answering some very big questions about
[4:16] the site constraints and about what the
[4:19] site parameters would be. Looking at
[4:21] whether we would move the water line or
[4:22] not, deciding not to, looking at whether
[4:25] we would considering acquiring an
[4:27] adjacent property or not, and getting to
[4:29] this last section over here where
[4:32] there's two areas that we were asked to
[4:34] bring forward. One was called um the
[4:37] boulevard scheme and the mountain
[4:38] scheme. So we moved forward with those
[4:41] and those were taking into account
[4:44] putting housing closer to um El Camino
[4:48] and
[4:49] um getting the adjacent property at 722
[4:52] Walnut.
[4:54] These were a set of words and criteria
[4:57] that came through our our um both
[5:01] visioning sessions that we did and also
[5:03] that the town had done before the
[5:04] consultant team joined. Um one thing
[5:07] that came across very loud and clear was
[5:09] to try to avoid underground parking. And
[5:12] so that brings us to the two where we've
[5:15] had some guy two um concepts we're going
[5:18] to go to for the first one looking at
[5:20] civic ridge line.
[5:24] There's a beautiful hillside that that Sam that Hillsboro sits on and we
[5:29] have the idea of taking that hillside
[5:32] and setting the town hall within a park
[5:36] light setting where we're actually using
[5:39] both the southern skyline ridge trail as
[5:42] our muse as well as the um historic
[5:45] cottages of Hillsbor with their
[5:47] cascading roof lines. So the town hall
[5:50] concept has its form from both the
[5:52] hillside and the homes here creating a
[5:55] civic landmark within a townlike set a
[5:57] park-like setting. That first site plan
[6:01] um
[6:04] is there is there a way I can use the
[6:07] mounts on this or is not really.
[6:13] » So we've we disabled the red dot just so
[6:16] the zoom people
[6:17] >> Okay, got it. So, um, on the northern
[6:22] side of the screen would be the police
[6:24] portion of town hall and on the the
[6:28] opposite side would be where there where
[6:31] the plaza is would be both the EOC and
[6:34] the chambers and the town hall building
[6:36] that across Walnut Street there would be
[6:39] a uh there would be a plaza there. You
[6:42] can see I'm going to actually go to the
[6:43] next slide where there's more labels.
[6:45] Um, so you can actually see that the
[6:48] number one is the entry both from the
[6:51] plaza side as well as from a d back
[6:54] parking side. Number two is a community
[6:56] as well as an emergency operations
[6:59] command center. Number three is chambers
[7:02] greeting you off the plaza. Um, number
[7:05] five is the Veterans Memorial and
[7:07] Centennial Park. You can see also on the
[7:10] screen the blue cars and the black cars
[7:12] being a way to distinguish between towns
[7:15] people coming and the police going into
[7:17] their secure parking areas. Uh we've
[7:21] been asked and been told by constituents
[7:23] that mailrop is very important. So
[7:25] letting you know that it stays there as
[7:27] well as bike parking. There's pedestrian
[7:29] crosswalks for traffic safety. The
[7:32] dotted blue line is the water line. So
[7:35] the water line goes under the new plaza.
[7:38] Both chambers and the community room can
[7:41] empty and and flow out to the plaza
[7:43] allowing allowing times like light up
[7:46] the town and other events to happen
[7:48] right on that plaza.
[7:52] You can see it here in an axonometric
[7:54] where the building slopes down to the
[7:56] street creating a more pedestrian scale
[7:58] along Florabunda. Housing is in the back
[8:01] corner, visually secondary to town hall,
[8:04] but having its own front yard and its
[8:07] own access closer to Flora Bunda.
[8:11] There's a sense of how we might be able
[8:14] to phase this. So you would deconstruct
[8:18] town hall. That would be the number one
[8:21] there. You would police would be able to
[8:23] continue to operate pretty much in its
[8:26] same location using the El Camino
[8:28] entrance. Um, perhaps town hall
[8:32] operations could go over to the
[8:33] town-owned residential lot. Then police
[8:36] and town hall could be built. Then
[8:39] police could be constructed. Housing
[8:41] could be constructed. And you could
[8:43] deconstruct the building at Florabunda
[8:45] to make the parking lot and complete the
[8:47] plan. So there's a phased approach that
[8:49] could happen with this.
[8:52] to give you a sense of the plaza and the
[8:54] side entrance into the community room.
[8:56] You can see how you flow through to the
[8:59] plaza as well as into chambers.
[9:04] And there's a sense of how the building
[9:06] itself has the is oriented well for
[9:10] resilient energy. So there could be
[9:11] integrated PVs on the roof. The water
[9:15] can cascade down and be collected. Um so
[9:17] rainwater harvesting can reduce water
[9:20] demand. The Clarastory windows allow
[9:23] healthy daylit spaces with low carbon
[9:26] construction through mass timber.
[9:28] The landscape pallet also in increases
[9:32] community wellness by the shaded plaza
[9:34] having a place for people to engage
[9:36] permeable parking as well as shielded
[9:39] native hedge and green infrastructure
[9:41] filter filtering water and creating
[9:44] resilient landscapes.
[9:47] giving a bit of a view from the floor
[9:49] abundance side. So you can see the EOC
[9:52] community room as a beacon.
[9:57] Okay. And now we're getting to the
[9:59] second concept, Town LA. We previously
[10:02] called this one Boulevard. And as it um
[10:05] as it as it changed, what we hope to do
[10:08] is be able to fit the police housing
[10:10] underneath the building. So, the
[10:12] articulation changed a bit, but we're
[10:15] still considering this a a sort of
[10:18] villagel-like setting um with a
[10:20] residential scale that comes through
[10:22] creating a civic heart and a civic plaza
[10:25] arranged around a courtyard and an allay
[10:27] of trees.
[10:29] This in this plan, the forward building
[10:31] across Flora Bunda is town hall. Housing
[10:35] is off of El Camino. That housing is in
[10:38] shown in white and it has um parking
[10:41] podium parking underneath housing.
[10:44] Police is across the back of the lot.
[10:46] You can still see it has moved as close
[10:48] as we can to El Camino with a secure lot
[10:51] and a secure driveway behind housing. Uh
[10:54] so we're giving a little bit of buffer
[10:56] to the the residences in Berling game.
[10:59] Walnut Avenue here remains where it is
[11:02] located. So you can see that the water
[11:04] line continues to run across Walnut
[11:06] Avenue and the triangle lot gets remade
[11:10] into a different parking area. What's
[11:13] nice about this one is it starts to keep
[11:16] the adjacent um
[11:19] the adjacent town owned building town
[11:22] owned
[11:24] a residence.
[11:26] So town hall is two stories. Number
[11:29] three indicates chambers kind of
[11:31] greeting you at the end. As you come
[11:34] into the parking behind town hall, you
[11:37] see number one is entries into the lobby
[11:40] for both police and town hall. The
[11:42] community and EOC can spill out onto the
[11:45] plaza allowing Centennial Park and
[11:48] Veterans Memorial to be under a trellis
[11:50] area. Police is three stories towards
[11:53] the back of the of the property. Um
[11:58] and housing is four. So you can begin to
[12:01] see this as it plays out on the site and
[12:04] in relative heights to the surrounding
[12:06] neighborhoods. The housing being closer
[12:08] to El Camino of a different scale and
[12:10] then dropping down to more residential
[12:12] scale as you move back into the site.
[12:17] Phasing for this um in this case, police
[12:20] would be deconstructed first. Um, town
[12:23] hall potentially can operate in 1640
[12:26] Florabunda and police potentially can
[12:28] operate in town hall. Then you would be
[12:30] able to build police and housing and
[12:33] then follow through with deconstructing
[12:35] town hall, building the new town hall
[12:37] and parking.
[12:42] This is a sense of looking into chambers
[12:44] and looking into the allay of trees
[12:46] between police and town hall.
[12:51] This what this project this concept
[12:54] could have more thermal comfort through
[12:56] passive and thermal mass enduring
[12:59] materials of wood and stone and stucco
[13:01] covered walkways for year round access
[13:04] and down at a neighborhood scale.
[13:08] The courtyard village would have
[13:09] sheltered gathering spaces between the
[13:12] community room and police treeline paths
[13:15] allowing a classic courtyard um features
[13:19] as well as green screening for the
[13:21] parking. This is the idea of looking
[13:24] down floor abunda towards the um town
[13:28] hall.
[13:30] And with that, let's talk about costs.
[13:33] It's important to note that these costs
[13:36] are escalated to 2030, an approximate
[13:40] midpoint of construction, but that is
[13:42] where the escalation is going towards.
[13:44] The total project costs range between
[13:47] 221 and 226.
[13:50] That does include both soft and hard
[13:53] cost. In the middle column, you can see
[13:55] the hard costs. And then as we work over
[13:58] to the other side, you can see the cost
[14:00] per square foot for different
[14:02] components.
[14:03] Um,
[14:05] and I know there's probably plenty of
[14:07] questions, so I want to give you the
[14:08] chance to ask them and we can circle
[14:10] back to more details on any of those
[14:12] slides. Thank you.
[14:14] >> Um, thank you for the presentation. Um,
[14:17] I will turn to my colleagues to ask for
[14:21] clarifying questions and we'll come back
[14:23] for more discussion before we go and
[14:25] then go to the um any um questions from
[14:29] just for clarification. Um it Vice Mayor
[14:32] Ragdale and Council Member Crowley are
[14:34] both on the subcommittee and have been
[14:36] meeting with you um over the past um
[14:38] couple of years. Correct. Yeah. Any
[14:41] questions from the council?
[14:45] >> Yes,
[14:45] >> I have questions, but I would defer to
[14:47] those not on the subcommittee first. Um
[14:51] if that makes sense.
[14:53] >> Yes. Any questions, Adam?
[14:55] >> I do want to note that a lot of this is
[14:57] new information to those of us on the
[14:58] subcommittee though, too.
[15:01] We that's the first time we've seen any
[15:03] cost estimate.
[15:04] >> Okay. Um, Council Member Adams,
[15:09] >> thank you so much for the presentation
[15:10] and thank you to my colleagues for all
[15:12] the work that you've put in on this. I
[15:15] know it's all in the details and it just
[15:19] keeps adding up more details, but I
[15:21] appreciate all the work you've done. Uh,
[15:24] just a few questions as I looked at
[15:26] things. Um,
[15:31] was uh neither one of these close Walnut
[15:35] Street, correct? The two that you've
[15:39] >> neither close Walnut Street. One does
[15:42] straighten Walnut Street and the And it
[15:45] actually lends itself to a time that you
[15:49] could close it for events if you wanted
[15:51] to.
[15:52] >> Okay. um where it could then kind of
[15:54] connect to the plaza that way and in
[15:56] fact either worked well to do that where
[15:58] you would be able to close it for
[15:59] events.
[16:00] >> But there was no consideration of
[16:02] turning a walnut into a culde-sac at
[16:06] this end so that we could have more
[16:09] space to play with, not to dig deep uh
[16:13] under the into our our water, but uh so
[16:18] that wasn't a consideration. I think
[16:20] that we we had a culde-sac at the first
[16:23] visioning session and as we looked at
[16:25] this and we looked at the turnaround
[16:27] space and the access to parking that
[16:29] needed to be separated for both housing
[16:32] and then town hall, it no longer was
[16:34] making sense in especially with the
[16:37] acquisition of 722 Walnut and the space
[16:40] at that location of the site. It worked
[16:43] better in that visioning session one
[16:45] when we pulled it quite a bit forward
[16:47] and then had underground parking. So as
[16:49] we as we negated underground parking and
[16:52] tried to keep it on surface, it it kind
[16:53] of would move the culde-sac back when
[16:55] the property and there wasn't enough
[16:56] room for it there. I can somewhat look
[16:59] show you on go all the way back to this
[17:02] one.
[17:04] So where it was culdeac on the visioning
[17:07] session one was in a different part of
[17:09] the property which was pulled forward
[17:11] with different space and as we didn't no
[17:14] longer had underground parking it it
[17:16] really didn't work out that way. but it
[17:19] potentially could add parking as well to
[17:22] close off the road if you constructed it
[17:25] in different ways. So, it was just a
[17:27] thought. Um,
[17:29] is was there ever consideration of uh
[17:33] using the townowned lot at 1640
[17:38] uh Floraunda because neither of them use
[17:41] that as well.
[17:43] So I I brought this summary slide back
[17:46] because I think it's probably quite
[17:48] helpful to look at the process. Um the
[17:51] town lot at 1640 floor if you go to the
[17:55] last the 52126 subcommittee
[17:58] that town that group of diagrams there.
[18:05] Thank you.
[18:09] Showed A and B versions
[18:13] of many schemes, some of it which were
[18:15] using the town owned lot, putting
[18:17] housing over on that side of the at on
[18:20] that side of the town hall site, but we
[18:22] were directed to try and get housing as
[18:24] close as possible to Flora Aabunda. So,
[18:27] how we ended up using it in the schemes
[18:29] that you see today, in one scheme, it
[18:32] actually becomes an overlow parking lot
[18:34] and in a second scheme it remains a
[18:37] town-owned home.
[18:38] >> Yeah. I I liked, frankly, these were so
[18:42] tiny when we received them. I haven't
[18:44] been able to really study them, but in
[18:47] that A and B, one of them at least was a
[18:50] park that uh obviously would be
[18:55] wonderful to use at that spot. Uh was
[18:59] there any thought of what to do with
[19:02] 1640?
[19:04] So in the schemes there um 1640 was used
[19:08] for housing with most of the town hall
[19:12] sites conjoined between police town hall
[19:16] EOC all in one area and then over on the
[19:19] other side it was being used as housing
[19:21] but we were directed to try and get
[19:23] housing as close as possible to
[19:25] Floraunda
[19:27] and so as we moved on I don't know if I
[19:30] excuse me Elamita I thank you supervisor
[19:32] Koh um does that answer your question?
[19:36] >> It does, but it it seems a little like
[19:38] we
[19:40] cut out a few avenues uh along the way.
[19:43] I know sometimes when you have a list of
[19:46] community suggestions, it can be
[19:49] interpreted as you have to do every one
[19:50] of these things, which is a little bit
[19:53] hog tying as you're trying to conceive
[19:55] of filling all this in. Um
[20:00] and then uh was there any talk of
[20:03] maintaining the existing town hall?
[20:08] There was and um back at visioning
[20:10] session three we had a versions where we
[20:13] maintained the existing town hall. We
[20:16] formed the subcommittee on 33125
[20:20] and by the 58 subcommittee meeting the
[20:23] idea had been been that we were going to
[20:26] explore um acquisition and annexation
[20:30] but also looking at that we it became
[20:33] clear that it with the site constraints
[20:36] we would be making all new buildings. So
[20:39] that happened kind of in an earlier
[20:41] phase that we would be looking at let's
[20:43] see was it might have been 87 pursue all
[20:45] new construction sorry 87 2025
[20:49] so in terms of interpreting it all now
[20:52] when we had heard that uh the cost was
[20:56] going to be $150 million there was shock
[21:00] and awe and how will we do this etc. And
[21:03] now that the there's a considerable
[21:05] increase to 221 or at the outside $226
[21:10] million,
[21:12] revisiting some of these earlier
[21:14] concepts would seem to make some sense
[21:17] and uh so I wondered how far you had
[21:20] gotten on each of them and how your
[21:22] direction had been influenced.
[21:25] Did Liz want to say something?
[21:27] >> We can um just for clarification if we
[21:30] could just get clarifying questions.
[21:31] We're going to come back and discuss
[21:32] this. Yeah. Okay. Um
[21:34] >> um well that those were my questions
[21:36] >> and you can your comments are well noted
[21:38] and we can come back to those.
[21:40] >> Great. Thank you.
[21:40] >> Okay. Thank you. Um council me.
[21:44] >> Thank you. Thank you so much for your
[21:46] presentation. It's long time coming. So
[21:48] really appreciate this finally have the
[21:51] u sort of the transitions of how the
[21:53] illerations kind of move. Uh my question
[21:56] is um sort of along uh the the ideas uh
[22:01] that you're not you utilizing the the
[22:03] Warner lots and also the town own uh
[22:05] rental properties.
[22:08] That is by directions or that is by
[22:10] discussions that we're going to focus on
[22:13] just the town complex in this existing
[22:16] lot.
[22:18] >> So I just wanted to confirm. So this is
[22:21] these are the process plans that were
[22:23] considered previously. The two preferred
[22:26] site plans that were presented. One does
[22:28] utilize the existing property at 1640.
[22:32] It becomes part of the parking structure
[22:33] or parking area. Um and then there's a
[22:36] second the town um LA uh that maintains
[22:42] the existing rental property at 1640.
[22:44] And so having an option that maintains
[22:47] the existing rental property and then
[22:49] having an option that utilizes it that
[22:52] was um direction that came out of
[22:54] subcommittee discussions and feedback
[22:56] from the community.
[22:58] >> Okay. So, uh my my clarification uh
[23:02] question is so by directions um you're
[23:07] focusing on the town complex to um to to
[23:11] design the utilities for uh for the
[23:16] purpose of the EOC and also for the town
[23:18] staff. Um is that then by intention that
[23:22] you're building it up to for the police
[23:24] is three stories and then for the um
[23:27] town hall is two story.
[23:31] So the two different options have two
[23:33] variants in that.
[23:35] >> The one central building is three
[23:37] stories but the building steps down. So
[23:41] this on this building the building steps
[23:44] down to one story at the bot at the
[23:47] front side along Florabunda and up to
[23:50] three stories which you can start to see
[23:52] in this axon perspective. So in this
[23:56] version both police and town hall are
[23:59] three stories. However in the next I'm
[24:01] going to go to the axon there as well.
[24:08] In this version, the axon starts to show
[24:11] that we lowered and made it two stories
[24:15] at the front, stepping to three stories
[24:17] at the back. So there was a bit of a a
[24:20] perspective where you could see that
[24:21] kind of raising on the site. Is that
[24:24] does that answer your question?
[24:25] >> Uh so I'm trying to understand that. So
[24:27] really you you are building the height.
[24:29] You're elevating it to be three stories.
[24:32] It just there's progression from the
[24:34] street. So it doesn't appear to be very
[24:36] intrusive. Is that what you're saying?
[24:37] That was that was the plan. That was the
[24:39] intent.
[24:39] >> That was the intent. And so the square
[24:41] footages are actually based on the very
[24:44] first slide that showed the program and
[24:46] how the programmatic elements. Um there
[24:49] was a phrase that Supervisor Kle used in
[24:52] the subcommittee which was layering in
[24:54] practicality so that it's how we're
[24:56] fitting the police, how we're fitting
[24:58] the parking, how we're fitting access to
[25:00] it, and how we're fit having it um
[25:02] operate around the site. But at the same
[25:05] time we are trying to keep the the the
[25:09] scale lower towards floor abundant in
[25:11] both schemes.
[25:12] >> Okay. And so my other question is um
[25:16] regarding the functionality of the town
[25:18] hall um you know when we first had this
[25:20] building and while it still in some way
[25:23] feel like very new um our experience has
[25:26] been that it quickly grew out of the
[25:29] purpose right it quick quickly the the sort of the styled of the meetings
[25:34] and the the sort of intent of having
[25:37] gatherings and so forth is not quite
[25:41] fitting. Um and there therefore the
[25:44] discussion of can we internally
[25:46] reorganize in restructure it to make it
[25:48] work or do we need to have a new design
[25:51] of the building. My question is do in
[25:55] your planning is the intent to have all
[25:58] the departments working under the one
[26:00] roof and and has the capacity to to
[26:04] accommodate that?
[26:06] >> So the two different schemes are
[26:07] slightly different in that. So in terms
[26:11] of designing into the future, I think
[26:14] this program process summary is a one
[26:17] that talks about how we have square
[26:19] footages that are designed for now based
[26:22] on things that you looked at in 2023
[26:25] through 2031 and then document it with
[26:28] existing conditions um as we went and
[26:31] looked around, but then testing and
[26:34] profiling and refining into what into
[26:36] the future and what we're seeing at
[26:38] other sites. So this kind of
[26:40] quantitative metrics that came out of a
[26:42] fairly robust program document
[26:45] >> so that we could be designing into a
[26:47] future is h how the space got allocated.
[26:52] And so in one scheme, the first scheme
[26:55] that we're calling civic ridge line that
[26:58] has town hall and police under one roof
[27:01] with a seismic brace in between so that
[27:04] you can have police functions on one
[27:06] side, town hall functions on the other.
[27:09] In Town LA, the second scheme, there are
[27:12] separate buildings around a courtyard,
[27:14] but with with entries that sort of
[27:16] mirror each other.
[27:18] >> Thank you. Um, my last question is this.
[27:21] Um there is a there's a huge discussions
[27:25] regarding parking and the availabilities
[27:26] of parking and that is filling over the street but there's also I think in
[27:32] these days as as we discuss about
[27:34] housing and structured buildings and
[27:36] whatnot to really recognize that people
[27:40] now don't necessarily own cars
[27:43] >> and that they use Uber lifts or AVs for
[27:46] that matters. Um so could you walk me
[27:49] through a little bit about the thinking
[27:51] behind the parking and the calculations
[27:54] of the parking?
[27:55] So the parking calculations are also in
[27:58] that programming document and we have
[28:01] heard both things. We've heard
[28:03] definitely from the community that they
[28:04] do not want overflow parking onto the
[28:07] street but that the parking should be
[28:09] rightsized and easily available as
[28:12] people are coming up to town hall. So
[28:15] this shows 20 stalls of surface parking
[28:19] for the housing units including guest
[28:21] parking. Um and then the police had very
[28:25] specific requirements both for their
[28:27] patrol cars and for their staff own
[28:29] cars. So they have secure parking behind
[28:32] the police station and podium parking
[28:34] under the building town hall. It was the
[28:38] quick drop off um behind the building.
[28:40] There's surface parking spots as well as
[28:43] p parallel parking spots on Walnut
[28:45] Avenue and overflow parking into the
[28:48] town owned lot. Those in this scheme,
[28:51] there's 66 surface parking spots for the
[28:54] town hall, which is exactly what was
[28:57] called out in that program documentation
[28:59] trying to weigh into what was needed and
[29:02] not needed. As we go into the second
[29:05] scheme, the ALA scheme, it's a little
[29:07] bit different. One of the things that we
[29:10] got told could give was the number of
[29:12] parking stalls. So in this case, we
[29:15] actually still want to have that quick
[29:17] drop off to the lobby that are labeled
[29:20] number one so people can come in, get out, that kind of quick ability.
[29:26] Walnut A stays in the orientation that
[29:28] it's in with the water line underneath
[29:30] it, but there's parallel parking there
[29:32] that can get pretty quickly through
[29:34] crosswalks over. And then the triangle
[29:36] lot gets resurfaced in a way that's a
[29:39] you kind of know where to park whereas
[29:40] right now it's a bit squirly. Um but
[29:43] this only has 55 spots. If parking were
[29:47] to become an issue for the future
[29:49] obviously the townowned residence is
[29:51] adjacent and could more spots could be
[29:53] accommodated. So, in both of the
[29:55] schemes, we were looking at it in terms
[29:57] of what we needed programmatically and
[29:59] then um trying to get them in on either
[30:03] surface or podium parking with no raised
[30:06] parking garages and no underground.
[30:08] >> Thank you.
[30:11] >> Um I have a few questions. Um if the uh
[30:15] subcommittee participants don't mind,
[30:17] I'll ask my questions along with my
[30:19] colleagues. Um, first of all, thanks for
[30:21] the presentation and thanks for all the
[30:22] work you've been doing over the past
[30:24] couple of years. Um, regarding the cost,
[30:27] did you separate those costs between the
[30:30] three main um, objectives? One being
[30:34] town hall redesign, the other
[30:38] HPD police department redesign and the
[30:42] third being the housing requirements or
[30:46] because you gave us a total number. Did
[30:48] you do any internal analysis to separate
[30:50] the cost?
[30:51] >> Yeah, if you look in that last column,
[30:53] the community and EOCC costs there is
[30:56] between 20 and 21 million. That's
[30:59] actually a pretty high cost per square
[31:01] foot because the EOCC, that emergency
[31:04] operation center and community room is
[31:06] only about 5,000 square feet. That has
[31:09] separate data and also has the ability
[31:12] to uh be seismically hardened. So
[31:15] there's not a it's not a larger EOC
[31:18] where there's an economy of scale. So
[31:20] that that hardening is there at 20 to 21
[31:23] million. If you look the next line down,
[31:26] town hall is about $2500 a square foot,
[31:30] between 39 and 40 million. Police goes
[31:33] to 68 to 70 down at 3,300. Again, has
[31:37] the seismic hardening and the things
[31:38] that you would want in a police station.
[31:40] Housing's the lowest cost there at
[31:42] 1,300. between 23 and 27 million. We
[31:47] looked at maintaining the bedroom count
[31:49] for housing, but as much as possible
[31:52] reducing the amount of corridors and one
[31:54] scheme having the corridors be outside
[31:56] and surface parking, which is cheaper,
[31:58] and a second scheme having podium
[32:00] parking, which has a little bit of a
[32:01] that's why there's a little bit of a
[32:03] cost variance between the two schemes
[32:04] there, but that's broken up um by
[32:07] building there. And regarding the
[32:09] housing cost, 1,300 square foot per
[32:12] square foot. How many what is the
[32:13] estimate? Are these one, two or three
[32:15] bedrooms or studios? What are they?
[32:17] >> One and two bedrooms. And
[32:18] >> one, two bedrooms.
[32:21] >> Is that
[32:23] >> correct?
[32:23] >> Is that correct?
[32:24] >> Correct. I just didn't know if you
[32:25] wanted to talk about how that was
[32:27] developed.
[32:28] >> Um
[32:30] I noticed I believe it's a town alley um
[32:34] design.
[32:36] It's is the one that's next to
[32:38] Centennial Park. Does it impact the park
[32:42] um in any ways or it just happens to be
[32:45] >> you could go to that?
[32:46] >> In both in both schemes, the idea being
[32:50] that Centennial Park may need to move
[32:53] it. The artifacts could be taken over
[32:55] into a new location. Um, so in both
[32:59] schemes, Centennial Park is potentially
[33:01] being relocated and still being on site
[33:04] as a park and as a place to be. So in
[33:07] town LA, housing over near El Camino is
[33:12] getting, in fact, it's more obvious
[33:15] potentially here. The the red square
[33:20] is Centennial Park. It's quite close to
[33:23] housing. So in that scheme, if you
[33:26] wanted to keep it exactly as is, it's a
[33:28] possibility, but it also may become um
[33:31] quite close to the housing building. And
[33:34] so the elements of the park we were
[33:37] proposing could be moved into a new
[33:39] location
[33:41] um in number five in between police and
[33:44] town hall. So it's possible to keep it
[33:47] exactly as is, but we were looking to
[33:50] see if we could move the artifacts. So
[33:52] your project anticipate moving
[33:54] Centennial Park.
[33:58] >> Is that my understanding?
[33:59] >> Potentially. Yeah.
[34:00] >> Okay.
[34:01] >> Yeah.
[34:02] >> Um regarding the water line um or the
[34:05] water main line on Walnut that you
[34:09] project may need to be straightened for one of these design. Which one was
[34:14] that again?
[34:15] >> So we um opted earlier in the
[34:19] subcommittee. We looked at both moving
[34:21] the water line or taking or or acquiring
[34:25] the adjacent property at 722 Walnut. And
[34:29] while moving the water line was a
[34:31] possibility, that possibility was
[34:34] abandoned through the process because of
[34:36] the time period it would take to move
[34:38] the water line would put us past the
[34:41] arena and put us past the housing
[34:43] element. And so we abandoned that at the
[34:46] subcommittee level back in um 827
[34:53] 2025.
[34:55] And then there's a bit of a So So we're
[34:57] not moving the water line in either version.
[35:01] >> And And you're not straightening walnut
[35:03] or does one of them
[35:04] >> One of them straightens Walnut but puts
[35:06] a park on top of it.
[35:07] >> And which one is that?
[35:08] >> The the uh the civic ridge line.
[35:12] >> Okay. exhibit. Um,
[35:18] and the housing the 16 units residential
[35:21] is that one of the design projects a
[35:24] fourstory is that what is projected in
[35:27] both designs? Fourstory building.
[35:29] >> Yeah, they are both fourstory buildings.
[35:32] Um, the housing in
[35:36] the civic ridge line is four stories.
[35:39] slightly lower um floor to floor height
[35:42] to make it compatible with the height of
[35:44] the the town hall. And then in the CI in
[35:48] the town LA where it's across there's a
[35:51] podium parking on the lower floor and
[35:54] then three stories of housing above.
[35:57] >> Okay. So it's not below ground parking.
[36:00] It's just a podium correct type of
[36:02] parking. Correct.
[36:03] >> And could you just review the access
[36:05] sites again for both um designs? I
[36:08] couldn't quite sure.
[36:10] >> So, this slide might be the easiest to
[36:13] see and then I'll I'll go to the next
[36:15] slide. This Civic Ridge line has Walnut
[36:19] Avenue straightened.
[36:21] And so there's a new Walnut Avenue
[36:23] orientation. The dark dotted blue line
[36:27] is where the water line is. That water
[36:30] line goes under a plaza or a park.
[36:34] The main building, the large building is
[36:36] town hall and police. Both are three
[36:38] stories at their tallest, but they they
[36:41] go they go down to the street at the
[36:44] floor abunda side.
[36:46] Housing is four stories behind police,
[36:50] but it's also oriented with a slightly
[36:52] lower floor to floor so that the heights
[36:54] sort of align well.
[36:57] The plaza gets a lot of nice um southern
[37:02] sun and is shaded by the trees on the
[37:04] new plaza and allowing overflow of
[37:07] parking at the existing town owned lot
[37:09] where you can see the numbers four and
[37:11] six.
[37:14] Number five is where Veterans Memorial
[37:17] and Centennial Park is. thinking that
[37:21] the the monuments themselves may be part
[37:24] of a new um landscape plan as the over
[37:28] at that section and very close to where
[37:30] they exist today.
[37:34] >> And the entrance from El Camino is that
[37:37] that's away from the current stop sign.
[37:40] Correct.
[37:41] >> So the entrance from El Camino is
[37:43] specifically just for a police secure
[37:46] entrance. It's about 100 ft more more
[37:48] than that from the corner for police
[37:50] only. And then you can see the blue car
[37:53] going out on El Camino. That's again
[37:55] just an emergency exit. It's sort of
[37:58] grasped in on the half arc. That's not
[38:01] meant for daily use. That's meant if
[38:02] there needs to be another way out from
[38:04] that side. The main entrance would be
[38:07] through Walnut A. And the black cars are
[38:10] sort of showing where that main entrance
[38:12] would be through Walnut A to the parking
[38:14] area right behind town hall in between
[38:17] town hall and housing
[38:20] >> and the straightening of Walnut A on
[38:22] this um design does not impact the water
[38:26] line. No, in fact, the building is
[38:28] beyond the setback for the water line,
[38:31] but the water line becomes the location
[38:33] for a new plaza and park that allows the
[38:37] community room and chambers to be able
[38:39] to spill out onto a plaza and that is
[38:42] allowed that's an allowed use over a
[38:44] water line.
[38:46] If we if we need to move the you
[38:49] suggested we may need to move um
[38:51] Centennial Park. Where exactly do you
[38:54] project or anticipate it could be?
[38:56] >> Okay. It's number five um on the that
[39:00] diagram.
[39:03] >> Okay. Yeah. And if you wanted to see
[39:06] where it actually exists in this scheme,
[39:10] it really would need to move. It's
[39:12] optional in the other scheme, but in
[39:15] this scheme, the red box, the small red
[39:17] box next to the police entry is actually
[39:19] Centennial. Um,
[39:24] >> okay. Um, I will ask my colleagues uh to
[39:27] remain colleagues to make comments
[39:28] before we go to public questions and and
[39:31] we we will question. Do you have a
[39:32] question?
[39:32] >> Just one question.
[39:33] >> Sure.
[39:34] >> On the Civic Ridge line, where are the
[39:36] police going to be parking?
[39:38] In both schemes, the police are parking
[39:41] in a there's a secure lot behind police,
[39:44] but also podium parking. They have quite
[39:46] a high parking need. So that in both
[39:49] schemes, there's some podium parking,
[39:51] meaning at the first level, not not
[39:53] below grade, not above grade, but pull
[39:55] in right at the podium level. And then a
[39:58] secure lot adjacent.
[40:00] >> They also have a fuel link stations that need to be addressed and that is
[40:04] part of that, right?
[40:05] >> Yes. Yeah. So you think that the number
[40:07] two that you were talking about?
[40:09] >> There's a the filling station is outside
[40:12] in because
[40:14] >> we don't want to put gas inside the
[40:15] building
[40:16] >> and as well as a gen there's generators.
[40:18] There's a police evidence. So all of
[40:20] that is accounted for in these. Yes.
[40:22] >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you.
[40:23] >> Thank you. Um yes. Any questions um from
[40:29] Vice Mayor Ragdale? Yes.
[40:31] >> Thank you so much. And it's great to see
[40:33] you again. Now I can't see you because
[40:34] I've put on the other glasses. It was
[40:36] great to see you and thank you. Um and
[40:39] I'm excited for our colleagues to uh see
[40:42] these these next steps. Um and uh I
[40:46] think right now I just have three
[40:48] questions. Um, one is more of a question
[40:52] for Liz and staff that maybe could be
[40:55] um, answered at another time, but with
[40:58] regard to the phasing, um, I'm just
[41:01] wondering if staff could actually work
[41:04] out of the town owned building on floor
[41:06] abunda because it seems
[41:09] not large enough, but um, just just
[41:12] something to to think about. Um maybe
[41:15] there will be a 40 baywood that that we
[41:18] could work out of. Um the second
[41:21] question um that I had is would the town
[41:24] Ali um would that use those uh green
[41:27] building concepts that were in the civic
[41:30] ridge line with the water capture and
[41:33] the solar? Yeah, they they would. And
[41:37] each scheme has different green
[41:40] strategies that would work well. There
[41:43] definitely is the ability for southern
[41:45] facing roofs to have building integrated
[41:48] photovoltaics on this. What's different
[41:51] about this scheme from on town LA versus
[41:53] the civic ridge line is that not all the
[41:56] roofs are southern facing. So not
[41:57] everything would be used that way.
[42:00] There's the ability for this building to
[42:01] have a bit more thermal mass which it
[42:03] helps with dal temperature swings and
[42:05] having less energy being used and um
[42:10] also the same ability to capture rain
[42:12] water and to use it well on site.
[42:14] >> Great. Um thank you. Um and then the
[42:17] last question is um uh
[42:21] the the in terms of the costs we would
[42:25] presume that the housing cost would be
[42:28] paid by a developer.
[42:31] Okay. Um and then and then can you just
[42:33] clarify with the water line? Um we can't
[42:35] put a building on top of it. Correct.
[42:37] Because we need access.
[42:38] >> Correct.
[42:38] >> Yeah. Great. Thank you.
[42:40] >> Thank you. Um Council Member Krillic.
[42:43] >> Thank you Karen. So when you go to uh a
[42:47] Lee to the the footprint um
[42:51] Yeah. And actually and even the phasing.
[42:54] So when we talk about the phasing if we
[42:56] went to a lead because I'm I'm trying to
[42:59] figure out how do we get there
[43:00] financially? Yeah.
[43:01] >> Could we
[43:02] have the police work out of one where
[43:05] they are build the police station and
[43:08] then they move and then we could build
[43:12] the housing there. So we could phase it
[43:14] that way and town hall would stay intact
[43:19] >> potentially because I think the what
[43:21] you're indicating is there's a section
[43:22] of where the police station is that's
[43:24] being used by finance, right? And so you
[43:26] would be having them stay potentially.
[43:30] Liz, I'm going to turn this one over to
[43:31] you.
[43:35] I think there's certainly a potential
[43:37] for that. that I know there was also
[43:38] discussion about um you know the
[43:40] potential for portable structures to be
[43:42] used on the Walnut parking lot for
[43:45] temporary office spaces for for PD or
[43:48] other staff. So there's certainly
[43:50] opportunities.
[43:51] >> Yeah. I'm just thinking if we could just
[43:52] simply finance the police department,
[43:55] the police building first, they can stay
[43:58] where they are. We build that, they
[44:00] move, then we do use that space for
[44:02] housing, and then we, you know, we
[44:06] enhance town hall in the future or
[44:09] rebuild town hall in the future, just
[44:10] because this, I mean, I just don't see a
[44:14] path right now to $200 million, even if
[44:17] we uh take out the housing part. Um,
[44:22] and then my next question was, are we
[44:25] preserving that historic part of the
[44:28] police station in any way?
[44:31] >> So, we had looked at that much earlier
[44:33] and I think I'd been directed not to
[44:36] keep it in. So,
[44:42] that's correct. It was determined that
[44:43] it's not technically historic. It is an
[44:47] original portion of the building. Um
[44:49] there were schemes that retained that
[44:52] portion of the building. There were
[44:53] schemes that relocated it. Um but
[44:56] ultimately in discussion um from a cost
[45:00] benefit standpoint. Um it it didn't
[45:03] pencil out. Um but there was also
[45:06] discussion about perhaps preserving the
[45:09] entrance to the PD building and reusing
[45:11] that somewhere. It could be reused
[45:13] inside. It could, you know, it could be
[45:15] um memorialized in other ways.
[45:19] If I could just add to that as well, you
[45:21] know, the the when we think of that part
[45:23] of the building and the historic nature
[45:25] of it, it really is at this point, it's
[45:28] pieces within that area that are really
[45:31] the historic keepsakes that are there.
[45:33] And I'm certainly would be looking to
[45:36] remove those delicately and reuse them
[45:38] somewhere in the project, even if the
[45:40] actual space itself was used for
[45:42] something else.
[45:44] >> Thank you. Um, yeah, those are all my
[45:46] questions right now. I just say thank
[45:48] you and I just want to point out um that
[45:52] we right now are just looking at where
[45:55] things are um the elevations and not the
[45:59] elevations but the drawings of how it
[46:01] looks that that's still another phase.
[46:04] >> Okay. Um let's hear from the community
[46:07] if we have anyone from um
[46:11] any of our residents either on Zoom or
[46:14] in the chambers who would like to make a
[46:16] comment specifically on this. We also
[46:18] have another agenda is item B which is
[46:21] to um present a petition which will be
[46:24] after this discussion is completed. So
[46:26] if there's anyone from the public who
[46:28] wishes to ask questions or comments on
[46:31] what's been presented so far. Thank you,
[46:34] Mayor Cole. I don't have any speaker
[46:36] cards, but I'll just ask if anyone in
[46:37] the room would like to speak, you can
[46:39] let me know later. You can go up to the
[46:40] podium.
[46:44] » Afternoon.
[46:44] >> Hello. Good afternoon. Your name is
[46:46] >> Riad Salma 816 Eucalyptus. I'm not sure
[46:49] I follow what you said, Mayor Cole,
[46:50] about the section B and the petition.
[46:54] >> Um, it will be presented after we finish
[46:56] the um presentation and discussion on
[47:00] the town hall. the petition will be
[47:02] presented and um we'll make some
[47:05] comments about it. It will be coming
[47:07] back. I can give you a heads up on that.
[47:09] >> I was asked to to speak to the petition
[47:11] by
[47:12] >> Oh, you were asked to speak to the
[47:13] petition. So, do you have any specific
[47:14] comments on what's been presented so far
[47:16] outside of the petition?
[47:19] >> Generally, it sounds as if the
[47:22] conversations are operated on the
[47:23] assumption that all these elements are
[47:24] going to be satisfied at this site, the
[47:26] housing included. Has that determination
[47:29] been made as opposed to allocating those
[47:32] additional 16 units to the Tobin Clark
[47:34] site as a possibility?
[47:35] >> I'm going to give you the opportunity to
[47:36] present that petition. Were you planning
[47:39] to read the petition into the records or
[47:41] were you just planning to make a comment
[47:43] about the petition?
[47:44] >> I was hoping to read the petition.
[47:45] >> Okay, we'll get to that in a minute. I
[47:47] just want to know if there are any um
[47:48] residents either in chambers
[47:50] specifically to talk about the town hall
[47:53] redesign as was presented by our
[47:55] consultants.
[47:56] >> Yeah, I wasn't intending to read the
[47:57] petition. I'll wait for that. Okay.
[47:59] That'll be coming up shortly. The
[48:00] question does I think apply to the
[48:02] discussion that we've been having and
[48:03] that's
[48:04] >> if the because we're talking about space
[48:06] allocations. Yeah.
[48:07] >> Between all these different elements.
[48:09] >> So, are we operating currently under an
[48:11] assumption that this site is going to
[48:13] house those 16 units or is that
[48:15] determination not yet been made?
[48:17] >> Well, that that's what we submitted, but
[48:21] there is a petition to consider
[48:23] alternatives. So, that will be discussed
[48:25] shortly.
[48:26] >> Okay. when we talk about the petition.
[48:28] >> Thank you.
[48:29] >> Um are there any other questions um from
[48:31] the public or on Zoom?
[48:33] >> Thank you, Marco. I don't have any
[48:35] speaker cards in the room and I don't
[48:37] see any raised hands, but I'll just give
[48:38] a moment if anyone on Zoom would like to
[48:40] provide comments on this item. Raise
[48:42] your hand, please.
[48:46] I'm not seeing any raised hands,
[48:48] Miracle.
[48:49] >> Okay. Um if there are any other
[48:52] additional comments specifically based
[48:54] on what's been presented so far with
[48:56] regards to the design of the town hall.
[48:58] Yes, council member Chuang.
[49:02] Uh this question is actually for the um
[49:05] the consultants. So on the um civic
[49:09] ridge line there's a quite a bit of a
[49:13] greeneries uh along the corner of Al
[49:16] Camino and Laura
[49:19] um where I I suspect that that's where
[49:22] the um the Centennial Park is currently
[49:28] located. just kind of want to understand
[49:31] the configuration of that versus the
[49:35] town allay that you guys were talking
[49:37] about. What is the comparison between
[49:39] the greeneries on that sections?
[49:43] So, it might be easiest to see that on
[49:45] the phasing plan. So, I'm just going to
[49:47] go back to that if that's okay. Um,
[49:49] >> yes.
[49:51] So on the town LA, the little red square
[49:56] at the Florabunda El Camino, that is
[49:59] where Centennial Park is. So now
[50:03] it's possible for it to stay in that
[50:05] location as is. It's quite close to the
[50:09] housing building and so it might not
[50:11] have a great feeling next to a fourtory
[50:14] building. So, we were considering
[50:16] bringing it into the plaza and into part
[50:20] of civic life in the town LA. And so, we
[50:23] were putting it underneath a trellis and
[50:26] in a place where you would be able to go
[50:28] sit and enjoy it and actually have it be
[50:30] part of the the the greenery. It is
[50:34] possible for it to stay where it is in
[50:36] this scheme though that you can see the
[50:38] red square there and the three um oak
[50:41] trees. Uh uh my question is not about
[50:44] the Centennial Park. I think that you
[50:46] know um I'm always open to a much better
[50:49] utilized park areas and I think that the
[50:52] Warner um the design on the Wana Avenue
[50:56] is intended to be picnic like offer the
[50:59] opportunities for community events,
[51:01] outdoor events and also for the staff
[51:04] and the residents to have the
[51:06] opportunity to enjoy it. So I'm okay
[51:09] with that. What I'm trying to make a
[51:11] different difference sort of the the
[51:14] separations of town LA versus the ridge
[51:16] line is
[51:19] first of all why the greeneries on that
[51:21] side you know and two is what is the
[51:24] difference? It seems like the town LA
[51:26] has a smaller green areas on the design
[51:31] versus the civic ridge seem to have a
[51:34] larger areas. And in in our conversation
[51:38] about space or importance and that the
[51:40] redesign is really for the functionality
[51:43] of our town activities and staff, you
[51:46] know, working
[51:48] >> those are all precious mon, you know,
[51:50] that that I want to make sure that we're
[51:53] not using it for the sake of the
[51:55] greenery, but rather that we're
[51:56] utilizing in a way that makes sense to
[51:59] our town.
[52:00] >> Okay, I think I understand the question.
[52:03] There there are slightly different
[52:08] there are different approaches to the
[52:09] site layout where town LA's site layout
[52:13] is a series of smaller a series of
[52:16] buildings arranged around a central
[52:19] courtyard and that central courtyard
[52:22] allows light and air through to the
[52:24] buildings for the town staff or for the
[52:27] town function to to work. Um and
[52:32] the building itself, town hall itself is
[52:35] closer to Flora Bunda Street. You're correct in seeing that. So the
[52:40] gap of greenery between Flora Bunda
[52:42] Street and the town hall is slightly
[52:44] less in this scheme. It still allows an
[52:47] area for some greenery, for some
[52:50] rainwater catchment, for all of those
[52:52] things, but it but the daylighting function is happening in
[52:59] the center of the site here. And so the
[53:02] outdoor gathering space is in the center
[53:04] of the site here
[53:07] in the civic ridge line scheme. And I'm
[53:11] going to just go to this um landscape
[53:15] plan.
[53:17] Walnut Avenue, since it was
[53:18] straightened, allows for a public plaza
[53:21] that you can see from Flora Bunda
[53:24] Street. It's a more um
[53:27] visible public plaza from Florabunda
[53:30] Street, but it's al also over a
[53:32] waterline, so we actually can't use it
[53:34] for a building. And so there's no
[53:36] opportunity to use it for a building.
[53:39] The town hall then elongates along the
[53:41] site and in this case it goes a little
[53:44] further closer to where the um oak trees
[53:47] are. And so there does get to be sort of
[53:51] like a front yard from El Camino and a
[53:54] front yard from Walnut Street to the
[53:56] site. And then in between from Flora
[53:59] abundant to town hall there's greenery
[54:01] that is there that also can function to
[54:03] capture rainwater. So because the
[54:06] building shapes are [clears throat]
[54:07] somewhat different where the outdoor and
[54:10] the daylighting ends up different and in
[54:13] this scheme we get our daylighting
[54:15] through changes in the claristory
[54:17] windows allowing light to come through
[54:19] on both sides of the roof line. Did that
[54:23] do it? Did that answer?
[54:25] >> That was helpful. Thank you. Uh
[54:27] >> um I'll have us make some final comments
[54:30] on what's been submitted so far and then
[54:32] we'll have the presentation regarding
[54:34] the petition. Do we have um additional
[54:37] comments? Council member Adams.
[54:40] >> Uh thank you, Mayor Cole. I I really
[54:42] just want to clarify exactly what we're
[54:46] deciding here, if anything. Uh because I
[54:50] heard uh Council Member Krillix say
[54:52] we're we're really just looking at where
[54:56] things are and I I understand that. But
[55:00] uh if that's what we're doing, I don't
[55:02] feel comfortable saying yes, we know
[55:05] where things are right now. So if that's
[55:08] what we're trying to do, I would I I
[55:11] would offer that I think there are still
[55:14] some more considerations. Just want to
[55:15] make what clarity there.
[55:17] >> My um understanding is to give feedback
[55:19] in terms of what you've heard if there's
[55:21] something specific you buil you you
[55:23] think should be modified, changed,
[55:24] upgraded, eliminated, and we just want
[55:27] to get we're not making a decision
[55:29] specifically. We're not voting, but
[55:31] we're giving feedback. Is that correct?
[55:33] >> Yes.
[55:34] And if I may, uh, what staff is
[55:37] seeking some ideas, um, not limited to
[55:40] these items, is just feedback on the
[55:42] overall site organization,
[55:45] um, the location and relationships of
[55:48] the town hall building, the police
[55:50] department, housing, parking, um, and
[55:52] the major other major project
[55:54] components, the site circulation and the
[55:57] parking strategy. I think the biggest
[55:59] difference um from previous versions is
[56:02] this is all surface or podium level
[56:04] parking. Um also feedback on the project
[56:08] phasing and implementation priorities
[56:10] understanding if there's a desired
[56:12] phasing approach. Um and then any
[56:16] refinements or sort of
[56:20] changes other considerations that the
[56:22] council would like to see. Um ultimately
[56:25] staff will evaluate any of the feedback
[56:28] that we received tonight along with any
[56:30] direction and um you know depending on
[56:33] the council's discussion we can come
[56:36] back with additional conceptual plans.
[56:38] We can evaluate alternative approaches.
[56:40] Really this is the first time that the
[56:42] full council has had the opportunity to
[56:44] discuss these options and so staff is is
[56:47] just looking for feedback.
[56:48] >> Yeah.
[56:49] >> Just for feedback. So you may proceed.
[56:50] Um council member Adams.
[56:52] >> Yes. Well, thank you. But, uh, in actual
[56:54] fact, that's why I'm uncomfortable even
[56:57] giving feedback because I've only seen
[57:00] this since Friday morning. And the
[57:03] little tiny drawings, I really want to
[57:05] put more thought into this. And if we
[57:09] have the opportunity to continue to give
[57:11] you feedback, then I'm fine. If this is
[57:14] it,
[57:16] >> oh, I anticipate we can put this back on
[57:18] the calendar in the very near future for
[57:20] ongoing discussion. Any additional
[57:22] comments on what's been presented so
[57:23] far? Yes, Council Member
[57:24] >> Crowley. Thank you. So, there were so
[57:27] many considerations. That's why it's
[57:29] taken so long to get to this point
[57:31] because parking was huge. Um neighbor
[57:35] concerns. Um and the number one concern
[57:38] of the neighbors and or parking they
[57:40] don't want to see everyday parking on
[57:42] Floor Bunda. the square footage, the
[57:44] needs of HPD, the needs of town hall
[57:46] staff, customer service and resident
[57:48] ease of accessing um giving a little
[57:52] more um community space um to customers.
[57:56] So these are our residents were all are
[57:59] all considerations but I think moving
[58:01] forward what's going to drive a lot of
[58:03] this planning is as um as Karen said we
[58:08] like to say layering on the
[58:09] practicalities because um you you know
[58:13] we have our wish list but we have to be
[58:15] practical about it. Um so how are we
[58:18] going to pay for this? Um moving Walnut
[58:21] Avenue I think adds an expense. Um so
[58:26] that's why I think you have wrestled
[58:29] with all of these different um
[58:32] considerations and I I think the Ali
[58:35] plan to me is the most practical plan. I
[58:38] think that we could execute it in kind
[58:40] of clearly defined phases which will
[58:42] help uh finance it more than anything
[58:46] but also be the least disruptive. So, um, I understand only having seen it
[58:52] since Friday, but in looking at these
[58:54] challenges for the past more than a
[58:56] year, um, I do think that you've come up
[58:59] with something that actually layers on
[59:01] practicalities.
[59:03] Thank you. Um, thank you for those
[59:04] comments. Um, let me just add my
[59:06] comments to what's been presented so
[59:08] far. Um I I do have some concerns about
[59:12] potentially moving um the Veterans
[59:14] Memorial or Centennial Park. During our
[59:16] housing discussion, there were
[59:19] passionate discussions or feedback from
[59:21] residents. It's very it's a very
[59:22] meaningful space. I agree. It may seem
[59:25] like we could move it to a better spot
[59:26] in this 2.3 acre site, but it carries a
[59:30] lot of meaning and it would be like move
[59:32] I hate to say this will be like moving a
[59:33] graveyard. It's not the same thing,
[59:35] right? and and so it it is a very
[59:37] meaningful
[59:38] um it just carries a lot of meaning for
[59:41] many residents. So I think that should
[59:42] be taken into serious considerations as
[59:44] we go forward.
[59:47] >> Um but as council member Crowley pointed
[59:52] out
[59:53] I as I'm listening to this what what I
[59:56] know for a fact is how do you proceed
[1:00:00] with this even if you do phasing? Okay.
[1:00:04] Um clearly we have a commitment to HCD
[1:00:07] to come up with an additional 16 units.
[1:00:11] We do not have I mean the the cost alone
[1:00:15] looking at it on paper is quite
[1:00:16] prohibitive. So clearly you're going to
[1:00:18] need to do this in phasing in which case
[1:00:21] I don't see a path forward to have 16
[1:00:24] units built on the site within the next
[1:00:27] five to six years. Actually, it's four
[1:00:30] years when our current arena cycle
[1:00:34] expires, we at least need to permit
[1:00:36] those 16 units. So, even if you were to
[1:00:40] phase back on HPD and let's say you
[1:00:42] decide HPD will be number two, you got
[1:00:45] to do something about our police
[1:00:46] department, there are certain quote
[1:00:50] guidelines that needs to be upgraded. So
[1:00:53] even if you were to say that goes number
[1:00:55] two and we can come up with some funding
[1:00:58] for that may have a little more flexibility
[1:01:01] with time but we do have to perform on
[1:01:04] the housing front and I cannot imagine
[1:01:08] for 16 units you going to take a $225
[1:01:13] million project and charge forward
[1:01:17] knowing that there are other key pieces
[1:01:19] which is police department and town
[1:01:21] hall. I'm not I agree you are not the
[1:01:24] money lady. [laughter] I'm not I'm
[1:01:26] looking at you because you presented. I
[1:01:27] should be looking at this person over
[1:01:29] here. [laughter]
[1:01:30] I should be looking at our city our city
[1:01:32] manager and our staff. But I'm just sort
[1:01:34] of addressing the whole community.
[1:01:37] There's a real practical improbability
[1:01:40] here from a timeline standpoint. And I
[1:01:42] just want to convey that to the to the
[1:01:44] staff. I I just don't see a path forward
[1:01:47] because now you have one project that's
[1:01:49] on a shorter timeline of approximately
[1:01:51] four years which is the 16 units. You
[1:01:54] have police department which might be on
[1:01:56] maybe four to five or six year timeline
[1:01:59] and then you have town hall which we may
[1:02:01] have the most flexibility with with
[1:02:03] regards to timeline. So, how do you
[1:02:06] phase this out? But how do you start
[1:02:08] with not only the least, the smallest in
[1:02:11] the bucket, but perhaps the one that
[1:02:14] doesn't make any cogent sense in terms
[1:02:16] of it would I mean, if you think about,
[1:02:20] you know, if you if you're going to um
[1:02:22] do a major remodeling, you always have
[1:02:24] to be practical in terms of how you
[1:02:26] phase things out and how you lay things
[1:02:28] out. So, I do have concerns that the the
[1:02:32] timeline for performing on those 16
[1:02:34] units may have boxed us in into perhaps
[1:02:38] looking at starting with a bigger um
[1:02:41] aspect of this such as the police
[1:02:42] department. Um, which we're still not in
[1:02:45] any position to start under that
[1:02:47] four-year um uh it's actually the end of
[1:02:51] this year. We have to give some kind of
[1:02:52] report midcycle updates as far as how
[1:02:55] we're doing on all of our arena numbers.
[1:02:57] So those are the concern as I'm
[1:02:59] listening to this is like practically
[1:03:01] how does this roll out? I'm not seeing the path forward um of
[1:03:06] the whole project and I agree that we do
[1:03:09] need to phase this out but um we still
[1:03:13] have to respond to that 16 units. Um
[1:03:16] those are my feedback and unless there's
[1:03:18] additional feedback I'll have us move to
[1:03:19] the petition.
[1:03:21] >> Yes, Vice Mayor Rexdale.
[1:03:24] >> Thank you. Um so some of my comments are
[1:03:28] um practical and some are not. So some
[1:03:31] it's a universe in which there's tons of
[1:03:33] money and uh some are are more in terms
[1:03:37] of the practicalities. Um so just going
[1:03:40] over because I know we wanted feedback
[1:03:41] on on the um concepts. Um I loved all of
[1:03:46] the green options and happy to see that
[1:03:50] those would be in either. Um I loved all
[1:03:52] of those. Um uh I wanted to know this is
[1:03:57] a question that I don't expect to be
[1:03:59] answered today. Um but the expense of uh
[1:04:02] moving walnut I would love to have that
[1:04:05] um a separate a separate piece because
[1:04:07] that was a very good point. Um I do just
[1:04:10] conceptually
[1:04:12] uh like the um civic ridge line concept
[1:04:16] better. Um but then again that that
[1:04:19] price does make a does make a
[1:04:21] difference. Um I think both I love that
[1:04:24] community space is sorely needed. Uh but
[1:04:27] then again um hopefully 40 Baywood is
[1:04:30] happening. Um so maybe that's less of a
[1:04:33] concern. Um I liked that using the um
[1:04:37] 16th floor abundant for the surface
[1:04:40] parking. I do think yes people are
[1:04:42] taking Uber and Lift more and probably
[1:04:45] will do that for maybe to come to light
[1:04:47] up the town and things. Um, but we do
[1:04:49] have the uh employee parking and the
[1:04:51] people doing oneoff, so you're coming
[1:04:53] for their permits and things. So, um, I
[1:04:56] do I do like having the greater number
[1:04:58] of parking spots again if possible. Um,
[1:05:02] in terms of phasing, uh, we could
[1:05:06] consider using if we if we're not doing
[1:05:09] town hall now or ever, consider using
[1:05:12] the 1640 floor abunda or um staff
[1:05:16] overflow once the um fire department has
[1:05:19] moved out. Um, that could work out
[1:05:22] nicely. Um, this is a small thing, but
[1:05:26] the conceptual that the the the the
[1:05:28] hedges in between the cars and the Civic
[1:05:31] Ridge line, I I just didn't care for
[1:05:34] that. Maybe maybe think of hay fever.
[1:05:37] Those are the things I'm one of the
[1:05:38] things I'm allergic to. Um
[1:05:41] uh I I did like in both plans that the
[1:05:45] housing was uh listening to the neighbor
[1:05:47] concerns apart from the petition of
[1:05:49] course, but listening to the neighbor
[1:05:51] concerns to have the parking uh closer
[1:05:53] to El Camino. So I appreciated that in
[1:05:55] both plans. Um and the mail drop. I love
[1:05:59] the mail drop and uh again residents
[1:06:01] love the mail drop. Um no underground
[1:06:04] parking. that's really um important to
[1:06:07] the residents and also rice. Um and um I
[1:06:13] think yep I think those are those are my
[1:06:15] thoughts like I said some some practical
[1:06:18] and some not. Council me council
[1:06:21] >> thank you. Um I think you probably heard
[1:06:24] from this das that there is strong
[1:06:26] interest in terms of facing like find
[1:06:29] figure out a way how we can look at each
[1:06:32] of the project and parse it out and so
[1:06:34] that we can look at in terms of the
[1:06:35] financing in terms of the f the
[1:06:38] practicality of how we can proceed right
[1:06:40] you know anytime that we delay it's
[1:06:42] going to get pricey
[1:06:44] >> pricier every time. So to the extent
[1:06:46] that we have to bite the bullets and
[1:06:48] then figure out how to do this, I think
[1:06:50] it would requires that um the staff
[1:06:53] would help us you know in terms of
[1:06:55] looking at facing it. So look at the
[1:06:57] project. Um my preference is that the
[1:07:00] police and the fire police and the town
[1:07:02] hall are separate. um simply for the
[1:07:05] fact that this the service that they
[1:07:08] provide, the security that they need to
[1:07:10] ensure um the multiple um functionality
[1:07:14] that they're providing and nowadays with
[1:07:17] the drone, with uh the surveillance and all the technologies that they have
[1:07:22] to um it it seemed to me that the way
[1:07:25] that we can provide some kind of
[1:07:26] independent
[1:07:28] um
[1:07:29] building will be will be making sense.
[1:07:32] Um I um I think that our centennial
[1:07:38] um park is wonderful. It was meant to be
[1:07:42] a designated area for people to come and
[1:07:45] reflect and things like that. There's
[1:07:47] really as far as I'm aware of not
[1:07:50] artifact that that needs to be concerned
[1:07:52] of. However, it is not really well used
[1:07:55] in the way that because the
[1:07:57] functionality that has been designed.
[1:07:59] Um, I know that during co um we have
[1:08:02] tried to come up creative ways to make
[1:08:04] sure that we recognize the the veterans
[1:08:06] and the the uh providing the memorial
[1:08:09] recognitions and so forth. And that's
[1:08:12] how I spend some time looking at that garden and realize that if there's
[1:08:16] any relocation that where we can have a
[1:08:20] better
[1:08:21] um design and have people come and
[1:08:25] reflect on that. I'm open to it. I think
[1:08:28] that that there there is opportunity for that. Um so um the the one of
[1:08:37] parking initially I'm not warming up to
[1:08:40] that because I thought
[1:08:42] those bro lands are expensive right but
[1:08:45] the reality is that that also opened up
[1:08:48] opportunity for us to have the outdoor
[1:08:50] events and so the flexibility of that is
[1:08:54] you know is welcoming. Um so that would
[1:08:57] be just the extent of my uh comments.
[1:09:00] Thank you. Thank you. Any additional
[1:09:03] comments?
[1:09:04] >> Just just one quick one. Um I just want
[1:09:06] to point out that the consultants
[1:09:08] phasing for Ali was to build HPD, move
[1:09:12] HPD into portables, build HPD and
[1:09:16] housing at the same time. So that would
[1:09:18] save time. And and I have a question
[1:09:20] because we've gone over the entry at the
[1:09:23] access and it's still not clear to me if
[1:09:25] you were to put 16 units let's assume is
[1:09:30] closer to where the PD exists right now
[1:09:32] next to the church where would those
[1:09:34] residents access the community through
[1:09:37] the town center.
[1:09:40] >> So it it is different in both schemes.
[1:09:44] So on the singular building they would
[1:09:46] be accessing it um that the civic ridge
[1:09:50] line scheme it's garden apartments. So
[1:09:52] they'd be Do you want me to go to it?
[1:09:54] Sorry might be easier.
[1:10:00] So, it's garden apartments, meaning that
[1:10:02] the parking you see on Walnut at the
[1:10:05] very back becomes housing parking.
[1:10:09] And then on El Camino, they could walk
[1:10:11] straight in from El Camino and access
[1:10:13] the apartments there. And so, it's
[1:10:15] actually between the the housing access
[1:10:18] on this scheme is between the church and
[1:10:21] the long bar of the blue building.
[1:10:24] >> So, they will access in terms of
[1:10:27] driving. They will come up Flory Bunder
[1:10:28] and make a right on Walnut to access the
[1:10:31] parking.
[1:10:32] >> Yeah. And drive into
[1:10:34] >> Okay. So, they will be accessing through
[1:10:35] Flory Bunder Walnut.
[1:10:37] >> Yeah.
[1:10:38] >> Um because there is no direct access to
[1:10:40] El Camino on this scheme.
[1:10:41] >> Correct. Okay.
[1:10:42] >> And then on the other scheme, they're
[1:10:44] just direct directly coming off of El
[1:10:46] Camino to the podium parking.
[1:10:49] >> Sorry, I'm gonna go
[1:10:50] >> um
[1:10:52] >> directly off of El Camino into the
[1:10:54] podium. How how do you access that? I
[1:10:57] thought that was a private um access for
[1:10:59] PD. H is there lights there? How do you
[1:11:02] access that?
[1:11:03] >> Um at the top, like right by the church
[1:11:07] parking, you see a black car going into
[1:11:10] the podium parking for housing. That's
[1:11:12] the access for housing. And then in
[1:11:15] between housing and police, you see a
[1:11:17] blue car going in. That's police access
[1:11:20] going in there. So the access for
[1:11:22] parking of El Camino
[1:11:24] >> you you you basically describing will
[1:11:28] there be a light a stop sign? H how will
[1:11:32] residents access El Camino from the
[1:11:35] housing
[1:11:36] >> they so residents from from the housing
[1:11:40] >> the residents who will be occupying the
[1:11:43] um housing the fourstory housing how
[1:11:46] will they access El Camino where the
[1:11:49] black car is entering
[1:11:50] >> they'll be turning in and off of El
[1:11:52] Camino there it's at the edge of the lot
[1:11:56] so it's far you could put in a light
[1:11:59] there could be there that could be a
[1:12:00] consider consideration or it could
[1:12:01] become um a right turn only if that were
[1:12:04] needed. But it's far enough from the
[1:12:06] corner at that back of the lot that they
[1:12:08] would just be turning into the podium
[1:12:10] parking there. So all of those things
[1:12:12] are considerations as further traffic
[1:12:14] study are done to say like oh do you
[1:12:16] only want to have you know right turn
[1:12:19] like only not crossing cross traffic to
[1:12:22] get in.
[1:12:22] >> So they will not access the campus they
[1:12:25] will only Okay.
[1:12:27] >> Yeah. Madame Mayor, if I could add just
[1:12:29] a bit to that as well. If you That's our
[1:12:31] Oak Grove uh stoplight is is just north
[1:12:35] of that. So, if you're looking at that
[1:12:37] black car, the Berling game stoplight of
[1:12:40] Oak Grove right there where the school
[1:12:41] is in the church, this would be just
[1:12:43] south of that. So, the stoplight would
[1:12:45] be there and immediately after that stop
[1:12:47] light would be the entrance into the uh
[1:12:49] into this particular formation of the
[1:12:51] housing.
[1:12:52] >> Okay. So, then you will come back up.
[1:12:55] Um,
[1:12:55] >> yeah. I mean, either way, you could if there was a
[1:12:58] >> because that's you could be entering
[1:12:59] into Berling game, right?
[1:13:00] >> Yeah. You if you're coming uh northbound
[1:13:03] up up the El Camino and you'd be making
[1:13:05] a lefthand turn into there. If you were
[1:13:08] coming southbound, it would be
[1:13:09] immediately after the traffic light uh
[1:13:11] from Oak Grove. So, we'd have to put
[1:13:13] some traffic control devices in. But,
[1:13:14] just to give you a spatial orientation,
[1:13:17] that's where it would be at. There's
[1:13:18] already a controlled intersection right
[1:13:19] there. It's just it's a little bit
[1:13:21] awkward uh just because it's that
[1:13:23] controlled intersection is probably
[1:13:25] about 5 to 10 yards
[1:13:28] up a little bit from where that car
[1:13:29] you're looking at is now. So, we'd
[1:13:31] certainly work with Berling game to make
[1:13:33] a smoother transition.
[1:13:34] >> Okay. Well, I just um wasn't it still
[1:13:36] wasn't clear to me, but that that's
[1:13:38] really helpful. They will be entry into
[1:13:40] Berling game and then come back up.
[1:13:42] Okay. Mayor, I have another comment.
[1:13:44] >> Oh, yes. Yes. Um Council Member Adams.
[1:13:46] Yes. Um, I just want to make it really
[1:13:48] clear that I agree with council member
[1:13:51] Schwang that police and uh our council
[1:13:56] and our city hall should be separate
[1:13:59] buildings. There are so many sensitive
[1:14:02] things that happen in the police
[1:14:03] department that I feel it's
[1:14:05] uncomfortable to have them in the same
[1:14:07] building. And I also feel it's
[1:14:10] uncomfortable in town LA with a police
[1:14:13] station that close to housing.
[1:14:16] So, I'm I'm really not happy with either
[1:14:20] of the schemes, but I can see parts of
[1:14:24] them being rearranged, parts of each.
[1:14:28] For example, building the housing on El
[1:14:31] Camino, which makes a lot of sense for
[1:14:33] the people who are living there. They
[1:14:35] have easy walking access to El Camino.
[1:14:38] And I do like the entrance.
[1:14:41] Keep town hall about as it is with
[1:14:44] improvements. put the police station on
[1:14:48] 1640 with lots of buffers from the
[1:14:52] existing community, uh, trees, uh,
[1:14:56] hedges. So, it's a private space. I I
[1:15:00] just think there's a lot that we haven't
[1:15:02] really included in the best way. So, we
[1:15:07] can build on what's happened, but I
[1:15:10] don't feel comfortable saying do this
[1:15:12] one or do that one. I really feel we
[1:15:15] need a little bit of breathing space to
[1:15:18] rethink this in some way. So I
[1:15:20] appreciate what's all the discussion,
[1:15:23] but I have to say I I don't think we can
[1:15:26] give feedback that says do this one and
[1:15:31] we need to get to that pretty quickly.
[1:15:34] >> Thank you. Um some of the guidance that
[1:15:36] we gave was the police requested to be
[1:15:39] closer to El Camino and we had very
[1:15:41] vocal push back for residents about
[1:15:44] having the police up behind Fairway
[1:15:46] Circle.
[1:15:47] >> Okay. Um I just in the interest of time
[1:15:51] I will have us proceed with item B which
[1:15:54] is um
[1:15:57] a reading of the petition which was sent
[1:15:59] to all council members. And this was um
[1:16:01] first of all thank you so much. That was
[1:16:03] an outstanding presentation, exciting
[1:16:05] discussion and please [clears throat] be
[1:16:07] reassured everything we just discussed
[1:16:10] will factor into this whole plan going
[1:16:12] forward and we're greatly appreciative
[1:16:14] of everything you've been doing. Thank
[1:16:16] you so much. Um before we move to item
[1:16:18] B, um it looks like um
[1:16:23] I'm sorry you you had who who will be we
[1:16:25] have someone in the chambers who Yes. Um
[1:16:28] item B is the petition. Let me just read
[1:16:30] this for the records. Hold on a second.
[1:16:33] Um,
[1:16:35] acknowledgement of petition and
[1:16:36] consideration of agenda agenda is in
[1:16:38] discussion of a housing element
[1:16:40] amendment.
[1:16:42] And um, before you start, I will ask uh,
[1:16:45] Lewis to make any comments before you
[1:16:48] um, proceed.
[1:16:52] » Thank you. Um so just for the record on
[1:16:57] uh the 31st on Friday July 31st the town
[1:17:00] received a communication um included a
[1:17:03] petition which was attached in the uh
[1:17:06] agenda packet and um that requested that
[1:17:12] the city council direct staff to prepare
[1:17:14] and submit a housing element amendment
[1:17:16] relocating 16 housing units currently
[1:17:19] identified at the town hall site to the
[1:17:21] Tobin Clark site. Um
[1:17:25] there's uh
[1:17:29] the the item tonight is a discussion. Um
[1:17:34] we are not requesting um any decision.
[1:17:39] Um, but staff's recommendation is to
[1:17:43] open public comment and have discussion
[1:17:45] and then direct staff on whether or not
[1:17:48] to agendize the topic of a housing
[1:17:51] element amendment for future discussion
[1:17:54] and if so, what if any topics the
[1:17:57] council would like included in that
[1:17:59] future discussion?
[1:18:00] >> Okay, thank you. And I'm sorry, could
[1:18:03] you just introduce yourself again?
[1:18:05] >> Sorry.
[1:18:05] >> Riyad Salma, 816 Eucalyptus.
[1:18:08] >> Hello. Welcome.
[1:18:09] >> Thank you. Um, as mentioned, this
[1:18:12] petition was circulated not too long
[1:18:13] ago. It was signed by
[1:18:16] over 100 households in town, and I was
[1:18:20] asked to read it into the record here.
[1:18:22] >> If you could speak into the mic so we
[1:18:23] can get it in the recording. Thank you.
[1:18:26] The undersigned Hillsboro residents
[1:18:28] respectfully request that the town
[1:18:29] council amend the housing element to
[1:18:31] relocate the 16 affordable housing units
[1:18:33] currently assigned to the town hall
[1:18:35] campus to the Coben Clark site, creating
[1:18:37] a single 116 unit housing development.
[1:18:41] This petition supports all 116 housing
[1:18:43] units. It supports all affordability
[1:18:45] commitments. It supports full housing
[1:18:47] element compliance. It does not reduce
[1:18:50] Hillsborough's RHNA obligations. And it
[1:18:52] requests only a change in location.
[1:18:55] The undersigned Hillsboro residents
[1:18:57] respectfully request that the town
[1:18:58] council pursue a housing element
[1:18:59] amendment relocating the 16 affordable
[1:19:02] units currently assigned to the town
[1:19:03] hall campus to the Cloen Clark site
[1:19:05] while preserving all 16 116 planned
[1:19:08] housing units, all affordability
[1:19:10] equipments and full compliance with
[1:19:11] state housing law. This petition does
[1:19:14] not reduce housing, reduce afford
[1:19:16] affordability, or reduce Hillsboro's
[1:19:18] RHNA obligations. It simply places the
[1:19:21] housing where it is most likely to be
[1:19:23] successfully delivered.
[1:19:26] Background. The town of Hillsboro's
[1:19:28] adopted 2023 to 2031 housing element
[1:19:31] certified by the California Department
[1:19:32] of Housing and Community Development in
[1:19:34] December 2023 designates two town-owned
[1:19:37] sites for multifamily housing. The town
[1:19:40] hall campus 16 units and the Tobin Clark
[1:19:43] estate 100 units. The town hall campus,
[1:19:46] an approximately 2.5 acre parcel at
[1:19:48] Florab Bunda Avenue in El Camino Rial,
[1:19:50] was designated to deliver seven very
[1:19:52] low-income and nine lowincome units.
[1:19:56] Since adoption, the town has been
[1:19:58] actively engaged in planning the campus
[1:19:59] redevelopment for over two years.
[1:20:01] Through multiple consultant engagements,
[1:20:03] a community vision meeting in May 2024,
[1:20:06] and an ongoing town council subcommittee
[1:20:08] represented a substantial investment of
[1:20:10] public time and funds.
[1:20:13] Critical hardships discovered through
[1:20:14] extensive due diligence.
[1:20:17] Despite this diligent effort and
[1:20:18] significant expenditure, consultants
[1:20:20] have now uncovered fundamental
[1:20:22] constraints that make a compliant
[1:20:24] highquality development of housing, town
[1:20:26] hall, and the police station on this 2.5
[1:20:28] acre site infeasible.
[1:20:30] A primary HCHE water transmission main
[1:20:33] runs directly beneath the proposed
[1:20:34] development footprint, severely
[1:20:36] restricting the building placement,
[1:20:37] structural design options, and overall
[1:20:39] site capacity.
[1:20:41] Every site layout that accommodates 16
[1:20:43] residential units result in a
[1:20:45] substandard town hall and a substandard
[1:20:47] police station facilities that are
[1:20:49] undersized and fail to meet the
[1:20:51] functional and operational needs of the
[1:20:52] community and the Hillsbor Police
[1:20:53] Department. including 16 residential
[1:20:56] units on the site comprises safe and
[1:20:58] efficient on the site comprises safe and
[1:21:01] efficient vehicle access, emergency
[1:21:04] response, site circulation, construction
[1:21:06] staging, and future municipality
[1:21:08] flexibility for both civic facilities, a
[1:21:11] significant public safety and
[1:21:13] operational concern,
[1:21:15] environmental, infrastructure and fiscal
[1:21:17] concerns. A 2019 town evaluation
[1:21:20] reportedly identified groundwater
[1:21:22] issues, utility deficiencies, creek and
[1:21:25] culvert concerns, seismic issues,
[1:21:27] asbestous, lead, and potential
[1:21:29] contamination concerns. While these
[1:21:32] issues may ultimately be addressed, they
[1:21:34] increase uncertainty, development risk,
[1:21:36] and project cost and project cost when
[1:21:39] compared to a more suitable housing
[1:21:41] site.
[1:21:42] After approximately two years of study
[1:21:44] and roughly 400,000 in public
[1:21:47] expenditures, the evidence suggests that
[1:21:49] the continued pursuit of residential
[1:21:51] development at the town hall campus may
[1:21:53] require significant additional
[1:21:55] investment before the site's
[1:21:56] sustainability can be fully understood.
[1:21:59] When a viable alternative exists that
[1:22:01] preserves all 116 planned housing units
[1:22:04] and all affordability commitments, the
[1:22:06] more fiscally responsible and practical
[1:22:08] course is to relocate the 16 affordable
[1:22:10] units to the Tobin Clark site where the
[1:22:12] town hall can focus its housing efforts
[1:22:14] on a location specifically intended for
[1:22:17] only residential development.
[1:22:20] Civic and public safety functions should
[1:22:21] not be compromised. The town hall campus
[1:22:24] is not an ordinary vacant parcel. is the
[1:22:27] operational center of government and
[1:22:30] public safety. Redevelopment decisions
[1:22:32] should preserve the town's ability to
[1:22:34] provide core services, maintain safe
[1:22:36] circulation and emergency access,
[1:22:38] support police operations, accommodate
[1:22:41] public access to town facilities, and
[1:22:43] adapt municipal facilities over time.
[1:22:46] The redevelopment of the town hall
[1:22:48] campus is an important civic opportunity
[1:22:50] to provide a town hall that serves the
[1:22:52] community and a police station that
[1:22:54] meets modern operational standards.
[1:22:56] Forcing 16 residential units onto a site
[1:22:59] constrained by underground
[1:23:00] infrastructure easements, limited
[1:23:02] acreage, environmental uncertainty, and
[1:23:04] access limitations would permanently
[1:23:06] compromise that effort. The town's
[1:23:09] housing obligation is genuine and must
[1:23:11] be honored. So is it so is its
[1:23:14] responsibility to deliver functional
[1:23:16] facilities. There is a better path
[1:23:18] forward.
[1:23:20] Conclusion. This petition supports
[1:23:22] housing. It supports affordable housing.
[1:23:25] And this petition supports full
[1:23:26] compliance with state housing law.
[1:23:29] We respectfully petition the town
[1:23:31] council to direct staff to prepare and
[1:23:32] submit a formal housing element
[1:23:34] amendment to HCD that removes the 16
[1:23:38] residential units from the town hall
[1:23:40] campus site, transfers those 16 units to
[1:23:43] the already accepted Tobin Clark site,
[1:23:45] preserving the full 116 unit housing
[1:23:47] program and all affordability
[1:23:49] commitments, and documents the over
[1:23:52] 400,000 expended to consultants on due
[1:23:54] diligence, the HCHE water line
[1:23:56] constraint, site access, limitation,
[1:23:59] substandard facility findings,
[1:24:02] environmental and infrastructure
[1:24:03] concerns, and fiscal risk considerations
[1:24:06] as the evidentiary basis for the
[1:24:08] amendment.
[1:24:10] Over two years of planning, multiple
[1:24:12] consultant rounds, and significant
[1:24:13] public investment have now produced
[1:24:15] clear objective evidence. The town can
[1:24:17] fulfill its housing obligations and
[1:24:20] provide civic facilities that meet the
[1:24:21] long-term needs of residents, but only
[1:24:23] if the council acts to remove to move
[1:24:26] these 16 units to a site that can
[1:24:28] receive them. We urge the council to do
[1:24:30] so without delay.
[1:24:32] >> Um, thank you, Mrs. Salma. Um, just for
[1:24:34] clarification,
[1:24:36] um, this item is not in front of the
[1:24:38] city council for a decision tonight. It
[1:24:40] is informative.
[1:24:42] We will make some general comments and
[1:24:44] give direction to the staff. with
[1:24:46] regards to how to proceed, but thanks
[1:24:48] for your efforts and um much
[1:24:50] appreciated.
[1:24:51] >> Thank you. Um before we ask the public
[1:24:54] to comment, do any of my colleagues want
[1:24:56] to comment and what was what was just
[1:24:58] read into the um what was read into the
[1:25:00] record?
[1:25:02] >> Yes. Um Vice Mayor Rex,
[1:25:04] >> my comments are for after public
[1:25:06] comment.
[1:25:07] >> Okay.
[1:25:09] Um Council Member Krollic,
[1:25:11] >> I I have a question this time for
[1:25:12] questions from staff. question is public
[1:25:15] comments still open?
[1:25:16] >> No, we haven't gone to public comments
[1:25:17] yet. I'm asking um city council members
[1:25:20] if they have specific questions and then
[1:25:22] we'll give we'll and the questions
[1:25:24] should be directed to staff at this
[1:25:26] point. Um as I noted, we are not making
[1:25:29] a deliberative decision specifically as
[1:25:31] to whether to proceed with the
[1:25:33] recommendations in the petition. Um
[1:25:36] council member um Adams. Yes.
[1:25:38] >> Thank you, Mayor Cole. Yes, I think that
[1:25:41] would be an important thing to
[1:25:43] reiterate. On page 30 of our book in in
[1:25:48] the middle of the page, it says, "At
[1:25:50] this time, staff is not seeking
[1:25:53] direction regarding the merits of the
[1:25:56] requested amendment or recommending that
[1:25:59] the town initiate an amendment. Rather,
[1:26:02] staff is seeking direction solely as to
[1:26:05] whether the city council would like this
[1:26:07] matter agendaized for a future
[1:26:10] substantive discussion. So, that's
[1:26:13] really important, I think, to
[1:26:15] reemphasize that. I think what we would
[1:26:18] be asking for is more information about
[1:26:22] the process of an amendment regardless
[1:26:24] of what the amendment is, the process of
[1:26:28] uh how the state would receive that and
[1:26:31] the pros and cons of going into that
[1:26:33] process. Uh but it's really not to
[1:26:36] discuss the merits of this particular uh
[1:26:41] suggested uh amendment.
[1:26:44] >> Well stated. Thank you. Um, any
[1:26:46] additional comments?
[1:26:51] No, before I I'm I'm about to go to
[1:26:53] public comments in a few minutes. Yes.
[1:26:54] So, I will go to public comments. You
[1:26:56] said you will wait until after public
[1:26:58] comments.
[1:26:58] >> Question of staff.
[1:27:00] >> Um,
[1:27:00] >> is this the time or after public?
[1:27:02] >> After public comment. Okay. Um, any any
[1:27:05] public willing I mean available or
[1:27:08] interested in commenting or asking
[1:27:11] questions. Yes, we have.
[1:27:14] >> Um, you can go ahead.
[1:27:16] >> Yeah, thank you.
[1:27:16] >> Yes,
[1:27:20] » Jeff.
[1:27:21] >> Hello, Jeff.
[1:27:22] >> The corner, you guys know, and I was one
[1:27:23] of the uh people who collected the
[1:27:24] signatures. Um, first I want to say
[1:27:26] thank you. Um, you know, I know this has
[1:27:27] been a challenging process and it's
[1:27:29] taken a lot of time and effort to get to
[1:27:30] this far. And so,
[1:27:31] >> could you move closer to the mic so we
[1:27:32] can capture your comments?
[1:27:34] >> And so, I appreciate all the efforts you
[1:27:35] guys have put into this. Um, from my
[1:27:37] perspective, I just wanted to share a
[1:27:38] little bit of the rationale for this,
[1:27:39] right? And I think listening to the
[1:27:41] discussion you all just had about the
[1:27:42] site and the options, you know, one of
[1:27:44] the reasons we put this forward is
[1:27:46] because when we originally thought about
[1:27:47] the town hall site before the arena uh
[1:27:49] requirements came into place, it was
[1:27:51] important to us that this site became a
[1:27:53] space to collect the community. If you
[1:27:55] think about the spaces that we have in
[1:27:56] this town where we where we're able to
[1:27:58] uh congregate, it's the schools, it's
[1:28:00] Vista Park, there just aren't that many
[1:28:02] spaces and that felt like a bit of a
[1:28:03] miss for us. And so as we got excited
[1:28:05] about the town hall site, we wanted a
[1:28:07] community center. We wanted a space
[1:28:08] where the community could come together
[1:28:09] and collect and we could actually um do
[1:28:12] things on a civic basis and and and as
[1:28:14] we be gotten to this process and the
[1:28:15] housing got put on top of this site.
[1:28:17] What we saw was that we started to make
[1:28:19] compromises and move further and further
[1:28:20] away from that. And I recognize sort of
[1:28:22] the competing priorities around the
[1:28:24] housing. And it's why it was important
[1:28:25] for us both through our ADU requirements
[1:28:27] as well as through what we're doing at
[1:28:28] Tobin Clark to say that we're not trying
[1:28:30] to get around our requirements. In fact,
[1:28:31] we embrace them. But we're trying to
[1:28:33] create an opportunity that that uh
[1:28:34] maximizes the the the the community uh
[1:28:38] feel and experience for all of our
[1:28:39] residents. And so as we went around and
[1:28:42] collected the various signatures, what
[1:28:43] we found, and you'll see they're from
[1:28:45] all over Hillsboro. They're not just
[1:28:46] from around this space, was that the
[1:28:48] reasons for people signing it were very
[1:28:50] different, but we were all united in
[1:28:51] this request. People who live around
[1:28:53] this site, right, you guys articulated
[1:28:55] some of this. The the parking is a
[1:28:56] concern that's going to happen. the fact
[1:28:58] that as one of you cited the police
[1:29:00] station next to a residential just
[1:29:01] didn't feel right. um you know for
[1:29:04] another time we can talk but locating
[1:29:05] the police station right next to our
[1:29:07] houses quite frankly is unacceptable to
[1:29:09] the residents here and so there just so
[1:29:11] many trade-offs and so what we didn't
[1:29:12] see today was a design that if we didn't
[1:29:14] have the housing on this site that if we
[1:29:16] did have it at Tobin Clark what could we
[1:29:18] do with the space what are the
[1:29:19] possibilities and so I'd like for the
[1:29:21] city council to request that to explore
[1:29:23] that option and weigh that against what
[1:29:25] it looks like with housing on this site
[1:29:26] and begin to get a feel for what we
[1:29:28] really could make this and turn this
[1:29:29] into and so that was the spirit of our
[1:29:31] request is that we felt like there were
[1:29:33] too many compromises and it not only was
[1:29:35] negative for the community but it'd be
[1:29:36] negative for the future residents who
[1:29:37] had to would live in those spaces that
[1:29:39] quite frankly would be in a suboptimized
[1:29:41] uh uh living arrangement. So just want
[1:29:43] to give that context. Thank you all for
[1:29:44] the time.
[1:29:44] >> Thank you for your comments. Appreciate
[1:29:46] that. And I'm going to start with um
[1:29:48] those are the all the public comments we
[1:29:50] have. I assume nothing on Zoom.
[1:29:52] >> Thank you, Mayor Call. I'll just ask if
[1:29:54] there's anyone on Zoom who would like to
[1:29:55] provide comments on this item.
[1:30:00] And I'm not seeing any raised hands.
[1:30:02] Thank you.
[1:30:02] >> Okay, I'll start with Council Member
[1:30:03] Crowley. You wanted to make some
[1:30:05] comments.
[1:30:06] >> One question of the petitioners. When
[1:30:07] you were collecting signatures from all
[1:30:09] over Hillsboro, how many did you get
[1:30:11] from people on Tournament Drive?
[1:30:18] » So my question of staff is if we
[1:30:21] agendaize this.
[1:30:23] So, we already have as part of our
[1:30:26] public record, as part of the housing
[1:30:28] element process that we had our former
[1:30:31] city manager had a consultant who
[1:30:33] brought forth a plan that showed that
[1:30:36] the town hall site could accommodate
[1:30:38] more than a hundred units. Isn't that
[1:30:40] right?
[1:30:44] » That's correct.
[1:30:45] >> And then we had a meeting as part of the
[1:30:48] housing element where council actually
[1:30:49] approved 75 units on this site. That's
[1:30:53] part of public record, correct?
[1:30:57] >> I I believe so. I don't know if it was
[1:31:00] approval. I think it was direction to um
[1:31:04] pursue
[1:31:04] >> in April of 24. So, we gave staff
[1:31:07] direction to pursue 75 units. Then, in
[1:31:11] response to the neighbors requests, we
[1:31:15] lowered that to 16 units. And then from
[1:31:19] what I understand, it took a great deal
[1:31:21] of diplomacy with HCD because HCD
[1:31:25] considers this a prime site because of
[1:31:28] its access to services and
[1:31:30] transportation to get them to accept
[1:31:33] only 16 sites on what they consider to
[1:31:36] be an ideal site. And then another
[1:31:40] requirement of HCD is that low income or
[1:31:44] moderate income or whatever their
[1:31:46] requirements that those those sites not
[1:31:50] that those units not be confined to one
[1:31:53] site that they should be spread
[1:31:55] throughout town which was another reason
[1:31:58] why it was important to have some at
[1:31:59] town hall.
[1:32:01] >> Correct. It's a requirement um under
[1:32:03] housing element law and compliance with
[1:32:06] affirmatively furthering fair housing,
[1:32:08] which is AFH, that you cannot have all
[1:32:11] of the lowinccome units concentrated at
[1:32:13] one site because that's a form of
[1:32:15] segregation. And a big part of our
[1:32:17] housing element that was approved
[1:32:21] and our residents literally begged for
[1:32:24] this was 400 ADUs. And that took a great
[1:32:27] deal of diplomacy to get HCD to accept.
[1:32:31] So if we put this forward to HCD, that
[1:32:34] would mean reopening our negotiations.
[1:32:36] Is that right?
[1:32:39] >> If this if the council directs staff to
[1:32:41] bring this back, we would need to gather
[1:32:43] more information and could present that
[1:32:45] at the time about the process and the
[1:32:47] requirements and the risks.
[1:32:48] >> Yes.
[1:32:50] There's a chance that our current deal could be
[1:32:55] overthrown. that information will be
[1:32:57] forthcoming. Um that is not my
[1:32:59] understanding. So if you could do more
[1:33:00] research on that and I I am going to
[1:33:03] proceed that will recommend that we
[1:33:05] bring this back. As you can see there's
[1:33:06] still many more questions to be answered
[1:33:08] and since we don't have the answer we
[1:33:10] cannot speculate or um yes um Vice Mayor
[1:33:14] Rex there. Um I I do uh think that with
[1:33:18] all the considerations we should um
[1:33:21] agendaize this to further discuss and
[1:33:23] then I have a list of uh questions if
[1:33:26] possible I'd like answered but when we
[1:33:29] have that discussion um but I did note
[1:33:32] that um if we applied for if you know
[1:33:37] agenda and discussed but if if we
[1:33:39] decided to apply for an amendment that doesn't work against us. um we're allowed to ask for an amendment
[1:33:47] and they are allowed to say no, but it
[1:33:49] doesn't mean that our housing element is
[1:33:51] nullified and we get the builder element
[1:33:53] and because I was worried about that too
[1:33:55] and that was
[1:33:56] >> yes that that was somewhere in the in
[1:33:58] the staff report.
[1:34:00] >> Yes.
[1:34:01] >> Doesn't look like we're trying to
[1:34:02] >> Yeah, that was somewhere in the staff
[1:34:03] report. But I do have a list of um
[1:34:07] questions um if if we agree um to
[1:34:11] agendaize this. Um they are um
[1:34:16] could it be possible to do eight
[1:34:21] units at town hall and eight units at
[1:34:23] Tobin Clark? Um could uh the last that
[1:34:28] we heard the Tobin Clark concept had
[1:34:31] fewer than the 100 units. I think it was
[1:34:34] 98, could have been 96, I'm not sure.
[1:34:36] But um so how firm was that estimate
[1:34:39] that went under 100 and then what is the
[1:34:42] likelihood that it could go up to 116?
[1:34:46] Uh you know, I guess consulting with the
[1:34:49] um Tobin Clark consultants on that. Um
[1:34:53] is there other town owned land that
[1:34:56] could be a possibility for some units?
[1:34:58] Maybe not 16, but they could be
[1:35:01] sprinkled the couple here, couple at
[1:35:03] Clark, couple on other town land. Um,
[1:35:07] and then maybe more details about um the
[1:35:10] affirmatively furthering fair housing.
[1:35:14] Uh, that units can't all be concentrated
[1:35:17] in one place and also the information
[1:35:20] on, you know, near transportation and
[1:35:24] different topographies, maybe the flat
[1:35:25] topography. All of that would be
[1:35:27] helpful. Um and then um
[1:35:32] the last question that I have is really
[1:35:34] for staff. Um the of the considerations
[1:35:38] that we had today um is that enough
[1:35:42] space for the staff
[1:35:46] um programmatic plans,
[1:35:50] you know, space needs and um that's it.
[1:35:53] Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor
[1:35:55] Rexdale, Council Member Adams.
[1:35:57] >> Thank you, U Mayor Cole. And I want to
[1:36:00] thank the neighbors uh who have
[1:36:02] presented this petition, not only for
[1:36:05] your activism and your interest, but for
[1:36:09] your endorsement of what we're trying to
[1:36:11] do at Tobin Clark. And I just have to
[1:36:15] tell you it has been detail after detail
[1:36:20] in order to make that number 100 and and
[1:36:24] we're still working on the physibility
[1:36:27] of that. So adding 16%
[1:36:32] is no small matter. And so in order to
[1:36:37] endorse that concept, we would need to
[1:36:40] spend some money on feasibility and the
[1:36:44] economic impact of that because uh it's
[1:36:48] a very difficult site. it it looks like
[1:36:51] we've come up with a solution and we're
[1:36:54] thrilled but we're also
[1:36:57] uh a little hesitant because we want to
[1:37:00] make sure that what we've proposed is
[1:37:04] possible and that's an iterative process
[1:37:07] we're still in. So again, I would
[1:37:11] suggest that what we look at isn't the
[1:37:13] feasibility at this point for an
[1:37:16] agendaized item, but just what the
[1:37:18] process is, which could be done, I
[1:37:20] think, pretty quickly, and what the
[1:37:22] potential implications are. I think
[1:37:25] council member Krill uh spoke very
[1:37:29] wisely about the ambitions for this site
[1:37:33] that we have reduced to something that
[1:37:36] is quite manageable. Uh, and I think we
[1:37:41] ought to at least consider that that may
[1:37:44] be our best way of approaching this is
[1:37:47] having a plan,
[1:37:50] having fulfilled some of the obligation
[1:37:53] or all of the obligation and then
[1:37:55] iteratively
[1:37:57] improving or changing the rest of the
[1:38:00] site according to a plan that in my view
[1:38:03] still needs a little bit of uh work. So
[1:38:07] again, I want to thank you, but it's the
[1:38:09] cart before the horse if we start asking
[1:38:12] the state to do something that we don't
[1:38:14] know yet we can do,
[1:38:16] >> right? Um and I think the directives um
[1:38:19] I'm sorry, Council Chong, do you have
[1:38:20] any additional comments to what's been
[1:38:22] said before I um finalize or summarize
[1:38:25] the directives?
[1:38:26] >> No, I think that my colleagues spoke so
[1:38:28] well.
[1:38:28] >> Yeah. So um I I think it's all been
[1:38:30] said. Um the only thing I would add is
[1:38:32] um I will ask the staff to two things.
[1:38:36] Address some of the questions that's
[1:38:38] been brought up but at the same time
[1:38:41] explore um the option that's in this
[1:38:44] petition to see the feasibility of that.
[1:38:47] But perhaps most significantly in terms
[1:38:49] of getting specific answers to questions
[1:38:51] is to see if we can get legal counsel.
[1:38:54] Um I always go to Barbara CS. She's very
[1:38:57] familiar with our town. She helped us
[1:38:59] through our housing element. If she is
[1:39:02] available to guide us through this
[1:39:05] question over the next um several weeks
[1:39:08] or months, but try to get it on the the
[1:39:10] next discuss the next agenda item on
[1:39:13] this would could be more discussions and
[1:39:15] more answers. and if Barbara Cotz is
[1:39:17] available to be here with us either by
[1:39:19] Zoom or in person to answer some of the
[1:39:22] questions that are being um brought up
[1:39:24] in terms of any any possibility of
[1:39:28] moving forward um regarding the petition
[1:39:32] or not moving forward and trying to see
[1:39:34] how we can remedy the issue with what we
[1:39:37] have at hand. But I do want some
[1:39:39] informed feedback. She's very
[1:39:41] experienced in this. I have spoken to
[1:39:44] her in a couple of conferences and she
[1:39:46] shared information with me about other
[1:39:47] municipalities she's helped. So
[1:39:49] hopefully we can get that legal
[1:39:51] counseling when we discuss this again.
[1:39:53] And I would strongly urge the staff that
[1:39:55] we try to get this back on the calendar
[1:39:57] um either next month or the month after.
[1:40:01] >> I'm sorry. Yes. Something else.
[1:40:03] >> I mean the the tournament people are
[1:40:06] also very organized just like the
[1:40:08] fairway circle people. I mean, as you
[1:40:10] know, I was mayor during the the HCD
[1:40:12] process where we came up with our
[1:40:14] housing element, and the city manager
[1:40:16] and I spent a lot of time talking to the
[1:40:19] people down in tournament to get them to
[1:40:22] get their heads around the hundred
[1:40:23] units. And that was the top week ago.
[1:40:27] They are not going to take kindly to
[1:40:29] another group of residents trying to
[1:40:32] shift 16 more units on to them. If we
[1:40:35] agendaize this, we're we're
[1:40:38] >> well, we will invite we'll invite all
[1:40:39] the residents with the stick.
[1:40:42] >> It's um it's been a long process and
[1:40:44] Jeeoff, you were a big part of it. Yeah.
[1:40:46] >> And you know, I sat in your living room.
[1:40:48] We spent a lot of time listening to you,
[1:40:50] which is why we got down to 16 units.
[1:40:53] >> Yeah. Um um noted I I please reach out
[1:40:57] to the tournament residents as well when
[1:40:59] this conversation moves forward. It is
[1:41:02] important to have all the residents in
[1:41:04] the room. Our housing element addresses
[1:41:07] every resident regardless of where you
[1:41:09] live, whether you live at fairway circle
[1:41:11] or tournament, at the end of the day, we
[1:41:14] need to comply with the housing elements
[1:41:15] because it would affect the entire
[1:41:17] community. So, I completely agree with
[1:41:19] you. I think getting their um weigh in
[1:41:22] and comments and feedback and also
[1:41:24] understanding where we are and what it
[1:41:25] could take or perhaps we don't move
[1:41:28] forward. We don't know yet if we need to
[1:41:29] if we could do this. It's a question
[1:41:31] that's been posed to the council and it
[1:41:34] needs to be explored with factbased um
[1:41:37] information with with evidence-based
[1:41:40] discussion not just about how we feel
[1:41:42] about this but what does the evidence
[1:41:44] show in terms of how we move forward. So
[1:41:47] that's um I think summarizes the
[1:41:50] majority of the sentiments from the day
[1:41:52] at this point.
[1:41:52] >> Yeah. through through the mayor. I I
[1:41:54] think that we we need to be uh
[1:41:56] thoughtful in terms of how we agendaize
[1:41:59] this. Uh and so that is not a um one way
[1:42:03] or the other uh in terms of the
[1:42:06] decisions making and I do want to echo
[1:42:08] our former mayor and current council
[1:42:10] member um growings. Um we all been
[1:42:13] there. We know we sat in this chambers
[1:42:15] we have long hours on discussions.
[1:42:18] There's a lot of concerns about the
[1:42:21] different interests in the locations and
[1:42:22] how why is amendable to do go through
[1:42:25] the ADU and even with that it is with
[1:42:28] some kind of concerns about the
[1:42:31] transportations and and pedestrians
[1:42:34] walkway and all that. So all that in
[1:42:36] consideration I I think that we need to
[1:42:38] take this gingerly to make sure that we
[1:42:41] do have the opportunity to have that
[1:42:44] discussions without seemingly um
[1:42:48] feeling like that there is already a
[1:42:51] direction that's going but rather that
[1:42:53] um we have concerns and we have
[1:42:55] petitions and then we want to see if we
[1:42:58] have that discussions um but not kind of
[1:43:02] predicated by saying that who is to say
[1:43:05] the Tobin Clark groups are not going to
[1:43:07] have
[1:43:08] >> petitions so forth so without getting
[1:43:11] into the this and that we we want to
[1:43:13] have a fair discussions to the extent
[1:43:16] that we we can rely on the staff for
[1:43:18] providing some um
[1:43:21] facts and also the HCD in terms of their
[1:43:25] rulings and so forth so that we can have
[1:43:28] a a a better foundation to have that
[1:43:30] discussions.
[1:43:31] >> Okay. Thank you. I think I will adjourn
[1:43:33] to um the study session is now adjourned
[1:43:36] and we'll proceed to close sessions.
[1:43:37] Thank you.
[1:43:41] » Thank you.
[1:43:47] We still need
[1:44:01] um we um we will be proceeding to close
[1:44:04] session. We'll first um do a roll call,
[1:44:06] please. City clerk.
[1:44:07] >> Thank you. Adams,
[1:44:08] >> present.
[1:44:09] >> Schwang.
[1:44:10] >> Kwick,
[1:44:11] >> present. Ragdale,
[1:44:12] >> present. Cole,
[1:44:13] >> present. Thank you. will now adjurnn to
[1:44:16] close session.
[1:44:27] Good evening everyone and welcome to the
[1:44:29] Hillsboro City Council with meeting
[1:44:31] which is now called to order. The time
[1:44:33] is 6 p.m. on August 10th, 2026. Um, city
[1:44:37] clerk, may we please have the roll call.
[1:44:39] >> Thank you. Adams,
[1:44:41] >> present. Strong
[1:44:42] >> present. Crowig
[1:44:43] >> present. Ragdale present. Cole
[1:44:46] >> present.
[1:44:46] >> Thank you.
[1:44:47] >> Um please join me in pledging allegiance
[1:44:49] to our flag.
[1:44:52] >> I pledge algiance.
[1:45:12] Um, do we have any report from close
[1:45:13] session? City attorney.
[1:45:16] >> Thank you, Mayor Cole. Just wanted to
[1:45:17] announce for the public that the council
[1:45:18] did convene in close session to consider
[1:45:20] one item as listed on the agenda and
[1:45:22] there was no reportable action at the
[1:45:23] conclusion of that close session. Thank
[1:45:25] you.
[1:45:26] >> Thank you. And I want to welcome
[1:45:28] everyone in the chambers and those
[1:45:30] listening at home on um Zoom. Um we have
[1:45:34] a very full agenda this evening, but
[1:45:36] we're first um very happy to start with
[1:45:39] a presentation from Concourse Delegance.
[1:45:42] Um this is such a historic and important
[1:45:46] entity in town. Um I remember when my
[1:45:49] kids were in school. I used to
[1:45:51] participate when it used to be on the
[1:45:52] school grounds. It's now held at the
[1:45:55] golf course and continues to be an
[1:45:56] amazing family experience and just
[1:45:58] excitement about cars. It's it's one of
[1:46:01] the few events that comes up where
[1:46:02] everyone in at my house, my husband and
[1:46:04] my son and even my in-laws love to
[1:46:08] attend. Um we do have uh Rob Fischer
[1:46:12] here, but let me just outline that um
[1:46:14] Concourse Delegance uh Hillsboro
[1:46:15] Concourse Delegance specifically um fund
[1:46:19] and supports local entities in town,
[1:46:21] specifically Hillsboro School
[1:46:23] Foundation, the Godsmen, which is really
[1:46:26] a nonprofit for um at risk and
[1:46:29] disadvantaged youth as well as Ability
[1:46:31] Path. And these are entities that
[1:46:34] benefit the immediate community. And Mr.
[1:46:36] Fischer, thank you for joining us and
[1:46:37] presenting, giving us an updates. Thank
[1:46:39] you.
[1:46:45] » Thank you, Madam Mayor,
[1:46:47] and uh the esteemed council members. Uh
[1:46:51] I get the privilege of representing the
[1:46:53] conc um every year. And it's kind of
[1:46:56] hard to believe that I stood up here 17
[1:46:58] years ago uh when we decided to take the
[1:47:02] conc
[1:47:03] the school grounds up at Crocker and and
[1:47:06] uh move it up to Crystal Springs Golf
[1:47:08] Course and it's been uh really going
[1:47:10] from strength to strength ever since.
[1:47:12] Um, and the reason that is the case is
[1:47:14] because of the tremendous community
[1:47:16] support we've gotten from the town of
[1:47:18] Hillsbor uh in cooperation and
[1:47:21] collaboration with the Hillsboro Police
[1:47:22] Department. Uh, and I stand up here very
[1:47:25] grateful for the support of the town and
[1:47:28] the police department uh because without
[1:47:30] your support, we could not put the event
[1:47:32] on every year. Um, this year represented
[1:47:35] our 70th anniversary. Uh and again for
[1:47:39] those who aren't aren't aware uh the
[1:47:40] Hillsboro Concore, our tiny little town
[1:47:43] of Hillsbor in the Concord that started
[1:47:44] in 1956
[1:47:46] is the longest continually running
[1:47:48] Concore in the world and we're very
[1:47:51] proud of that and it it is all due to
[1:47:54] the amazing community support that we
[1:47:56] have. Um, this year's show was uh no
[1:47:58] exception to uh the successes we've had
[1:48:02] in the past and uh I'm delighted to say
[1:48:06] that yet again we were profitable uh
[1:48:09] which is key uh because without our
[1:48:11] profits of course we would not be able
[1:48:14] to to support the charities that we
[1:48:15] provide funds to every year. Um and we
[1:48:19] each year we look to try to expand our
[1:48:21] sponsorship and we picked up a couple of
[1:48:23] new sponsors this year. We're still
[1:48:25] counting the numbers uh but it looks
[1:48:27] like we probably grew anywhere between
[1:48:29] three and 5% over last year and I can't
[1:48:31] tell you how hard it is to actually move
[1:48:33] the needle uh in this business uh
[1:48:36] because we have about 180 to 200 cars
[1:48:38] that are on the field uh and then we
[1:48:40] have somewhere between a dozen and uh
[1:48:43] dozen and 14 15 sponsors uh that provide
[1:48:47] the income and uh the revenue from from
[1:48:50] the event each year. We try very hard to
[1:48:52] compete for all those what you'd call
[1:48:55] variable dollars that people have to
[1:48:57] give to something like an event like
[1:48:59] ours. And we had perfect weather this
[1:49:01] year. Uh and it was uh 100 years to the
[1:49:04] day of the formation of the of
[1:49:07] MercedesBenz which was formed on June
[1:49:09] 28th, 1926.
[1:49:11] And we celebrated that 100th anniversary
[1:49:14] along with our 70th anniversary this
[1:49:16] year. Um, while we were there, um, and I
[1:49:19] just brought a sample. I don't know if
[1:49:20] you want to keep it for your records,
[1:49:22] but this was our program. You can see
[1:49:24] we, um, obviously celebrating the 70th.
[1:49:27] I also brought for you, Madame Mayor.
[1:49:29] Uh, we created a a collective
[1:49:32] collectible coin this year, which we
[1:49:34] gave out to all of our entrance and
[1:49:36] special VIPs. So, I'll leave that with
[1:49:38] you today. Uh but I also would like to
[1:49:42] present to you uh and the council
[1:49:46] a placard in appreciation for the
[1:49:48] sponsor for the support that we've
[1:49:50] received from the town um for the 70
[1:49:53] years of putting on the Hillsboro
[1:49:55] Concore. Um, and this is especially done
[1:49:58] if you if you attend our shows. Um,
[1:50:01] you'll notice that in front of every car
[1:50:02] that is placed on the field, there's a
[1:50:04] special information placard that talks
[1:50:06] all about the car, the year, make,
[1:50:08] model, and special ownership
[1:50:10] information. And it's what really makes
[1:50:11] Hillsboro special. Um, because it really
[1:50:14] looks like a a uh almost like a museum
[1:50:16] setup. So, um I would like to present
[1:50:19] this to you if I could on behalf of uh
[1:50:22] the many volunteers that we have for the
[1:50:23] Hillsboro Concore Foundation, the
[1:50:25] operating committee.
[1:51:13] So again I you know I stand up here
[1:51:15] representing the the concore but we have
[1:51:19] an operating committee of roughly 25
[1:51:21] people and then we have a volunteer core
[1:51:23] of somewhere in it grows to about 70 80
[1:51:25] people on the day. Uh and uh we could
[1:51:28] not do it without the support of the
[1:51:30] community and the 100% volunteer group
[1:51:32] that we have that puts on the show. So
[1:51:33] thank you all very much. Look forward to
[1:51:35] seeing you next year.
[1:51:38] Thank you.
[1:51:40] so much.
[1:51:43] >> Yes, please. Um, don't leave yet.
[1:51:46] Council member Crowley would like to
[1:51:47] make a comment.
[1:51:48] >> Well, and not just to Rob. Thank you,
[1:51:49] Rob, for all your many, many hours in
[1:51:51] the committee are amazing. But any any
[1:51:54] Hillsboro resident who doesn't go to the
[1:51:56] top of the hill on Concord Day, which is
[1:51:58] the third Sunday in June now. Is that
[1:52:00] our third Sunday in June? People come
[1:52:03] from all over to come to this show. And
[1:52:06] it's right at the top of our hill. It is
[1:52:08] it's like Briadune. You go over the hill
[1:52:11] at the Crystal Springs Golf Course and
[1:52:12] here's this whole incredible car magic
[1:52:16] uh that happens. So,
[1:52:17] >> and and and it is beautiful. It's great
[1:52:19] for picnic, family picnics. Um the cars
[1:52:22] are awesome. The guys will even love it
[1:52:24] more than you. It's really, like I said,
[1:52:26] it's definitely one of the experiences
[1:52:28] my family truly truly enjoys. Um, thank
[1:52:31] you so much for all you do, especially
[1:52:33] for your support of these very important
[1:52:35] um, entities in the community. Much
[1:52:37] appreciated. Thanks.
[1:52:40] Um, the next item on our agenda is
[1:52:43] actually a town updates from our
[1:52:45] assistant city manager, Mandy Brown.
[1:52:49] >> Thank you, Mayor and Council members.
[1:52:51] Let's keep this brief because I know we
[1:52:52] have a very full agenda this evening.
[1:52:55] Um, wanted to have a reminder from the
[1:52:57] Hillsboro Police Department. a reminder
[1:52:59] about traffic safety. Um especially with
[1:53:02] the first day of school being Monday,
[1:53:03] August 31st coming up and just in
[1:53:06] general around town, lots of
[1:53:08] construction going on, being mindful of
[1:53:10] the speed and obeying posted traffic
[1:53:13] signs.
[1:53:16] Um ebike, I know uh we've been talking
[1:53:18] about this recently. The uh website on
[1:53:21] the on ebikes has been updated. There
[1:53:24] was a KQED forum with Dr. MA. And so
[1:53:27] that recording has been posted and added
[1:53:29] to the resources. And also save the date
[1:53:31] if you are available. Tomorrow the board
[1:53:33] of supervisors will be discussing an
[1:53:35] ordinance related to ebikes and that
[1:53:37] begins at 9:30 a.m.
[1:53:41] Another message from HPD. Uh there is a
[1:53:45] wonderful website resource that is uh
[1:53:48] been posted about scam awareness. Um
[1:53:50] some really great flyers that will be
[1:53:52] included in some upcoming town
[1:53:54] communications. Uh, and the website, I
[1:53:57] wish I could fit the whole thing on the
[1:53:58] slide, but there's just a lot of
[1:54:00] clickable any question you could have
[1:54:02] about scam. There's an answer on there.
[1:54:04] Um, and so highly encourage everyone to
[1:54:07] check it out, but also stay tuned in
[1:54:09] your mail uh because you'll be getting
[1:54:10] some resources there as well.
[1:54:14] We've been getting also a lot of calls
[1:54:15] about solicitors in town. Um, so just a
[1:54:18] reminder on the process. The town
[1:54:21] doesn't prohibit soliciting, but you do
[1:54:24] have to have a license. And so, the
[1:54:26] Hillsboro Police Department manages
[1:54:28] those who have licenses. So, if somebody
[1:54:31] comes soliciting, you can always call
[1:54:33] HPD and verify that they are a permitted
[1:54:36] solicitor in town. Um, and the town
[1:54:39] cannot legally restrict permitting
[1:54:42] unless you have a no soliciting sign.
[1:54:44] So, just a reminder about our process.
[1:54:46] And again, we've been getting so many
[1:54:47] calls about this. it will be coming out
[1:54:48] in some upcoming um communications as
[1:54:51] well.
[1:54:54] We have launched the uh
[1:54:55] telecommunications survey. So, it's
[1:54:57] available on our website as well as our
[1:55:00] um uh e-news our our weekly bulletin. Uh
[1:55:03] it is a long survey and we thank you in
[1:55:06] advance everybody that takes it. It's we
[1:55:09] did really try and whittle it down if
[1:55:10] you can believe it. It was longer. Um,
[1:55:12] but it is really critical information to
[1:55:15] help us inform the priorities of the
[1:55:17] different areas of telecommunications
[1:55:19] improvement and you'll also be getting a
[1:55:21] postcard um with the survey information.
[1:55:23] So, we it's open until September 25th.
[1:55:26] So, we're really hoping to get a lot of
[1:55:27] participation. So, um if you don't have
[1:55:29] time, you can always come back to it or
[1:55:31] do it again, but we really encourage
[1:55:33] everyone to take the survey.
[1:55:36] Another reminder about the left turns.
[1:55:38] Um, still getting a lot of we town hall
[1:55:41] we can hear the sirens and everything.
[1:55:43] So, still getting a people people
[1:55:45] getting used to that no left turn. So,
[1:55:46] just wanted to plug it again.
[1:55:50] Um, the nomination period for the
[1:55:53] November city council election has been
[1:55:54] extended. Um, so because an incumbent
[1:55:56] did not file nomination papers, the
[1:55:58] nomination period is extended uh until
[1:56:00] five o'clock on Wednesday, o August
[1:56:03] 12th.
[1:56:06] Upcoming agenda items for September um
[1:56:08] childhood cancer awareness month. We
[1:56:10] also have some items related to Tobin
[1:56:12] Clark and the council handbook
[1:56:14] discussion related to selection
[1:56:16] rotation. And we're also had talked
[1:56:17] about that surplus land act presentation
[1:56:20] and discussion um from a a couple months
[1:56:22] ago. So we'll be looking to bring that
[1:56:24] back in September
[1:56:27] and our regular emergency preparedness
[1:56:29] resources slide. Thank you.
[1:56:32] >> Thank you Mandy Brown. appreciate that.
[1:56:35] Um, we will ask for public comment on
[1:56:38] items that are not on the agenda. Do we
[1:56:41] have any um public either on Zoom or in
[1:56:45] the chambers who would like to make a
[1:56:47] comment on items that are not on the
[1:56:49] agenda?
[1:56:49] >> Thank you, Mayor Cole. Yes, Mary Kalo.
[1:56:56] » Good evening.
[1:56:56] >> Hello.
[1:56:57] >> Hi. Good evening, mayor and council
[1:57:00] members. I would like to invite the city
[1:57:02] council and members of the community to
[1:57:05] attend a free public forum when the
[1:57:08] mission follows you home. The event will
[1:57:11] be held on Thursday, September 10th from
[1:57:14] 9 until 12 noon at Central Peninsula
[1:57:19] Church located at 105 Shell Boulevard in
[1:57:23] Foster City. The forum will focus on the
[1:57:26] mental health challenges that can affect
[1:57:29] veterans and first responders while
[1:57:33] highlighting the resources, support, and
[1:57:37] conversations that help individuals
[1:57:40] recover and thrive. Although the forum
[1:57:43] centers on veterans and first
[1:57:45] responders, it is intended for the
[1:57:48] entire community, families, friends,
[1:57:51] employers, co-workers, neighbors, and
[1:57:54] anyone who cares about those who serve
[1:57:58] us all have an important role to play.
[1:58:01] Supporting those who dedicate their
[1:58:03] lives to protecting and serving others
[1:58:06] is a community responsibility.
[1:58:09] and we hope this event will help
[1:58:11] strengthen those connections. We would
[1:58:14] be honored to have you join us and help
[1:58:16] spread the word. Thank you again for
[1:58:19] your support and willingness to help.
[1:58:21] With everyone contributing to the
[1:58:24] outreach effort, we can ensure that this
[1:58:27] forum reaches the people who need it
[1:58:30] most and makes a positive impact
[1:58:33] throughout our community. Registration
[1:58:36] is not required but will be available on
[1:58:39] Eventbrite under when the mission
[1:58:42] follows you home and that will be
[1:58:45] updated with panelists and more
[1:58:47] information as we get closer to the
[1:58:49] event. Thank you so much and you should
[1:58:52] have the flyer. Um and thank you for
[1:58:55] sharing that.
[1:58:56] >> Yeah, thank you. Does anyone have any
[1:58:59] questions for clarification or are we
[1:59:02] pretty good with the flyer? Thanks for
[1:59:03] the flyer. is informative. Appreciate
[1:59:05] that. Any other public comment?
[1:59:09] >> Thank you. Um the next is a phone caller
[1:59:12] on Zoom.
[1:59:16] » Do we have the name?
[1:59:18] >> Uh no, we don't.
[1:59:21] color.
[1:59:22] >> Yeah, my name is My name is Gord
[1:59:26] and I just want to say I am glad that SB
[1:59:30] saving saving pass because now I can say
[1:59:34] all this. I disagree with Hillsboro
[1:59:37] being a sanctuary city and I think that
[1:59:40] mayor needs to be deported back
[1:59:43] to where she came from. Yeah, God bless
[1:59:46] America and God bless Donald Trump and
[1:59:49] God bless Israel and Tick Stout is our
[1:59:52] real governor of California.
[1:59:58] » Okay, any additional public comments,
[2:00:03] Thomas Layman,
[2:00:09] » can you hear me?
[2:00:10] >> Yes. Yes, my name is Thomas Layman and
[2:00:13] thank you uh council members for
[2:00:15] entertaining my uh comments. Uh the
[2:00:18] reason I'm commenting it has to do with
[2:00:20] what uh Mandy, I forget your last name,
[2:00:24] I'm sorry, assistant town manager
[2:00:25] mentioned in her overview
[2:00:27] >> regarding the um permits for
[2:00:31] solicitation.
[2:00:32] I want to I'm assume all of you are
[2:00:35] aware of a large number of recently uh
[2:00:41] people have been broken into. Houses
[2:00:44] have been broken into. In fact, my next
[2:00:46] door neighbor a week ago Monday. Um the
[2:00:49] police were very kind to follow up and
[2:00:51] they took some of our Ring camera to try
[2:00:53] to investigate who might have been
[2:00:55] involved in that. And we're not the only
[2:00:58] one in this area as well as uh other
[2:01:00] areas that I know occurred
[2:01:04] on Friday evening at 8:15 and I have
[2:01:07] pictures of it. A gentleman came to our
[2:01:09] door and rang the doorbell soliciting um
[2:01:12] pest services.
[2:01:15] I said that he couldn't do it without a
[2:01:17] permit and he said he had one, but I
[2:01:20] said, "Well, it doesn't matter. I don't
[2:01:22] really need them." And I asked him to go
[2:01:24] away. whereupon I called the Hillsboro
[2:01:27] Police Department to report this. And
[2:01:30] unlike Ms. uh I'm sorry, Mandy's
[2:01:33] comment,
[2:01:35] the police officer that took my message
[2:01:37] said that they have to have a permit,
[2:01:40] but permits are issued by this city of
[2:01:44] Hillsboro and couldn't do anything about
[2:01:46] it. She suggested that I call the city.
[2:01:49] So, that was Friday night. Today, I
[2:01:51] called the city. They took me back to
[2:01:54] the police department and a nice
[2:01:55] gentleman, Lieutenant Colbrurner, was
[2:01:58] kind enough to call me back. He
[2:02:00] indicated that there are no restrictions
[2:02:03] on or at least the way he presented it,
[2:02:06] there were not any restrictions on an
[2:02:09] individual who wanted to do a
[2:02:10] solicitation.
[2:02:12] And he said that it was up to the city
[2:02:14] council to make such restrictions.
[2:02:18] At a minimum, I would expect since
[2:02:21] particularly if I did a pest, they would
[2:02:24] be looking at every part of my house to
[2:02:27] potentially look and could potentially
[2:02:30] figure out how to get in and to also see
[2:02:33] what kind of security features I have.
[2:02:35] It seems to me that in this environment,
[2:02:38] some restrictions ought to be placed on
[2:02:40] such uh I don't know, permits. I have no
[2:02:44] idea what is requested in the permit,
[2:02:46] but it seems to me that at least a time
[2:02:48] frame, just like we do with our leaf
[2:02:50] blowers, ought to be imposed upon such
[2:02:52] permitting. Thank you very much, and I
[2:02:55] appreciate your time.
[2:02:57] >> Um, thank you for sharing that with us.
[2:02:58] We'll take it into consideration. Thank
[2:03:00] you. Any additional comments from the
[2:03:04] public?
[2:03:05] >> Thank you, Mayor Cole. I don't have any
[2:03:06] additional speaker cards on this matter
[2:03:08] and I don't have see any additional
[2:03:10] raised hands. Thank you.
[2:03:12] Okay, I will now close um public comment
[2:03:16] and the next item is the announcement of
[2:03:19] conflicts of interest from my colleagues
[2:03:22] on the deis. Do any council members have
[2:03:24] a conflict of interest they need to
[2:03:25] disclose related to any item on the
[2:03:27] agenda?
[2:03:29] Um I will start by noting that I will be
[2:03:32] recused I will recuse myself from item
[2:03:34] 1515 on the consent calendar
[2:03:38] >> and through the mayor.
[2:03:39] >> Yes. Um council member
[2:03:43] Yes. Yeah. But item 15 is the public
[2:03:47] hearing, correct? Yeah.
[2:03:48] >> Right. And I will recuse myself on um
[2:03:51] item 17.
[2:03:54] >> And just to clarify for the public uh
[2:03:56] only because the Fair Political
[2:03:57] Practices uh Commission does require
[2:03:59] that we announce the reason for the
[2:04:01] refusal and in both cases uh both
[2:04:03] council members live within proximity of
[2:04:05] the uh project locations. Thank you.
[2:04:09] >> And Okay. and and council member Adams.
[2:04:11] Yes.
[2:04:11] >> Yes. I would like to remove item 14.
[2:04:15] >> Um ju just a second. So um the recusal
[2:04:19] any other recusal from the from agenda?
[2:04:24] >> None. Okay. We will then move on to the
[2:04:26] consent calendar and council member
[2:04:28] Adams would like to remove on the
[2:04:30] consent calendar item 144.
[2:04:36] » Yes. Council member Krillic.
[2:04:38] >> Number one. Number one, please.
[2:04:42] One 114. Any other items to be removed
[2:04:47] from the consent calendar?
[2:04:55] Okay, seeing none, I will have us
[2:04:57] proceed. Um, are there any public
[2:05:00] requests to remove any items from the
[2:05:02] consent calendar?
[2:05:08] Nothing on Zoom.
[2:05:08] >> No, no, no request. Thank you.
[2:05:11] >> Okay. Um in which case we will um May I
[2:05:14] have a motion to um approve consent
[2:05:17] calendar items 2 3 4 5 6 7
[2:05:21] 8 9 10 11 12 13.
[2:05:24] >> So move.
[2:05:26] >> Second.
[2:05:27] >> Okay. Um city clerk, may I have a roll call roll vote?
[2:05:33] >> Thank you, Adams. Yes. Schwang.
[2:05:36] >> Yes.
[2:05:36] >> Curlic.
[2:05:37] >> Yes.
[2:05:37] >> Ragsdale.
[2:05:38] >> Yes.
[2:05:38] >> Cole.
[2:05:39] >> Yes.
[2:05:40] >> Thank you.
[2:05:42] >> Proceeding to the consent calendar
[2:05:44] items.
[2:05:44] >> Okay. Just quickly because I know we
[2:05:46] have a long agenda. So on items 19 and
[2:05:48] 20 on the June 8th um minutes. I just
[2:05:52] noticed because I remembered this
[2:05:53] discussion that residents had concerns
[2:05:55] regarding a grading permit on item 19.
[2:05:58] And in the minutes uh it says that there
[2:06:01] was public comments expressing concerns.
[2:06:03] And then the next thing in the minutes
[2:06:04] it says that the council got a motion
[2:06:07] and got accepted and approved and and so
[2:06:09] I went back I even listened to it
[2:06:10] because I remembered we had a discussion
[2:06:12] with the director of public works and
[2:06:14] the civil engineers addressing the
[2:06:16] public's concern and then I saw the same
[2:06:18] thing in item 20. So, I just thought
[2:06:20] that when we have in the minutes public
[2:06:23] comment expressing concerns and then the
[2:06:25] next thing is the council voted to
[2:06:27] approve that we should insert something
[2:06:30] that says that staff or the council
[2:06:32] address the public concerns because
[2:06:34] otherwise it just looks like people are
[2:06:36] talking and we're not listening to them
[2:06:38] where we all know that we spend a lot of
[2:06:41] time listening and responding. So um I
[2:06:44] just maybe as a matter of format moving
[2:06:46] forward but in this particular case I
[2:06:48] think we should insert in items number
[2:06:50] 19 and 20 in the June 8th meeting that
[2:06:52] residents concerns were addressed.
[2:06:56] Um in other words reflecting the
[2:06:58] discussion that occurred um on that
[2:07:00] date. Correct. Okay. And so perhaps a
[2:07:04] summary of um what the thoughts were or
[2:07:08] consensus from the deis to be reflected
[2:07:11] in the minutes.
[2:07:13] Is that um city attorney and city clerk?
[2:07:16] Is that something that we can
[2:07:18] >> Sure. So I I can I can relisten to that
[2:07:21] section and you would like something
[2:07:23] included that just indicates the the
[2:07:25] staff comments or the council comments
[2:07:27] related to the addressing the concerns?
[2:07:29] >> Yes.
[2:07:31] Basically, what was the consensus or
[2:07:33] general thinking?
[2:07:35] >> Try to summarize. We I I try to
[2:07:37] summarize sometimes, but um perhaps just
[2:07:39] um
[2:07:40] >> reiterating back to us what your
[2:07:42] understanding is as far as the direction
[2:07:44] and then move forward with the votes. Um
[2:07:46] okay, that would be perhaps more
[2:07:48] accurate
[2:07:49] >> for items 19 and 20.
[2:07:50] >> Yes. Well, or or items um in this nature
[2:07:54] where the public weighs in and give
[2:07:56] comments, but to just state that we the
[2:08:00] council discussed these comments and
[2:08:02] responded and decided to proceed in this
[2:08:05] fashion. Something along those lines.
[2:08:07] >> I I I don't even mind if it just says
[2:08:09] residents concerns were addressed by
[2:08:11] staff to council's
[2:08:14] >> approval or something.
[2:08:16] >> Yeah, I think that'll that'd be an easy
[2:08:18] ad to do in this specific case where
[2:08:20] we're doing it. We do take action
[2:08:21] minutes as part of our minutes thing
[2:08:23] since we have the now the video and and
[2:08:26] the and the audio of it as well. But I
[2:08:28] understand your point here. So I think
[2:08:29] in this particular instance we can just
[2:08:31] add in the back and forth that shows it
[2:08:33] was addressed. But just so we we're all
[2:08:35] aware in the future and for the public
[2:08:37] as well the the minutes that you see in
[2:08:39] writing are action minutes that are also
[2:08:41] accompanied by a video as well. But in
[2:08:43] this particular circumstance I
[2:08:44] understand.
[2:08:45] >> Okay. Um Council Member Adams has
[2:08:47] additional comments along those lines.
[2:08:49] Um, yes. And and I agree. I think that's
[2:08:53] laid out pretty clearly that it's
[2:08:55] supposed to be the actions that are
[2:08:57] taken. But, uh, on item 13, city council
[2:09:01] items, it says I reported on the
[2:09:05] Hillsboro Beautification Foundation, it
[2:09:07] should just say reported about the
[2:09:09] Hillsboro Beautification Foundation
[2:09:11] donor. Thank you. Because I did not
[2:09:13] attend.
[2:09:16] » Okay.
[2:09:17] >> Thank you. Those corrections are noted
[2:09:21] on the minutes from the last city
[2:09:23] council meeting.
[2:09:28] Okay, that's item one. Is that all your
[2:09:31] comment? Okay.
[2:09:32] >> Um, next item that's removed from the
[2:09:34] consent calendar is item 14,
[2:09:39] adoption of an ordinance amending
[2:09:41] section 17.32.030
[2:09:43] 030 of the Hillsboro Municipal Code to
[2:09:46] reduce the minimum dwelling size
[2:09:48] requirements and eliminate the
[2:09:49] recordation requirements for limited
[2:09:51] remaining floor area. Um,
[2:09:55] Council Member Adams, I will have you
[2:09:57] start with your comments.
[2:10:00] >> Thank you, uh, Madame Mayor. I I feel
[2:10:04] that this was brought up uh uh Liz
[2:10:08] brought this up to us just one time
[2:10:12] before and I feel that there are still
[2:10:14] some questions. I think a thousand
[2:10:17] square feet is a really a big jump down
[2:10:22] from 2500 square feet. And I think we
[2:10:25] need to analyze the implications of
[2:10:27] this, not from people who are
[2:10:31] well-meaning and plan to live in our
[2:10:33] town, but from those who may look at
[2:10:36] this as a way of
[2:10:39] circumventing some of the character of
[2:10:42] the town that we have worked so hard to
[2:10:45] maintain. and I just don't feel that in
[2:10:49] the staff report there is enough
[2:10:51] information about the pros and cons of
[2:10:54] doing this. So I would like to suggest
[2:10:57] that rather than discuss it tonight uh
[2:10:59] we table it until we have a little bit
[2:11:02] more information.
[2:11:05] >> Um thanks for those comments and I would
[2:11:07] like to add to that. I completely agree
[2:11:10] with you on this and I and I thank you
[2:11:12] for bringing it to my attention as well.
[2:11:14] Um I I do have specific questions. First
[2:11:17] of all, as I read the staff report, and
[2:11:20] granted you're right, this is supposed
[2:11:22] to be the second reading. It happens to
[2:11:23] be in consent calendar, and perhaps
[2:11:26] that's a conversation we can have later
[2:11:27] about consent calendar for reasonzoning
[2:11:30] um ordinances that are going to be
[2:11:31] modified um whether we should actually
[2:11:34] have two explicit reading and not put it
[2:11:36] in consent calendar because it's a very
[2:11:38] important issue. Um, as I understand
[2:11:41] what's as I read read what you
[2:11:43] submitted, I'm thinking what who does
[2:11:47] this benefit because the issue of a
[2:11:49] th00and square foot primary dwelling
[2:11:55] um does not is not necessary because we
[2:11:58] have an ADU ordinance that allows 4,000
[2:12:01] square foot building on the same parcel.
[2:12:05] Correct. That's our own internal ADU
[2:12:08] ordinance in addition to the
[2:12:10] statemandated
[2:12:12] 800 square foot as well as 500 square
[2:12:16] foot JADU.
[2:12:19] So if you were, it seemed like an end
[2:12:22] run around our zoning ordinance of 2500
[2:12:26] square foot and I also worry if you have
[2:12:30] half an acre, you are now beginning to
[2:12:33] make an argument to have as many as four
[2:12:36] primary
[2:12:37] dwellings on that site. If you reduce
[2:12:40] the size of the dwelling size to a
[2:12:44] thousand, you could have as many as four
[2:12:46] on half an acre. And of course, if you
[2:12:48] have an acre, it's maybe eight primary
[2:12:51] in addition to what state mandated. And
[2:12:54] you will have these micro developments
[2:12:56] and these micro homes on a parcel. And I'm just trying to understand the
[2:13:01] logic of this. What does what is the
[2:13:03] benefit from this change on the
[2:13:05] ordinance? The driver for this ordinance
[2:13:08] is because our certified housing element
[2:13:10] included a promise that our town would
[2:13:14] eliminate our minimum dwelling size
[2:13:16] because HCD flagged our minimum dwelling
[2:13:19] size of 2500 square feet as a constraint
[2:13:22] and a barrier to development. Um so it
[2:13:24] was a requirement of our housing element
[2:13:27] program to eliminate that minimum.
[2:13:29] >> Okay, let me clarify what we submitted
[2:13:31] or what was approved in December of
[2:13:34] 2023. December 20th, 2023 by HCD. On
[2:13:38] page 87 of our housing element, it
[2:13:41] explicitly said that currently the
[2:13:45] minimum required square footage of a
[2:13:47] single family detached home is 2500
[2:13:50] square foot. This is a constraint to the
[2:13:52] development of a variety of housing
[2:13:54] types. The discussion, I was a part of
[2:13:57] that discussion a few years ago. The
[2:13:59] discussion was centered around housing
[2:14:02] types which is R1 which is what we
[2:14:05] currently have single family detached
[2:14:07] homes versus R2 which is multifamily
[2:14:11] housing. That was the intent of that
[2:14:14] discussion.
[2:14:14] >> In that context it was referring to a
[2:14:17] variety of housing types in terms of
[2:14:20] offering opportunities for houses that
[2:14:22] were smaller than 2500 square feet. So,
[2:14:24] you could have a home that's 2,000
[2:14:26] square feet or a home, you know, it's
[2:14:28] the the goal, I believe, um, in HCD
[2:14:31] flagging this is to provide housing for
[2:14:34] what they call the missing middle. Not
[2:14:35] everybody can afford a home that's 2500
[2:14:38] square feet or larger. And so, the
[2:14:40] intent from the state is to push for
[2:14:42] jurisdictions to allow houses that are
[2:14:45] not only large.
[2:14:48] The average size of a house in the
[2:14:51] United States is about 2400 square foot.
[2:14:54] So, we're not outside of the scale or
[2:14:56] 2500 square foot homes. My concern about
[2:15:00] this kind of a change on our ordinance
[2:15:02] is that not only do you circumvent our
[2:15:05] current ordinance, but you will now have
[2:15:09] homes that are built to rent. You could
[2:15:11] have four homes on a parcel that are all
[2:15:14] rentals.
[2:15:15] as opposed to home ownership. You shift
[2:15:17] the the incentive towards perhaps large
[2:15:22] institution investors buying older homes
[2:15:26] using half an acre parcel, having four
[2:15:29] homes on those parcels that are 1,000
[2:15:32] square foot. In addition to the fact
[2:15:35] that the state allows you to have a,000
[2:15:37] square foot, well, we actually allow you
[2:15:40] to have a thousand square foot ADU. So,
[2:15:42] you have a primary residence that's a
[2:15:43] th00and square foot. You have an ADU
[2:15:45] that's 1,000 square foot. In addition,
[2:15:46] you have a JADU that's 500 square foot.
[2:15:50] So, you're back to 2500 except now you
[2:15:52] have three different three different
[2:15:55] individual structures and you'll have
[2:15:57] four of those. I mean, theoretically,
[2:15:59] you could have a dozen on any parcel.
[2:16:02] So, I worry that this will incentivize
[2:16:05] nonhome owners because you're right,
[2:16:07] most Hillsbor residents are not
[2:16:09] interested in this, but investors are
[2:16:12] potentially. And the drive would be to
[2:16:15] build these individual entities, these
[2:16:17] smaller homes and rent them. And and
[2:16:20] there's nothing wrong with renting. We
[2:16:22] are working on multif family housing to
[2:16:24] allow for rentals. But if we shift the
[2:16:27] burden from home ownership to rentals,
[2:16:29] you will have micro homes throughout the
[2:16:31] town. It would fundamentally change the
[2:16:34] character of the town in a way that is
[2:16:37] just completely different than what
[2:16:40] exists currently. And I'm not blaming
[2:16:42] you. And I think it was perhaps our
[2:16:44] oversight not to have caught into the
[2:16:46] details of this and I thank my colleague
[2:16:48] for bringing it up. Um I I read this
[2:16:50] again multiple times and I went back and
[2:16:52] look at our um housing element that was
[2:16:56] submitted and reviewed some of the
[2:16:59] minutes and it was clear the intent to
[2:17:02] reduce the size was really about multif
[2:17:05] family housing such as apartment
[2:17:07] buildings or an apartment that's a
[2:17:09] thousand square foot makes sense. It's a
[2:17:11] two or threebedroom apartment
[2:17:12] potentially, but to make this change
[2:17:16] will potentially increase. You could
[2:17:19] quadruple the population overnight
[2:17:21] because you have manufactured homes that
[2:17:23] could be deployed which are allowed in
[2:17:25] the town of Hillsboro.
[2:17:27] And I think at a minimum we should reach
[2:17:29] out to other stakeholders
[2:17:31] such as public works, what's the impact
[2:17:34] on our sewer system, police department,
[2:17:37] our schools, etc. This is not about not
[2:17:40] building. We are addressing that as you
[2:17:43] heard earlier. We are moving forward to
[2:17:45] get our housing elements um achieved.
[2:17:48] But I just feel like reducing the size
[2:17:50] of a primary home, the primary residence
[2:17:53] is is quite drastic. Um go ahead. Yes.
[2:17:57] >> I do want to clarify that this doesn't
[2:17:59] change the allowed zoning or the allowed
[2:18:02] density. It's merely reducing the
[2:18:05] allowable size of a primary dwelling. It
[2:18:08] doesn't change the number of units that
[2:18:09] are allowed on a lot. It doesn't that's
[2:18:12] already the case regardless of the size
[2:18:14] of the primary dwelling.
[2:18:15] >> But if you don't change the FAR, which
[2:18:17] is the floor to area ratio, and you
[2:18:19] change the size of the home, you have
[2:18:22] half an acre, which is about 20,000
[2:18:24] square foot. You can now have four
[2:18:27] primary dwellings on that site.
[2:18:29] >> You can only have one primary.
[2:18:31] That's our zoning. You can only have
[2:18:33] >> But you have residual land that's not
[2:18:34] used. You would not have met your FAR.
[2:18:36] There are I don't want to argue with you
[2:18:38] about ADUs. We can certainly bring that
[2:18:40] item back for a discussion. But
[2:18:42] specifically for this item, it does not
[2:18:44] change the density. It does not change
[2:18:46] the allowable use. The same number of
[2:18:48] units that are allowed now with our
[2:18:50] minimum dwelling size would still be
[2:18:52] allowed with the reduced minimum
[2:18:54] dwelling size. There the the floor area
[2:18:57] ratio, the FAR, is not the only
[2:18:59] mechanism that regulates how much square
[2:19:03] footage of structure can be on a site.
[2:19:05] Um, you're allowed to have a converted
[2:19:07] ADU, which has to be within the existing
[2:19:10] square footage of the of an existing or
[2:19:12] proposed home. A JADU is limited to 500
[2:19:14] square feet. And then the limited
[2:19:16] detached ADU that we're required is a
[2:19:19] minimum of 800 square feet. We do allow
[2:19:21] up to a,000, but it it's not changing
[2:19:25] the allowable density beyond what's
[2:19:27] already in place.
[2:19:29] Yeah, I'm not sure how that math works,
[2:19:31] but um I would allow my colleagues. It
[2:19:33] sounds like um Council I mean Vice Mayor
[2:19:35] Rexdale have a question.
[2:19:37] >> That's that was my question. There's
[2:19:39] still just one primary house,
[2:19:42] >> correct?
[2:19:43] >> But that's not stated here
[2:19:46] >> in in this ordinance change. We did not
[2:19:48] explicitly
[2:19:50] state you can only have one primary. We
[2:19:53] stated the primary dwelling size will be
[2:19:56] 8,000 square foot.
[2:19:58] >> I believe that would be covered in the
[2:20:00] zoning
[2:20:01] >> if I'm not right.
[2:20:02] >> Yeah. I mean
[2:20:05] >> Well, can we can we bring this back for
[2:20:07] um for the discussion because I Yeah, go
[2:20:10] ahead. That's really I I understand that
[2:20:14] there were really good reasons to put
[2:20:15] this forth and probably we want to get
[2:20:18] it addressed pretty soon, but I feel
[2:20:21] there is still some confusion and also a
[2:20:24] good case to be made for how this is
[2:20:27] going to work in our town and if we
[2:20:29] could just bring it back rather than
[2:20:31] discuss it right now, I I would feel
[2:20:34] more comfortable if that works for you.
[2:20:36] Liz,
[2:20:37] >> understood. Is there direction that the
[2:20:39] council can provide about what exact
[2:20:41] information would be helpful to
[2:20:42] understand?
[2:20:43] >> I think clarification in terms of what
[2:20:45] we promised HCD because when I read what
[2:20:49] we submitted it that was not my
[2:20:50] understanding. So clearly this I
[2:20:53] understood that to apply to multif
[2:20:54] family housing not to single family
[2:20:56] residents. Um so clarification along
[2:20:59] those lines and what exactly this
[2:21:02] translate to if the flow to area ratio
[2:21:05] stays the same for half a you know for
[2:21:07] any size lot and um what kind of density
[2:21:11] we are looking at per parcel the impact
[2:21:14] that would have to reach out to other
[2:21:16] stakeholders like public works, police,
[2:21:19] schools etc. and the population growth
[2:21:22] and how quickly that could happen. I
[2:21:24] think that would be a start.
[2:21:26] Yeah.
[2:21:27] >> And and I think um there could just be a
[2:21:31] word or two added that for the one
[2:21:34] allowed uh primary dwelling just to so
[2:21:37] it's clear if if the other concerns are met.
[2:21:42] >> I know the the schools could use more
[2:21:44] kids. So I think we're okay there.
[2:21:46] Thanks.
[2:21:48] >> Um any additional um questions from
[2:21:50] anyone else on the deis?
[2:21:54] Liz, if I if I could just add unusual
[2:21:56] here to ask you a question since I've
[2:21:58] read over this as well, but was the
[2:22:00] original help me understand was the
[2:22:02] original request from the state that we
[2:22:03] eliminate any size restriction and what
[2:22:06] we're trying to do is put some size
[2:22:08] restriction, but what the state is
[2:22:09] really asking for is you should have no
[2:22:12] size. There should be no small. It could
[2:22:15] be as small as you can make the house.
[2:22:17] >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, there are minimum
[2:22:18] requirements for what constitutes a
[2:22:20] dwelling under state law and like
[2:22:22] health,
[2:22:22] >> but those are much lower than thousand
[2:22:24] square feet. Yeah. So, I think the
[2:22:26] intent was just to try to provide some
[2:22:28] type of
[2:22:30] >> the state's requirement is for ADUs,
[2:22:34] NJADUs. It does not apply to primary
[2:22:38] dwellings.
[2:22:40] >> Uh, no. The housing element looks at all
[2:22:42] of our regulations that um regulate
[2:22:45] development. So they look at all of our
[2:22:47] zoning ordinances, anything that would
[2:22:49] be seen as a barrier to development of
[2:22:52] all housing types, meaning large homes,
[2:22:55] small homes, ADUs, multifamily.
[2:23:00] » Yeah. Um, Council Member Krill,
[2:23:02] >> so just to clarify, so there's only one
[2:23:06] primary dwelling unit per lot,
[2:23:08] >> correct?
[2:23:09] >> And then you could still have one ADU
[2:23:11] and one J AU.
[2:23:15] Uh, and even and if you had a the garage
[2:23:20] one, would the garage have to be
[2:23:21] attached or something?
[2:23:22] >> There are a few configurations and it
[2:23:25] depends on which mechanism you go
[2:23:28] through, but you can have either one
[2:23:31] attached that's either attached or it's
[2:23:33] a conversion attached. You can have one
[2:23:35] detached and you can have a Jadu which
[2:23:37] is Jadu has to be attached as part of a
[2:23:40] >> but still only one on one lot, one
[2:23:43] primary dwelling. Correct. Thank you.
[2:23:47] >> Any additional questions?
[2:23:50] Um, okay. So, we'll bring this back for
[2:23:52] further discussion and it's removed from
[2:23:55] the consent calendar and um we will move
[2:23:58] forward and approve item one.
[2:24:01] >> So, moved
[2:24:02] >> as amended. Right.
[2:24:03] >> As amended. Yes. Item one.
[2:24:06] >> Second.
[2:24:08] >> Um, all those in favor of item one
[2:24:10] amended. Hi.
[2:24:11] >> Hi.
[2:24:13] >> And then for the last one before
[2:24:15] continuing.
[2:24:16] >> Uh yes, item 15 will be continue will be
[2:24:19] brought back for further discussion.
[2:24:20] >> 14.
[2:24:22] >> I'm sorry. Um item 14. Sorry. We will
[2:24:27] the next item on the agenda is item 15
[2:24:30] which I will be recused from. Um and I
[2:24:36] will step aside.
[2:24:47] Thank you. Welcome to item 15. The mayor
[2:24:51] will um be recusing herself due to um
[2:24:55] the proximity of her her primary
[2:24:58] residence. And this is the conceptual
[2:25:00] review of the subdivision of um parcel
[2:25:04] number 038-
[2:25:06] 1110-160.
[2:25:08] and parcel number 038121-160
[2:25:13] otherwise known as the Metawwood Estates
[2:25:15] into two parcels with a and a dedication
[2:25:18] of a public utility easements which will
[2:25:20] be presented by deputy deputy director
[2:25:23] of public works Natalie Griven.
[2:25:26] >> Good evening [clears throat] madame vice
[2:25:29] mayor and council members.
[2:25:32] Okay. Yes. So tonight I'll be presenting
[2:25:34] on the conceptual conceptual review of a
[2:25:37] two lot subdivision. You may be
[2:25:40] wondering why there are two APNs. It is
[2:25:42] one legal lot. Uh we did some the
[2:25:45] applicant did a lot of research with the
[2:25:47] title company and the surveyor and the
[2:25:49] county. It appears it was created for
[2:25:51] tax purposes only at C at one point, but
[2:25:54] it is one legal lot that's being
[2:25:56] proposed to that's they're proposing to
[2:25:59] subdivide into two.
[2:26:03] So before I delve into the application
[2:26:05] itself, I want to provide a brief
[2:26:08] overview on the subdivision process. The
[2:26:11] town municipal code requires
[2:26:13] subdivisions are heard at four meeting
[2:26:16] public meetings. The first is the
[2:26:18] conceptual review by city council which
[2:26:20] is where we are tonight. The second is
[2:26:23] the conceptual review by ADRB which is
[2:26:26] tenatively scheduled for August 31st.
[2:26:29] Uh at both these meetings, no actions
[2:26:32] are taken, just comments are received
[2:26:34] and feedback are received.
[2:26:36] Then the tenative map is considered by
[2:26:39] city council at a public hearing to uh
[2:26:42] approve conditionally approve or deny
[2:26:46] the application. And then finally, a
[2:26:48] final the final map will be considered
[2:26:50] by city council prior to its final
[2:26:53] recordation.
[2:26:57] The code specifically
[2:27:00] uh states that a conceptual review
[2:27:02] public hearing is intended to facilitate
[2:27:05] optimum subdivision design, reduce
[2:27:09] unproductive efforts by all parties, and
[2:27:12] bring about a better result for
[2:27:13] applicants, town residents, and city
[2:27:16] council.
[2:27:17] The process provides a form for citizens
[2:27:20] and the city council,
[2:27:22] excuse me, to provide preliminary
[2:27:24] feedback on issues relating to the
[2:27:27] subdivision's design and potential
[2:27:29] environmental issues.
[2:27:33] So, the property in question is located
[2:27:36] near the intersection of Tartan Trail
[2:27:38] Road and Crystal Springs Road.
[2:27:43] The existing lot is about 20 acres and
[2:27:47] the two proposed lots are or lot one is
[2:27:50] proposed at about 6 acres and lot two is
[2:27:53] about 14 acres.
[2:27:58] Now, many of you may be may recall that
[2:28:01] an eight lot vesting tenative map was
[2:28:04] approved in 2020 with a recorded
[2:28:07] development agreement. And the vesting
[2:28:10] tenative map is displayed on the screen
[2:28:12] right now.
[2:28:14] You'll see that a majority of that area
[2:28:17] consists of this lot that's being
[2:28:19] presented tonight. The lot is compatible
[2:28:22] uh in the the lot's configuration is
[2:28:25] compatible with the approved VTM and
[2:28:28] therefore there's no conflict processing
[2:28:30] multiple multiple maps and multiple
[2:28:32] steps. Uh the development agreement
[2:28:35] which has been recorded controls uh the
[2:28:38] development of this uh lot in front of
[2:28:40] you us tonight.
[2:28:44] Lot two aligns with lots five. The
[2:28:48] proposed lot two aligns with lots five,
[2:28:51] six, seven, and eight of the approved
[2:28:53] VTM.
[2:28:55] And so subdividing
[2:28:58] the lots tonight would allow the
[2:29:00] property owner to cleanly sell off uh
[2:29:03] lots five, six, seven, and eight
[2:29:05] separately from the rest prior to the
[2:29:09] recording of the final map of the VTM.
[2:29:15] The applica the application is
[2:29:17] consistent with the subdivision map act
[2:29:19] and the town subdivision ordinance. Uh
[2:29:23] the um it's anticipated that the
[2:29:25] proposed subdivision will rely on the
[2:29:28] previously adopted environmental impact
[2:29:31] report and public notices were mailed
[2:29:34] for the municipal code and I staff has
[2:29:36] not received uh comment to date.
[2:29:41] So staff's recommendation is to open to
[2:29:43] open the public hearing close the public
[2:29:46] hearing uh hear comments close the
[2:29:48] public close the public hearing and then
[2:29:52] again no action uh would be will be
[2:29:55] provided tonight but uh uh comments
[2:29:58] preliminary comments uh are welcomed.
[2:30:03] Thank you very much Natalie. U does
[2:30:05] anyone have any clarifying questions for
[2:30:07] Natalie?
[2:30:09] Seeing none, we will open the public
[2:30:12] hearing on this matter and um you can
[2:30:15] come up to the podium and give your
[2:30:17] comments and then you can um fill out a
[2:30:19] card later.
[2:30:22] But would you need to come up to the
[2:30:23] microphone? So um
[2:30:24] >> I think I think
[2:30:25] >> Sure.
[2:30:26] >> Oh,
[2:30:27] >> if you come up to the microphone then
[2:30:28] that way the people watching at home or
[2:30:30] watching later can hear you. Thank you.
[2:30:33] >> Oh,
[2:30:33] >> hi.
[2:30:34] >> Yeah.
[2:30:34] >> So my neighbor and I are here this
[2:30:36] evening and Okay,
[2:30:38] >> Vice Mayor Regston,
[2:30:40] >> we live on
[2:30:42] Hold on.
[2:30:44] >> If we could, if normally the applicant
[2:30:46] is not here, I understand they are in
[2:30:48] attendance and so we always want to let
[2:30:49] the applicant speak first in case they
[2:30:51] have any um comments or anything to
[2:30:52] share with you. I think a conclusion of
[2:30:54] their comments, we can take public
[2:30:56] comment and then at the conclusion of
[2:30:57] those public comments um we might want
[2:30:59] to allow the applicant some brief
[2:31:01] rebuttal time.
[2:31:02] >> I hi I don't have a comment. I just have
[2:31:05] a question. Oh, yes. We want to hear
[2:31:08] from the applicant first, but then
[2:31:09] you'll be able to ask your questions.
[2:31:10] >> Questions? Yeah.
[2:31:12] >> Great. Thank Thank you, city. I had that
[2:31:14] backwards.
[2:31:18] » Hello, my name is Brian Desler. Thank
[2:31:20] you for hearing on this item. Um,
[2:31:23] really, uh, this is something as, as
[2:31:26] most of you know, we did get approved in
[2:31:28] 2020. at the time uh really on an
[2:31:31] oversight on our part, we had always
[2:31:33] thought that these were two individual
[2:31:36] we had two APNs and so I think we had
[2:31:38] just uh uncorrectly assumed that we had
[2:31:41] two legal parcels but as we've been
[2:31:44] going through the process of of
[2:31:46] finalizing our uh agreements to develop
[2:31:50] the property uh we found out it's
[2:31:53] actually as Natalie stated it's only a
[2:31:55] single legal parcel as far as the county
[2:31:58] is concerned. So really administratively
[2:32:00] we're just trying to split this uh down
[2:32:03] the middle as it was approved in the
[2:32:05] vesting tenative map and and do it
[2:32:08] legally. So that's all I really had to
[2:32:10] say but thank you for hearing this.
[2:32:12] >> Great. Thank you so much.
[2:32:17] All right. Now I will ask if we have any
[2:32:20] public comments.
[2:32:28] So,
[2:32:30] we we live uh on Blue Bell Lane, which
[2:32:33] is a little culde-sac that looks many of
[2:32:36] my neighbors look down on Crystal
[2:32:39] Springs Road.
[2:32:40] And so, it's of great interest to us,
[2:32:43] this proposed development. And um to
[2:32:48] begin, I'd just like to know how many
[2:32:51] homes are proposed
[2:32:54] and um what how large they will be. Are
[2:32:59] they
[2:33:00] um individual homes? Because this
[2:33:05] development
[2:33:07] uh came up before maybe about 15 20
[2:33:09] years ago and it was proposed at that
[2:33:13] time by a developer to put in uh
[2:33:17] anominiums.
[2:33:19] But this is about 15 or 20 year more
[2:33:22] like 20 years ago.
[2:33:24] So um I know nothing about what is being
[2:33:27] proposed this evening. So if the
[2:33:32] developer or his representative is here
[2:33:34] this evening, you could just give me a
[2:33:37] little bit more information about again
[2:33:40] how many homes. Um how large the homes
[2:33:44] will be? Um, will the lots be half an
[2:33:49] acre or more? Or just general
[2:33:51] information so that we sort of get a
[2:33:55] visual idea in our minds what the
[2:33:58] completed development will look like.
[2:34:02] We're interested because we'll be
[2:34:04] neighbors. Thank you.
[2:34:06] >> Thank you. And again, the item tonight
[2:34:09] is a technicality just splitting the
[2:34:12] lots for because they um they have two
[2:34:14] APN numbers, but they legally are still
[2:34:18] one lot and all of the other details
[2:34:21] will um come in due time. Thank you. Um
[2:34:25] do we have any other public comments?
[2:34:27] >> Thank you, Vice Mayor. Um, I don't have
[2:34:29] any additional speaker cards on this
[2:34:32] item, but I'll just ask if there's
[2:34:33] anyone on Zoom who would like to provide
[2:34:35] comment on this item to raise their hand
[2:34:37] now.
[2:34:40] And I'm not seeing any raised hands.
[2:34:42] Thank you.
[2:34:43] >> Thank you. Um, would the applicant like
[2:34:46] to uh comment on the comments?
[2:34:55] » Yes. uh to address the question really
[2:34:58] at this time there's no proposed homes.
[2:35:01] So it's the vesting tenative map did
[2:35:03] approve uh eight total home sites on the
[2:35:06] entire 20 acre parcel. Four off of
[2:35:09] Tartan Trail Road and four off of
[2:35:11] Crystal Springs Road, but at this time
[2:35:15] um there's no housing proposed
[2:35:18] immediately.
[2:35:20] those uh when housing is actually
[2:35:22] proposed on both sides, those will go
[2:35:25] through the normal ADRB and uh council
[2:35:29] approval process. So, there'll be plenty
[2:35:31] of time at that point and that may be a
[2:35:33] year from now or four years from now. I
[2:35:36] don't know exactly when, but um that
[2:35:39] process will go through the normal town
[2:35:42] approval process. Um, and you will get a
[2:35:46] lot more information at that time as to
[2:35:48] the size of the homes, how big the lots
[2:35:50] are, and everything like that.
[2:35:54] >> Thank you, Mr. Destler. If there are no
[2:35:57] more public comments, I will now close
[2:35:59] the public hearing and bring it back to
[2:36:01] council to see if there are any
[2:36:04] comments.
[2:36:10] No comments. Um Um, okay. I uh would be
[2:36:15] open to a motion to approve this item.
[2:36:18] >> No. So move.
[2:36:20] >> Yes. So Vice Mayor Rexdale City Council,
[2:36:23] this is just conceptual review. So I
[2:36:24] think staff is just looking for input
[2:36:26] from the council if you have any uh
[2:36:28] questions or things you want to see when
[2:36:29] this comes back to you, but otherwise
[2:36:31] this will come back to you for approval,
[2:36:33] but future meeting.
[2:36:34] >> Great rookie rookie move here. Thank
[2:36:37] you. Um, so if anyone has any comments
[2:36:41] uh on the direction, uh, if not, I'll just say it seems to make sense to
[2:36:46] me that, um, when we had this item
[2:36:50] before us, it we we thought it was two
[2:36:52] lots all along, so it it does seem to
[2:36:54] make sense. So, if anyone has any
[2:36:56] different direction, speak now or
[2:36:58] forever. Hold your peace. All right.
[2:37:01] Thank you. And, uh, could someone call
[2:37:03] the mayor back? She's better at this.
[2:37:07] Thank you.
[2:37:12] I think you're the next you're the next
[2:37:13] item too right now. Okay. Thank you.
[2:37:43] While we're waiting, I'll just say I
[2:37:45] think it would be nice to have a village
[2:37:47] of like 2500 square foot homes and have
[2:37:50] city employees have first crack at
[2:37:52] buying them.
[2:37:55] >> We're welcoming back our mayor. Don't
[2:37:57] watch the recording. Mayor Cole
[2:37:59] [laughter]
[2:37:59] did not do well. Thank you. Welcome
[2:38:02] back.
[2:38:08] » Thank you. Um,
[2:38:11] so that was item
[2:38:14] 16. Item 16. Okay. Um,
[2:38:19] hello Natalie. How are you? Um item 16,
[2:38:23] conceptual review of subdivision of 119
[2:38:26] Reservoir Road into three parcels and
[2:38:28] dedication of public utility easements.
[2:38:32] Yes.
[2:38:33] >> Great. Thank you. Good evening, madame
[2:38:35] mayor and again fellow council members.
[2:38:38] So this next item is also a conceptual
[2:38:41] review of a subdivision at third at 119
[2:38:45] Reservoir Road. Uh,
[2:38:48] so I just went over this, but for the
[2:38:50] benefit of the mayor Cole, I'm just
[2:38:52] going to briefly uh go over the
[2:38:55] subdivision process um before I dive
[2:38:59] into the details of the actual
[2:39:00] application. The application is um
[2:39:04] subdivisions are heard at four public
[2:39:06] meetings. The first is conceptual review
[2:39:09] at city council. The second is
[2:39:11] conceptual review at ADRB. At both these
[2:39:14] meetings, neither no com no actions are
[2:39:17] taken, just comments are welcomed. And
[2:39:20] then the third meeting is a tenative map
[2:39:24] review by city council where council
[2:39:26] will approve, conditionally approve or
[2:39:29] deny the application. And then lastly is
[2:39:31] the final map which the council will
[2:39:34] approve or deny the application before
[2:39:36] the map actually gets recorded at the
[2:39:38] county.
[2:39:41] And again briefly just to summarize uh
[2:39:44] the intent of the conceptual review
[2:39:46] public hearing is to welcome comments
[2:39:48] from all parties, the public, the
[2:39:50] council to uh create a more streamlined
[2:39:55] um application process and a better
[2:39:58] result uh in the end for the applicant
[2:40:01] and um residents.
[2:40:06] Okay.
[2:40:08] So 119 Reservoir Reservoir Road is
[2:40:12] located where the red star is on the
[2:40:14] eastern side of Ish Hillsboro. Uh it's a
[2:40:18] culde-sac and the property is located at
[2:40:21] the near the end of the culde-sac.
[2:40:27] The existing lot is 5 1/2 acres
[2:40:32] and
[2:40:33] there are three lots being proposed. The
[2:40:36] first is 2.12 acres. The second is 2 and
[2:40:41] a/4 acres and lot three is 8/10 of an
[2:40:44] acre.
[2:40:46] The existing home is will be would be
[2:40:49] located on lot two and is proposed to
[2:40:52] remain
[2:40:55] and lots one and three would remain
[2:40:58] vacant as part of this subdivision, but
[2:41:00] they are suitable for uh future build.
[2:41:04] We did receive one public comment
[2:41:06] regarding the uh buildability of lot
[2:41:10] three and the uh the minimum lot size
[2:41:16] per our municipal code is based on this
[2:41:19] generally based on the uh how steep the
[2:41:22] lot is. So generally steeper the lot the
[2:41:25] bigger the minimum lot size.
[2:41:28] This minimum lot size for lot three is 6
[2:41:31] acres and it's currently being proposed
[2:41:33] at 0.8 acres 8 tons.
[2:41:42] And of course lots one and three the the shaded uh dark gray rectangles
[2:41:49] areas. If and when a property owner or a
[2:41:53] future developer decides to make
[2:41:55] improvements to this lot, they would be
[2:41:57] subject to the town's building permit
[2:42:00] process ADRB design review.
[2:42:05] So the project is consistent with the
[2:42:08] California subdivision map act and all
[2:42:11] other requirements of the town
[2:42:13] subdivision ordinance. the um it has
[2:42:17] been ter this is a a preliminary view.
[2:42:20] So uh the an environmental assessment
[2:42:24] will be required. It'll be either deemed
[2:42:28] uh exempt from SQA or the appropriate
[2:42:30] environmental document will be presented
[2:42:33] to council at the uh tenative map um
[2:42:36] meeting
[2:42:39] and public notices were mailed in
[2:42:41] accordance with the municipal code.
[2:42:45] So with that similar recommendation,
[2:42:48] open the public hearing, hear comments,
[2:42:50] close the public hearing, and again no
[2:42:52] action will be taken tonight, but uh
[2:42:56] staff and the applicants welcome
[2:42:58] feedback. And I believe we have members
[2:43:00] of the applicant team on Zoom with us
[2:43:03] tonight.
[2:43:04] >> Um thank you Natly Griven for the
[2:43:06] presentation. Do we have any um
[2:43:08] questions from the council before we go
[2:43:10] to public comments? Any clarifying
[2:43:13] questions? Yes, council member Chong.
[2:43:15] >> Um, thank you Natalie for your
[2:43:17] presentation and just so um we do have a
[2:43:21] public comments regarding lot three and
[2:43:23] I'm also curious about lot three because
[2:43:25] the size is quite different and in terms
[2:43:28] of what you just had explained which is
[2:43:30] that the location of lot three um has a
[2:43:35] steeper hills. Is that is that correct?
[2:43:39] >> No, it's it doesn't have a steeper
[2:43:41] slope. Um, I just was saying that our
[2:43:44] code uh sets minimum lot sizes based on
[2:43:48] how steep a property is. So based on how
[2:43:52] steep the the slope of the of this
[2:43:56] particular lot, the minimum lot size
[2:43:59] calculates out to 6/10 of an acre.
[2:44:02] That's what our code requires. I see.
[2:44:04] And the application is or this applica
[2:44:06] application is proposing 8/10 of an
[2:44:09] acre. So,
[2:44:10] >> so it so they're exceeding the minimum
[2:44:12] lot size.
[2:44:14] >> So, uh what what does that mean?
[2:44:17] >> Oh, the intent of the minimum lot size
[2:44:20] is to um one of the intents of the
[2:44:23] minimum lot size is to ensure that a
[2:44:26] property is buildable. If it's too
[2:44:28] sleep, if it's too steep, then the less
[2:44:31] area there is to build. So, um, because
[2:44:36] this applicant, uh, proposes 25% more
[2:44:40] than what our code requires, the
[2:44:43] property would be considered buildable
[2:44:45] per our code's requirements.
[2:44:47] >> I see. Thank you.
[2:44:50] >> Any additional clarifying question?
[2:44:52] Well, um, okay, we'll go to public
[2:44:54] comments.
[2:44:55] Um, are there any
[2:44:57] >> Mayor Cole? I was going to indicate uh
[2:44:59] because the applicant is on Zoom, we
[2:45:00] might want to start with them to uh
[2:45:02] state any comments and then once they're
[2:45:04] uh concluded with their comments, we
[2:45:06] would take general public comment and
[2:45:07] then if there's a lot of public comment,
[2:45:09] you might want to give the applicant
[2:45:10] some rebuttal time.
[2:45:11] >> Okay. And who is the applicant?
[2:45:15] >> Oh, Mr. Tom Vogle.
[2:45:17] >> Mr. Vera. Steven Vera.
[2:45:20] >> Tom Vogle.
[2:45:22] >> Where is Okay. He does not have his arm.
[2:45:24] Mr. Vogle, are you um ready to
[2:45:28] >> I'm not sure if he had anything
[2:45:30] prepared. Um but he is available to
[2:45:33] answer questions.
[2:45:34] >> Hello, council.
[2:45:36] >> Can you hear me on the spot?
[2:45:39] >> That's fine. That's fine. Natalie
[2:45:40] mentioned it.
[2:45:41] >> Hello to all. I'm gonna I'm gonna defer
[2:45:43] to my partner boss Steven Burner.
[2:45:47] >> Steve, can you raise your hand?
[2:45:48] >> Yes. Got it. Thank you.
[2:45:52] >> Okay. Hello, Mr. Burner. Yes, please
[2:45:54] proceed.
[2:45:57] » Hello, Mayor Cole and fellow council
[2:46:00] members. Thank you for your time this
[2:46:01] evening. Um, yes, I think what Natalie
[2:46:04] summarized what we're attempting to do
[2:46:06] was to create two potentially buildable
[2:46:08] lots from this um nice parcel at the end
[2:46:11] of Reservoir Road. And um I think uh lot
[2:46:16] one was an easy
[2:46:18] um amount of area to create and lot
[2:46:22] three we worked with uh Natalie and her
[2:46:24] team to figure out a way to get that to
[2:46:26] work and I think what we proposed does
[2:46:29] work and as as she mentioned we exceed
[2:46:31] the minimum lot size by 25%. Um so any
[2:46:35] further I'll wait to see if there's any
[2:46:37] comments and take questions at the end.
[2:46:38] Thank you.
[2:46:41] >> Okay. Any um additional
[2:46:45] comments or questions from the public
[2:46:47] either on Zoom or in the chambers?
[2:46:49] >> Yes. Uh thank you, Mayor Cole. Lawrence
[2:46:51] Frank.
[2:46:58] » Hello, Mr. Spring.
[2:47:03] » Thank you very much for the opportunity
[2:47:04] to address you. Um my name is Lawrence
[2:47:08] Frank. I have lived for the last 78
[2:47:10] years at 101 Reservoir Road down at the
[2:47:12] bottom. Um, I have to start out by
[2:47:15] saying I could not be more ignorant of
[2:47:18] real estate law or uh the process you're
[2:47:22] discussing tonight. I'm addressing
[2:47:26] strictly environmental considerations.
[2:47:29] When I was a kid, we lived at the bottom
[2:47:32] of Reservoir and Daniel and Marian
[2:47:36] Koshland lived up at the top and next to
[2:47:38] them at the very end was the Vista's
[2:47:40] greenhouse.
[2:47:42] In the early 1950s, Dan and Marian's
[2:47:46] daughter Phyllis and her husband husband
[2:47:48] Howard Freriedman built the house which
[2:47:51] is uh now at 119 Reservoir uh lot number
[2:47:56] two.
[2:48:00] At the time, Hillsboro was still very
[2:48:02] largely
[2:48:04] pristine, gorgeous oak forest. Right
[2:48:07] across the street from my home was a
[2:48:10] dense, dense forest of oak, oak trees,
[2:48:13] thick with poison oak and brambles. It
[2:48:15] was the most fabulous playground for a
[2:48:18] little boy.
[2:48:19] And then one day I was walking home from
[2:48:21] South Hillsboro school. I was probably
[2:48:23] in seventh in in second grade.
[2:48:27] and men with chainsaws were there
[2:48:29] cutting down the oak trees. Then they
[2:48:31] brought in bulldozers and they plowed
[2:48:34] the rest the the rest of that lot, very
[2:48:37] large lot, several acres in into dust
[2:48:40] and and built a few houses
[2:48:43] at the time. That was the most traumatic
[2:48:45] thing that ever happened to me.
[2:48:48] A few years later, I became a keen young
[2:48:50] na naturalist and I turned my efforts to
[2:48:52] the area between Black Mountain Road and
[2:48:55] Crystal Springs.
[2:48:57] A few years after that, the bulldozers
[2:48:59] appeared and the chainsaws appeared and
[2:49:00] that became the Tartan Trail
[2:49:02] neighborhood. That was the second great
[2:49:04] trauma of my life.
[2:49:07] As a result of both of those those
[2:49:09] events, I became a professional
[2:49:10] conservationist and have had a long
[2:49:12] career in wildlife biology.
[2:49:18] I'm absolutely gutted to hear that more
[2:49:22] development is planned for that
[2:49:23] neighborhood. So little of Hillsboro has
[2:49:26] any open space left. There is so little
[2:49:28] space left for wildlife.
[2:49:31] Plot lot three
[2:49:34] on Reservoir Road is covered with
[2:49:37] magnificent old Scots pine trees. Lots
[2:49:40] lot one is covered with immense
[2:49:42] eucalyptus. I don't much care for
[2:49:44] eucalyptus, but it's still a beautiful piece of piece of land. And
[2:49:50] here we're talking about destroying yet
[2:49:52] more of what little is left of
[2:49:54] Hillsboro's open space.
[2:49:57] Lastly,
[2:49:59] with the building of more houses up
[2:50:01] there, we'll have years of tremendous
[2:50:04] construction commotion going up and down
[2:50:06] the road.
[2:50:09] Workmen will be tossing their trash
[2:50:11] along the road as they do today. And
[2:50:14] once those houses are built, there will
[2:50:16] be at least double the traffic that's
[2:50:18] already al along that road.
[2:50:22] Nobody cares about the cranky comments
[2:50:25] of a crabby old man. But I will be
[2:50:29] gutted to see that land bulldozed and
[2:50:32] destroyed as so much of our Hillsboro
[2:50:35] has already been destroyed. and I don't
[2:50:37] want the quality of my life severely
[2:50:40] degraded by the traffic and the
[2:50:42] construction commotion and everything
[2:50:44] that goes along with it.
[2:50:46] >> Thank you.
[2:50:47] Mr. Frank. Um any
[2:50:51] um additional comments from the public?
[2:50:54] >> I have no additional speaker cards and
[2:50:56] there are no raised hands on Zoom. Thank
[2:50:58] you.
[2:51:01] >> Okay. Any um comments from the council?
[2:51:04] Yes, council member Council Member
[2:51:06] Crowley.
[2:51:07] >> Yes. Thank you. I believe is 119
[2:51:10] reservoir. Is that our Frank Lloyd
[2:51:12] Wright house?
[2:51:15] Oh, was that your house? Okay. I That's
[2:51:18] a wonderful treasure. Okay. So, now I
[2:51:20] know where you are. Um uh so, Mr. Frank,
[2:51:23] I I do absolutely understand what it is
[2:51:27] that you're saying. And one of the
[2:51:29] things that we struggle with on building
[2:51:30] and planning is um we it is mitigating
[2:51:36] the effects of construction on the
[2:51:39] neighbors because it is it's I
[2:51:42] understand it is upsetting when you see
[2:51:44] trees go. We try very hard and we do
[2:51:47] have ordinances in place that any tree
[2:51:50] that's bigger than uh 18 inches actually
[2:51:53] you need to have a permit to u remove.
[2:51:56] There are some trees that are considered
[2:51:58] nuisances um that are non-native, but we
[2:52:02] um our our building department works
[2:52:05] really really hard with the applicants
[2:52:08] and with the contractors to try and keep
[2:52:10] down the noise, keep down the dust,
[2:52:12] manage the parking, um manage the trash
[2:52:16] certainly, but it is it is difficult. Do
[2:52:20] understand that.
[2:52:23] Um I I will make a few comments if none
[2:52:26] of my colleagues um have a comments at
[2:52:28] this time and I'm sorry Adams. Yes,
[2:52:32] >> we're really not supposed to comment on
[2:52:35] comments, but I have seen deer every
[2:52:39] time I've been up at lot one. And that's
[2:52:43] another problem that we really need to
[2:52:46] address in Hillsboro. How can we
[2:52:48] maintain our integration with wildlife?
[2:52:52] It's what makes us special. So, I
[2:52:55] sympathize completely with how you feel.
[2:52:58] It's going to be hard, but this is
[2:53:01] something that I think has uh we have a
[2:53:04] legal obligation to respect along with
[2:53:08] working on maintaining our wildlife and
[2:53:12] being good stewards of what is a
[2:53:15] resource that we can't reclaim once we
[2:53:17] destroy it.
[2:53:24] Um I have um questions for um Natalie
[2:53:28] with regards to construction and
[2:53:30] traffic. Do we have a program in place
[2:53:32] in terms of how to handle that chaos
[2:53:36] that typically ensues?
[2:53:37] >> Sure. So um as as part of the
[2:53:40] subdivision
[2:53:42] application, not just tonight, but all
[2:53:44] the way through the next those four
[2:53:46] meetings that I mentioned, no
[2:53:48] improvements are being proposed. So, um
[2:53:53] the the houses the homes on lot one and
[2:53:56] three are conceptual only just to show
[2:53:59] that these lots could be buildable. But
[2:54:03] if this property were to be subdivided
[2:54:05] uh the final map were to be approved and
[2:54:08] the property is uh officially subdivided
[2:54:12] then any future property owner or
[2:54:14] developer would have to uh follow the
[2:54:17] town's um uh uh process for building
[2:54:22] permits and getting ADRB.
[2:54:27] And does this road um I I assume it
[2:54:30] spills onto another road and do we have
[2:54:33] a sense as to how it impacts the
[2:54:35] immediate neighborhood, not just Mr.
[2:54:37] Frank's home which is next to it, but
[2:54:40] how do what's the I see there we go.
[2:54:42] >> Yeah, the property is at the end of a
[2:54:44] culde-sac. So there are it'll probably
[2:54:47] mostly impact the across the street
[2:54:49] neighbors and the other residents along
[2:54:51] the road that um
[2:54:55] uh that you'd have to travel on to get
[2:54:57] to the lot.
[2:54:58] >> Mhm.
[2:55:04] And I assume the staff typically
[2:55:06] coordinates between neighbors in terms
[2:55:08] of how to handle some of the issues that
[2:55:10] would come up if now even the
[2:55:12] subdivision will create some traffic.
[2:55:14] But once you do the subdivision then
[2:55:17] obviously building ensues eventually.
[2:55:20] >> Yeah. So the subdivision won't create
[2:55:21] any traffic. It's a paper approval. So,
[2:55:24] there's no no physical improvements or
[2:55:27] changes associated with tonight's um
[2:55:30] agenda item or any future agenda items
[2:55:32] for the subdivision. Um but all four of
[2:55:36] those meetings are publicly noticed to
[2:55:38] neighbors within 500 ft of the property.
[2:55:40] And then of course once if if any of
[2:55:45] those either of the vacant lots are
[2:55:47] developed, then there are typical um
[2:55:49] noticing and neighbor engagement
[2:55:51] processes would take place.
[2:55:54] Okay. Um Mr. Frank, thanks for your comments
[2:55:58] and my thoughts along this line. It's
[2:56:01] always um a challenge for us making sure
[2:56:04] that we continue to do our best to
[2:56:07] preserve the character of the town while
[2:56:09] respecting property rights which are
[2:56:11] often beyond anything we can modify or
[2:56:15] change. um not only state but federal
[2:56:17] laws with regards to property rights.
[2:56:19] And the individual um owns this land and
[2:56:23] if he meets the criteria for subdivision
[2:56:26] um or at least a conceptual plan at this
[2:56:29] stage assuming other criterias are met
[2:56:32] going forward. Um we we're obligated to
[2:56:36] honor that individual's rights because
[2:56:38] we all want to preserve that rights for
[2:56:40] our own properties.
[2:56:42] Um, if you have a specific, if there's a
[2:56:44] specific comment or question that could
[2:56:46] be addressed to the owner or the
[2:56:51] I believe that's the contractor,
[2:56:52] architect,
[2:56:53] >> applicant. Yeah,
[2:56:54] >> the applicant. Sorry, the applicant. Um,
[2:56:56] that that would be this would be a good
[2:56:58] time. We seem to have a little bit of
[2:57:00] time to address that if there's
[2:57:01] something specific from the from the
[2:57:03] public that they would like to submit.
[2:57:06] Okay.
[2:57:09] All right. So, um
[2:57:12] do do you have any
[2:57:16] um I'm speaking to the applicant. Um do
[2:57:19] you have anything specific you would
[2:57:20] like to submit or um share with the
[2:57:23] council or with the community?
[2:57:30] » Yes, Mr. Burner.
[2:57:34] » Yes. Good evening. Um no, I have nothing
[2:57:37] further to add. um understand the public
[2:57:40] comment and that's uh something we do
[2:57:42] run across for many any new construction
[2:57:46] project is being mindful of preserving
[2:57:50] the natural habitat. They are uh some
[2:57:52] beautiful trees and that um both lot one
[2:57:55] and lot three and we would certainly if
[2:57:58] we move forward with doing any sort of
[2:58:00] proposed development um or or houses on
[2:58:02] those lots uh be mindful of that.
[2:58:06] >> Okay. Thank you. All right. I will now
[2:58:09] close um the public comments. And
[2:58:13] >> is there a motion to adopt the
[2:58:14] resolution approving and grading permit
[2:58:16] application for the construction of
[2:58:18] private improvement? I'm sorry. Sorry.
[2:58:20] That's not it. Which one
[2:58:22] is it? Okay. Up here.
[2:58:23] >> Yeah. Mayor Mayor Cole, this is just for
[2:58:25] conceptual review. So, I think staff's
[2:58:27] heard council's comments. Uh this will
[2:58:29] come back to you for eventual approval
[2:58:30] at a future meeting. But I think if
[2:58:32] staff has everything they need, um yes,
[2:58:34] we can next item. I was moving ahead,
[2:58:36] moving too fast. Sorry about that.
[2:58:38] Thanks, Natalie.
[2:58:47] Okay, next item on the agenda is item 17
[2:58:51] and Council Member Trong will recuse
[2:58:54] will be recused.
[2:58:58] And item 17,
[2:59:03] resolution approving the grading permit
[2:59:05] for constructural construction of
[2:59:07] private improvement at 2055 Forest View
[2:59:10] Avenue pursuant to categorical exemption
[2:59:14] and I'll be presented by Natalie Griven.
[2:59:18] >> Thank you, Madame Mayor. Hello again. So
[2:59:21] my last item tonight is the category 3
[2:59:24] for your consideration. The category 3
[2:59:27] grading permit application 2055 forest
[2:59:30] view as you just said. So the property
[2:59:33] is located at the northern area of
[2:59:36] Hillsboro.
[2:59:39] 2055 Forest View is between Eucalyptus
[2:59:42] and Oaks Drive.
[2:59:47] The property actually has an approved
[2:59:49] grading permit right now for a new
[2:59:52] single family residence pool and
[2:59:54] associated landscaping. They're
[2:59:56] currently in construction.
[2:59:58] However, um recently the applicants
[3:00:02] submitted a revision to uh install a
[3:00:06] sports court and replace what was going
[3:00:10] to be a deck with a with pavement. and
[3:00:15] the fill associated with both of those
[3:00:19] uh changes exceed 1,500 cubic yards of
[3:00:24] onhaul
[3:00:26] or fill. And so the code requires that
[3:00:31] anytime a project exceeds more than 1500
[3:00:35] cubic yards of onhaul of soil or offhaul
[3:00:38] of soil, city council approval is
[3:00:40] required.
[3:00:44] The gross quantities for the project as
[3:00:46] a whole now
[3:00:48] um are 535 cubic yards of cut, 3,70
[3:00:54] cubic yards of fill, and about 2500
[3:00:57] cubic yards of uh import.
[3:01:02] The
[3:01:04] uh the code requires that the grading
[3:01:06] and hauling hours are from 8:00 a.m. to
[3:01:08] 5:00 pm, but the contractor is not
[3:01:11] planning to start until at least 9 uh to
[3:01:14] minimize impacts to traffic.
[3:01:17] The hall route is will need to be um
[3:01:22] along
[3:01:24] excuse me to Oaks to Carmelita to El
[3:01:26] Camino Rial. Typically, they probably
[3:01:28] would have taken just Forest View
[3:01:30] straight to El Camino, but because of
[3:01:32] all the construction on El Camino, the
[3:01:35] turns are just not possible on many of
[3:01:37] the streets. Um,
[3:01:40] and then, uh, the contractor's schedule
[3:01:43] is to complete all the hauling and the
[3:01:46] grading before October 1st, which is
[3:01:48] when our grading moratorum is, major
[3:01:51] grading. Um and then uh the appropriate
[3:01:55] fees to recover staff time and vehicle
[3:01:58] impact fees have been collected
[3:02:01] and public notices were mailed uh in
[3:02:04] accordance with our uh municipal code
[3:02:06] and no public comment has been received
[3:02:09] by staff to date.
[3:02:14] The project has been deemed categor
[3:02:16] categorically exempt from SQUA.
[3:02:22] And with that, my recommendation is to
[3:02:26] open the public hearing, receive
[3:02:28] comments, close the public hearings, and
[3:02:31] then um adopt the grading approve the resolution
[3:02:36] for the grading permit application for
[3:02:38] 2055 forest view.
[3:02:41] >> Okay. Um, do we I think we'll have the
[3:02:45] council ask a specific question of you
[3:02:47] if there's any before we ask for public
[3:02:49] comment. Yes. Uh, Council Member Adams.
[3:02:53] >> Um, thank you, Natalie. I know we're
[3:02:56] just approving the uh grading permit. I
[3:03:01] have a question just for my own
[3:03:02] curiosity about the change from a deck
[3:03:05] to a sport court. Is there a permit
[3:03:09] required or noticing to neighbors uh
[3:03:12] when something like that happens?
[3:03:14] >> Yeah. So, so the sorry just to clarify
[3:03:18] the um the sport court is a completely
[3:03:21] new addition and then this deck is in
[3:03:26] between the deck was in between the
[3:03:28] proposed um between the residence and
[3:03:31] the pool and so I don't believe there
[3:03:35] was any uh special noticing specifically
[3:03:38] for the uh yes there was
[3:03:42] as I'm being told by the director of
[3:03:44] building and planning uh
[3:03:51] kind of
[3:03:52] >> okay so that part's done I guess uh so
[3:03:56] uh and I would add that all residents
[3:03:58] within 500 ft were notified and provided
[3:04:01] this uh as part of tonight's
[3:04:04] >> thank you
[3:04:07] >> um do you have a question Christine yes
[3:04:09] council member Crowley
[3:04:10] >> thank you so um 254 four round trip
[3:04:14] truck trips. That's a lot of trips. So,
[3:04:17] my concern though is about the sports
[3:04:20] court. Um, is it going to be pickle
[3:04:22] ball? And if so, um, is it going to
[3:04:26] disturb the neighbors? Um, are the
[3:04:28] applicants nearby or
[3:04:32] uh, I believe yes, there's there's
[3:04:34] members of the applicants team. I think
[3:04:36] we have our the contractor owner and
[3:04:40] civil engineer
[3:04:42] online.
[3:04:45] Do we have the applicant or
[3:04:47] representative online?
[3:04:48] >> And then yeah, Mayor Cole, what I'd
[3:04:50] recommend is I think if council has that
[3:04:52] question and we want to ask it of the
[3:04:54] applicant, we can go ahead and open the
[3:04:55] public hearing with the applicant
[3:04:57] present uh their comments and they can
[3:04:59] answer the question if they so desire
[3:05:00] and then we'll go to general public
[3:05:02] comment and then bring it back to see if
[3:05:03] the applicant wants to rebut any of the
[3:05:05] comments that were made.
[3:05:06] >> Okay. In which case, before we go to the
[3:05:08] public, I would like to ask my
[3:05:09] colleague, Vice Mayor Ragdale, if she
[3:05:11] has any questions of clarification. Uh
[3:05:13] just one question. The the the thing
[3:05:15] that I thought of when I saw this was oh
[3:05:17] no because of the El Camino
[3:05:19] construction. So it sounds like you have
[3:05:20] that in hand. Um I just want to um ask
[3:05:24] if they will be in good touch with uh
[3:05:28] the town because the construction
[3:05:30] changes their schedule sometimes. So
[3:05:33] just wanted to make sure that that would
[3:05:35] be a a fluid conversation.
[3:05:38] Uh sorry with the the El Camino project
[3:05:41] or with the
[3:05:42] >> Yes. the between the El Camino project
[3:05:44] and the contractor who's doing the
[3:05:46] onhauling.
[3:05:47] >> Oh yes.
[3:05:50] If the if we can if we can make sure
[3:05:52] that the contractors if with this uh
[3:05:56] plan is communicated to the El Camino
[3:05:59] Riale project team. I'm sorry if I'm
[3:06:01] misunderstanding.
[3:06:03] >> The opposite. So if there are changes to
[3:06:05] the Elino construction um schedule that
[3:06:09] the contractor is kept uh in
[3:06:12] >> Oh absolutely. Yeah.
[3:06:13] >> Um I can direct them to the the public
[3:06:15] website and also I meet regularly with
[3:06:17] the El Camino team so we can share any
[3:06:19] significant changes.
[3:06:21] >> Perfect. Thank you.
[3:06:23] >> Um thanks for that. Um I think we can
[3:06:24] now go to the applicant if they could
[3:06:26] comment and then we'll go to public
[3:06:28] comment. Do we have the applicant on on
[3:06:31] Zoom? Can I ask you can I ask you is it
[3:06:35] Travis or who
[3:06:37] >> is it Travis is the civil engineer of
[3:06:39] record. I'm not sure if he's uh Okay. So
[3:06:42] maybe if I can ask the applicant to
[3:06:43] raise their hand I can unmute you.
[3:06:50] Not seeing a raised hand. Okay. I have
[3:06:53] >> um I'm not sure of a representative.
[3:06:55] Here's Travis.
[3:06:56] >> Okay. Yeah. Travis looks okay. Um, are
[3:07:00] you the applicant or the Um,
[3:07:02] >> I'm I'm the civil engineer. Can you hear
[3:07:04] me? Okay.
[3:07:05] >> Yes. Uhhuh.
[3:07:06] >> I'm the civil engineer on the project.
[3:07:08] Um, it's it's always been coordinated at
[3:07:10] as sport court um on our plans, but um
[3:07:14] certainly I don't think there's any
[3:07:16] restriction in what you know sport
[3:07:18] activity could be played on on on this
[3:07:20] kind of surface.
[3:07:25] » And we didn't quite understand your
[3:07:26] response regarding the sports court. We
[3:07:29] didn't hear it. It didn't come up
[3:07:30] clearly. Could you just repeat it again,
[3:07:32] please? Of
[3:07:33] >> of course. It's always just been
[3:07:35] coordinated on our plans and and by on
[3:07:37] landscape's plans as a sport court.
[3:07:39] There's been no real mention of it of it
[3:07:41] being like a pickle ball court or what
[3:07:43] specific, you know, sports the the
[3:07:45] applicant is is going to uh use it for.
[3:07:51] >> Unknown at this time. Thank you.
[3:07:55] >> No, no problem.
[3:07:57] any other public comment on this project
[3:08:00] either in chambers or on Zoom?
[3:08:04] >> I don't have any speaker cards uh in
[3:08:06] chambers. I'll give it a moment on Zoom
[3:08:08] if there's anyone who would like to
[3:08:09] provide comment on this item
[3:08:13] and I'm I'm not seeing any raised hands.
[3:08:16] Thank you.
[3:08:18] >> And no additional public comments to be
[3:08:20] shared with the city council.
[3:08:24] Okay, I will close public comments and
[3:08:26] bring it back to the council. Um,
[3:08:32] any comments or discussion points for
[3:08:36] the council? Any council member would
[3:08:38] like to Yes, council member Adams. Uh, I
[3:08:42] want to resurrect a a a comment that was
[3:08:45] made by my colleague, Councilwoman Crow,
[3:08:50] uh, in a similar instance in a different
[3:08:52] property just one month ago, I think,
[3:08:56] uh, maybe two months ago, where a
[3:08:58] project is
[3:09:01] uh, already approved, probably already
[3:09:04] in process, and a a change happens, and
[3:09:08] it triggers a longer construction
[3:09:13] concept for the entire neighborhood. And
[3:09:16] uh I think uh council member Krich had a
[3:09:21] good notion when she brought this up
[3:09:23] that we need to figure out ways to
[3:09:25] discourage this from happening.
[3:09:27] Sometimes when you get into a project
[3:09:30] suddenly it looks completely different
[3:09:31] and you realize you need to make a
[3:09:33] change. But this kind of serial activity
[3:09:36] actually extends the pain for the
[3:09:40] neighborhood and really is not the truly
[3:09:45] uh way we want this to unfold. We want
[3:09:48] professionals to come in having thought
[3:09:50] through what's going to happen. And so I don't actually know what we can do,
[3:09:55] but it does seem like we need to uh
[3:10:00] not add another 200 truck trips to a
[3:10:05] project that's already uh on its way.
[3:10:11] What what concerns me is that we approve
[3:10:15] all of this dis disruption to the
[3:10:18] neighborhood with all these trucks and
[3:10:21] we don't know what this is being used
[3:10:22] for and what the impact of the court is
[3:10:25] on noise for the neighbors and
[3:10:29] so I just feel like I don't have enough
[3:10:31] information.
[3:10:36] Um yeah, you for I think if the um
[3:10:40] applicants or their representative have
[3:10:43] any comments. It looks like Paul is
[3:10:44] walking to the podium perhaps to add to
[3:10:48] this conversation.
[3:10:50] It would be helpful. Thank you.
[3:10:53] >> Hello Madame Mayor, members of the
[3:10:54] council. Natalie's been doing a great
[3:10:57] job by the way. Thank you, Natalie.
[3:10:58] [clears throat]
[3:10:59] >> Um so I just wanted to speak to this a
[3:11:01] couple of the reasons. First of all,
[3:11:02] this is a category three project. So the
[3:11:05] one that was referenced by
[3:11:07] >> What does that mean?
[3:11:08] >> So it's a project where there's more
[3:11:10] than 1500 yards of earth removed or
[3:11:12] moved.
[3:11:13] >> The project that was referenced by our
[3:11:16] commissioner a couple of months ago was
[3:11:18] a category 2 project that didn't meet
[3:11:20] the council threshold. It was started in good faith and then it uh crossed
[3:11:26] over. we had to stop work went through
[3:11:28] code enforcement and had them correctly
[3:11:30] fix those counts which did lead to a
[3:11:33] very long delay. Uh to the credit of the
[3:11:35] applicant and the civil engineer who we
[3:11:38] worked with for many years, they're
[3:11:40] disclosing probably a worst case
[3:11:42] scenario and that's great. I think the
[3:11:45] other reason why it's important for them
[3:11:47] to show everything correctly today is
[3:11:49] because there is a threshold of when the
[3:11:52] project needs to be done, which is
[3:11:54] October 1st for the grading portion. If
[3:11:57] we don't approve it and they don't have
[3:11:58] the time to move all of this material by
[3:12:00] October 1st, that means they're probably
[3:12:02] going to have to wait till next year in
[3:12:04] April when the grading moratorum stops.
[3:12:08] At this time, actually in two weeks,
[3:12:10] we're going to send out notifications to
[3:12:12] all the open projects that are not yet
[3:12:14] completed with grading, telling them
[3:12:16] that they have 30 days to get done,
[3:12:18] otherwise they have to button up. And
[3:12:20] that's because we don't want, uh,
[3:12:22] contractors to be grading during the
[3:12:24] winter. We know this is probably a El
[3:12:25] Nino year. It's very important to us.
[3:12:28] So, um, kudos to the team to try to make
[3:12:31] sure that all of these applicants are
[3:12:33] done timely because then we'll have
[3:12:35] folks saying that they can't work on
[3:12:36] their homes or their projects over the
[3:12:38] winter. So, I just wanted to add that
[3:12:40] point about category 3 in the reference
[3:12:42] to the other projects.
[3:12:43] >> Do do we do a followup somewhere in the
[3:12:45] middle or just to see what kind of
[3:12:48] progress when you're having this this
[3:12:49] amount of grading to potentially prevent
[3:12:52] slope
[3:12:54] >> erosion? uh category 3 projects uh have
[3:12:57] some of the highest engineering fees
[3:12:59] because we have to maintain them and
[3:13:00] watch them on a regular basis. Also,
[3:13:02] when we know that there's going to be
[3:13:04] significant rainfall, usually like half
[3:13:05] an inch, we have these required
[3:13:07] inspections from our inspectors that go
[3:13:09] out with uh forms to check off that
[3:13:12] everything is buttoned up in place
[3:13:15] during the winter. So, there is a lot of
[3:13:17] double checks uh in the system to make
[3:13:20] sure that they fully comply with Mr.
[3:13:23] plans that he's showing here.
[3:13:26] >> Um, yes, Council Member Adams.
[3:13:28] >> Thank you, Paul. And I I do want to uh
[3:13:32] at least make sure I'm clear about what
[3:13:34] I was saying. I'm not actually talking
[3:13:36] about not voting for this. I'm just
[3:13:39] making sure that we have a way of
[3:13:42] talking to applicants that says
[3:13:46] make your decisions
[3:13:48] once and try to keep it to that. Uh, and
[3:13:53] I I would suspect that this decision was
[3:13:57] not made
[3:13:59] uh because of geology or anything that
[3:14:03] changed on the lap. It was someone
[3:14:05] deciding, gee, you know, this would be
[3:14:07] better. So, I understand that we're all
[3:14:10] human, but it would be best if you come
[3:14:12] in with something that's finished in the
[3:14:15] future. This one I think we need to
[3:14:17] approve.
[3:14:20] » Yes. I think it's a Sorry.
[3:14:23] >> Go ahead. Yes.
[3:14:24] >> I think it's important. Is it a sports
[3:14:26] court is usually a basketball court. Is
[3:14:27] it a basketball court or is it a pickle
[3:14:29] ball court? Because I it's not that far
[3:14:32] from the property line and I don't want
[3:14:34] to live with, you know, the next 20
[3:14:36] years hearing from everybody on Jerry
[3:14:37] Lane and Forest View that they're going
[3:14:39] crazy.
[3:14:41] >> Well, um, could building and planning
[3:14:43] comment? Do we have any moratorum or
[3:14:46] restrictions on what kind of courts um
[3:14:48] an individual can have on their
[3:14:50] development?
[3:14:59] » Good evening, council. Uh currently we
[3:15:01] have no restrictions on the use of a
[3:15:04] sport court. Could be used for kickball,
[3:15:07] tennis, playing catch, riding bicycles
[3:15:10] and tricycles. Uh so currently we have
[3:15:13] no no direct no restrictions on the use
[3:15:17] except for lighting uh night night
[3:15:19] lighting or lighting of the court. We do
[3:15:21] have restrictions for that.
[3:15:23] >> There's there have been um outreach from
[3:15:26] the residents regarding the noise um the
[3:15:28] nuisance from um pickle ball. Do we give
[3:15:31] any recommendations? Granted, we can't
[3:15:34] mandate it, but do we make any
[3:15:35] recommendations to developers or
[3:15:37] contractors in terms of building the
[3:15:40] courts? You know, these are things that
[3:15:42] could mitigate some of the noise.
[3:15:44] >> To the best of my knowledge, we've just
[3:15:46] used uh you know, friendly neighbor
[3:15:48] advice uh discussing the issues between
[3:15:51] neighbors because currently, as I
[3:15:52] stated, we don't have a mechanism to
[3:15:54] mandate any change.
[3:15:58] There's one municipality in California
[3:16:00] we could look at this that requires 250
[3:16:03] ft from the center of the court to the
[3:16:05] property line.
[3:16:07] Although we don't we don't have that in
[3:16:09] our ordinance so we can't
[3:16:15] correct.
[3:16:16] Um any additional questions for building
[3:16:19] and planning as well as public works on
[3:16:22] this project?
[3:16:27] » Okay.
[3:16:28] >> Thank you.
[3:16:29] All right. So, do we have a
[3:16:32] motion? I I believe that's all the
[3:16:35] comments from the de. Do we have a
[3:16:37] motion to adopt the resolution approving
[3:16:39] the grading permit application for the
[3:16:40] construction of private improvement
[3:16:42] improvements at 2055 Forest View Avenue
[3:16:45] pursuant to categor categorical
[3:16:47] exemption under SQA guidelines?
[3:16:50] >> So moved.
[3:16:51] >> Do we have a second?
[3:16:53] >> Second.
[3:16:55] >> May we have the roll call the vote?
[3:16:58] >> Thank you. Adams,
[3:17:00] >> yes.
[3:17:01] >> Schwang is recused. Krillic,
[3:17:03] >> no. Ragdale,
[3:17:05] >> yes.
[3:17:06] >> Call,
[3:17:06] >> yes.
[3:17:07] >> Motion carries 31. Thank you.
[3:17:12] >> The next
[3:17:14] Thank you. Oh, we need to get
[3:17:17] we need we need to get a fellow council
[3:17:20] member, Marie Troy.
[3:17:23] We'll wait for her.
[3:17:55] item 18. The next item, resolution
[3:17:57] adopting the town of Hillsboro 2025
[3:17:59] urban water management plan and
[3:18:01] resolution adopting the 2025 water
[3:18:03] shortage contingency plan. And this will
[3:18:05] be presented by all Willis and Ed
[3:18:08] Cooney.
[3:18:09] >> Good evening again. Thank you, Madame
[3:18:11] Mayor, for letting us uh present this
[3:18:12] item. So, this item is something uh that
[3:18:15] comes back to city council every five
[3:18:17] years, and it's a pretty in-depth
[3:18:19] document. Uh I'm here just to say thank
[3:18:21] you all, especially to uh Vice Mayor
[3:18:25] Ragsdale, who sits on the BOSA board and
[3:18:28] also very carefully read this document
[3:18:31] over the weekend. Thank you for your
[3:18:32] comments and and reviewing that. Uh Ed
[3:18:34] and I have reviewed it for a few months
[3:18:36] now and sometimes when you review things
[3:18:38] over and over again it all looks the
[3:18:40] same. So thanks for your fresh eyes. Uh
[3:18:42] my job tonight is to answer questions
[3:18:45] but really introduce uh those that are joining us. So uh we have Tom
[3:18:50] Francis with BOSA who you all know Tom
[3:18:52] is here and also Danielle McFersonson
[3:18:55] with BOSA. uh they're the the group that
[3:18:58] really assists us and all of our other
[3:18:59] member agencies stay in compliance with
[3:19:01] the state as well as our partners at
[3:19:03] SFPU. Uh working on the document for us
[3:19:06] for quite a while is Mr. Cooney. And I
[3:19:10] I'd like to bring that up. He has a a
[3:19:12] pretty in-depth but precise PowerPoint
[3:19:16] uh that he'd like to go over with you to
[3:19:17] explain uh what you're being asked to
[3:19:20] review and approve tonight. So with
[3:19:21] that, Ed.
[3:19:26] Thank you. And good evening, Madame
[3:19:29] Mayor, city council members.
[3:19:37] There it goes.
[3:19:39] So, as uh Paul mentioned, this is an
[3:19:42] urban water management planning document
[3:19:44] that is updated every five years. Um
[3:19:48] when we last looked at our urban water
[3:19:50] management plan thoroughly, the um
[3:19:54] requirements for urban water management
[3:19:56] plans and water shortage contingency
[3:19:58] plans changed significantly.
[3:20:01] Uh during this 2025 cycle uh which we
[3:20:05] are actually completing now uh there
[3:20:08] have been um updates to the department.
[3:20:14] Can everybody hear me? Okay. I feel like
[3:20:15] my voice is coming in and out.
[3:20:17] >> Yes.
[3:20:17] >> Okay, great. Um, there have been updates
[3:20:20] to the 2025 urban water management plan
[3:20:23] guide book from DWR, but fortunately no
[3:20:27] uh significant or substantial changes to
[3:20:30] the actual California water code or the
[3:20:33] urban water management plan
[3:20:35] requirements.
[3:20:37] So, um much of what you uh may see in
[3:20:42] the 2025 urban water management plan is
[3:20:46] similar uh at least in context to the
[3:20:50] 2020 plan. And our goal today is to
[3:20:52] point out uh what might be significant
[3:20:55] water planning related changes during
[3:20:58] this presentation.
[3:21:02] So, this five-year water planning
[3:21:04] document uh describes uh things like
[3:21:08] water demand, supply reliability,
[3:21:12] um drought or water shortage management
[3:21:15] uh through 2050. Um it does project out
[3:21:20] that far.
[3:21:22] Now, I've mentioned what is called the
[3:21:24] water shortage contingency plan. That
[3:21:27] plan is uh a standalone
[3:21:30] document. It is part of the urban water
[3:21:32] management plan, but it is an appendices
[3:21:35] to the urban water management plan. It's
[3:21:37] a standalone document so that it can be
[3:21:40] amended without amending the urban water
[3:21:42] management plan and it will ultimately
[3:21:44] be adopted separately from the plan, the
[3:21:48] urban water management plan. And this
[3:21:50] will be a public hearing um for for both
[3:21:53] of those uh documents.
[3:22:00] So, Hillsboro as we mentioned has to um
[3:22:03] update its urban water management plan
[3:22:05] and water source contingency plan. Uh we
[3:22:07] do follow all the guidelines. Um we are
[3:22:11] conducting a duly noticed public hearing
[3:22:14] and assuming both plans are adopted, we
[3:22:17] will submit them to the department of
[3:22:19] water resources, the state library and
[3:22:22] uh interested parties.
[3:22:26] So, how does Hillsboro organize its
[3:22:28] urban water management plan? We follow
[3:22:30] the guideline, the DWR guidelines
[3:22:32] organization. Um, it makes it uh more
[3:22:36] easy to follow um more easy for uh
[3:22:39] easier for uh Department of Water
[3:22:42] Resources to kind of check our work and
[3:22:45] follow our work. Um again, we won't go
[3:22:48] through every uh chapter in our urban
[3:22:51] water management plan, but this is a
[3:22:53] list of those those chapters and the
[3:22:55] general content therein.
[3:23:01] Okay, let's get to the meat and
[3:23:02] potatoes.
[3:23:04] So, uh, Hillsbor, uh, from a normal
[3:23:10] water a year supply, um, perspective is
[3:23:15] doing very well. Um, we have plenty of
[3:23:18] supply to meet our normal what a year
[3:23:22] demands. Um, we have, uh, an ISG of
[3:23:27] 4.09 MGD, which is 2 million CCF per
[3:23:31] year.
[3:23:33] uh CCF being uh what a unit 748 gallons.
[3:23:37] Um and you know our demand is is is
[3:23:41] roughly half that. Um
[3:23:44] it's important to note however that our
[3:23:47] current demand is historically low. So
[3:23:50] this graph is a graph of our water use
[3:23:53] overlaid upon um recent droughts. Uh the
[3:23:58] most recent three being the '07 drought,
[3:24:02] the 2013 drought, and the 2020 droughts.
[3:24:04] And as you can see, uh the blue line
[3:24:07] being um our usage, that blue line dives
[3:24:11] pretty pretty precipitously from 2007
[3:24:17] uh 2007 to uh to present. Um
[3:24:22] so typically what you'll see is a
[3:24:24] drought rebound. Um, you can see that
[3:24:27] drought rebound in the 1987 drought
[3:24:30] where water drops and then slowly climbs
[3:24:33] back up. Uh, because of our backtoback
[3:24:36] droughts, we haven't seen a drought
[3:24:37] rebound. Um, you know, the $100,000
[3:24:41] question is, will we see a drought
[3:24:43] rebound? And I don't have a magic ball,
[3:24:45] uh, crystal ball. Um, but we have to,
[3:24:48] uh, we have to work with where we are in
[3:24:51] terms of our water use projections.
[3:24:58] And it's important to note that future
[3:25:00] demand by Hillsbor will be at least
[3:25:04] somewhat dependent upon
[3:25:06] um future weather cycles. Again, if
[3:25:09] there's another drought in the near
[3:25:10] term, one could expect water use would
[3:25:13] continue to be lower. If not, then one
[3:25:16] might expect the water could water use
[3:25:19] could rebound.
[3:25:23] This slide tells you a lot about what
[3:25:25] you already know about Hillsbor. Um,
[3:25:28] stable community, 100% served by the San
[3:25:32] Francisco uh uh water system. Um we have
[3:25:37] about 4,300 service connections and
[3:25:40] we've already talked about the water use
[3:25:43] but you know um speaking to uh future
[3:25:47] projections we would not expect
[3:25:50] development or population increase to be
[3:25:54] this the primary driver or for or um an
[3:25:58] increase in water use.
[3:26:01] Okay. So um we were talking about normal
[3:26:04] water use during normal water years.
[3:26:06] This is um this slide addresses what is
[3:26:10] called dry year reliability.
[3:26:14] So the the takeaway from this slide is
[3:26:17] that um all the information provided um
[3:26:22] by the SFPC and BOSA related to um water
[3:26:27] supply projections
[3:26:30] um during uh a single and multi- dryear
[3:26:33] period um indicates
[3:26:36] uh along with our projected water use
[3:26:39] that over the next five years or so uh
[3:26:43] Hillsburg is in reasonably good shape to
[3:26:46] handle a um a planned drought. Um
[3:26:53] it, you know, the longer the drought
[3:26:56] goes on, the more difficult it becomes,
[3:26:58] of course, but given our best
[3:27:02] understanding, uh we are in a good
[3:27:04] position to um weather a multi-year
[3:27:08] drought in the near term.
[3:27:14] the longer term past 2030 becomes um a
[3:27:17] little more unclear. Uh you all have
[3:27:19] heard about the Bay Delta Plan. I know
[3:27:22] um the Bay Delta Plan in essence
[3:27:25] requires or could require um the uh
[3:27:32] the diversion or the actually the it
[3:27:36] would it would require that certain
[3:27:38] amount of water not be diverted for use
[3:27:41] by
[3:27:43] urban water suppliers including San
[3:27:44] Francisco. Um so
[3:27:48] um
[3:27:50] the Bay Delta plan is uh in litigation.
[3:27:55] Um there is also what's called a
[3:27:58] voluntary agreement negotiations
[3:28:01] and um it is anyone's guess how that is
[3:28:05] going to unfold or when it's going to
[3:28:08] unfold. Um for the next five years we
[3:28:11] seem to be in good shape. Um potentially
[3:28:14] in the 2030 cycle, we may know more
[3:28:17] information and when that urban water
[3:28:20] management plan update comes back to
[3:28:22] city council, there could be more
[3:28:24] information uh related to this. Right
[3:28:27] now, we just don't know. The picture is
[3:28:28] unclear. As Paul mentioned, our experts
[3:28:34] uh are in the room and they can answer
[3:28:35] any questions about uh this, you know,
[3:28:38] bigger regional picture. Hillsboro
[3:28:40] doesn't have any control over it. We um
[3:28:43] can only plan around what we know.
[3:28:48] Oops, and I turned it off.
[3:28:52] Okay. And regarding public review, we
[3:28:54] are following the um the public review
[3:28:57] and adoption process. Uh we have issued
[3:28:59] a 6-day notice. The draft has been
[3:29:02] available on the website. uh newspaper
[3:29:04] notices have gone out and we are
[3:29:06] conducting a public hearing uh this
[3:29:08] evening for both the water shortage
[3:29:11] contingency plan and the urban water
[3:29:12] management plan.
[3:29:20] Uh briefly about the water shortage
[3:29:22] contingency plan. It is a planning
[3:29:24] document um with three sections and I
[3:29:29] want to point out that um the water
[3:29:33] shorts KYC plan is really a um
[3:29:37] a blueprint or it's more of a a game
[3:29:41] plan for water shortage events um that
[3:29:46] are broken up into kind of 10% stages
[3:29:50] that's based on uh DWR requirements And
[3:29:53] um those are um those stages and the
[3:30:01] recommended actions related to the
[3:30:02] stages are um kind of a guideline. Um
[3:30:05] they are what we've used in the past,
[3:30:08] what we found to um potentially work. Um
[3:30:11] but city council can can choose among
[3:30:14] those um at the time at the event uh
[3:30:17] during a water shortage event.
[3:30:20] What's really great is the town has
[3:30:23] compiled a historical record of
[3:30:25] responses
[3:30:27] to all the drought events that you saw
[3:30:29] in that earlier slide.
[3:30:31] Got a lot of history, have a lot of um
[3:30:34] tools in the tool belt that have been
[3:30:36] used to work through um significant
[3:30:39] drought events. So, uh you know, we're
[3:30:41] about as prepared as one could be in
[3:30:43] terms of um what a shorts contingency
[3:30:45] planning.
[3:30:48] And these are the six standard water
[3:30:51] shortage levels that I mentioned.
[3:30:58] Lastly, um, DMM's, demand management
[3:31:02] measures, what we all like to call water
[3:31:04] conservation. I don't know why they have
[3:31:06] to be called demand management measures,
[3:31:07] but they are more words. Um,
[3:31:11] one of our most significant that um, uh,
[3:31:14] the town invested in um, in uh, 20078
[3:31:19] uh, sorry 1718 period was uh, AMI um,
[3:31:24] automated metering infrastructure
[3:31:26] otherwise known as smart meters. Every
[3:31:29] uh, Hillsboro resident has one. This is
[3:31:32] a great tool for water management. It
[3:31:34] turns every resident, every property
[3:31:37] owner into a water manager. You can see,
[3:31:40] one can see what use uh every hour um
[3:31:45] you know what what one's water use was
[3:31:48] uh every hour, daily, weekly, monthly um
[3:31:52] and also receive um alerts, high water
[3:31:56] use, possible leak alerts. It's a great
[3:32:00] water conservation tool in addition to
[3:32:02] the other um conservation tools and
[3:32:05] rebate programs that the town offers its
[3:32:08] residents. Um
[3:32:11] so with that, that covers the majority,
[3:32:14] not all, but a majority of the
[3:32:16] significant portions of the water shorts
[3:32:19] contingency plan and the urban water
[3:32:20] management plan, but can answer
[3:32:22] questions about anything in the plan uh
[3:32:24] that you have before we go into the uh
[3:32:26] public hearing.
[3:32:28] Thank you. Thanks for the presentation.
[3:32:31] Um, any questions from the DES?
[3:32:35] No, Council Member Chwank.
[3:32:38] >> Um, I don't have any questions. Thank
[3:32:40] you Ed uh for the presentation and it is
[3:32:42] really really rewarding to hear that our
[3:32:46] town is prepared in terms of the
[3:32:48] shortage and and the sort of the plans
[3:32:51] to meet the 10% the 20% you know all the
[3:32:56] scenarios all the playbooks that we are
[3:32:59] prepared and I think that is critical uh
[3:33:02] for a town and as on the council we
[3:33:05] applaud you for having those plans and
[3:33:07] have those live through experience that
[3:33:09] we know are really good practices. So,
[3:33:12] thank you.
[3:33:13] >> Thank you. And uh
[3:33:15] public works director has also lived
[3:33:17] through several of these. So,
[3:33:21] we definitely have experience.
[3:33:24] Um we know we we appreciate our public
[3:33:26] work director very much. Um any I will
[3:33:30] ask any public comment at all um on the
[3:33:34] >> Thank you. I'll give it a moment. um on
[3:33:36] Zoom. I don't have any speaker cards,
[3:33:38] but
[3:33:40] I'm not seeing any raised hands. Thank
[3:33:42] you.
[3:33:43] >> Okay, we'll come back to the council.
[3:33:44] Any additional comments from the
[3:33:46] council?
[3:33:47] >> Yes, Vice Mayor Rexdale.
[3:33:49] >> Uh just some comments. Um first of all,
[3:33:52] as I told uh Director Willis, it's so
[3:33:55] exciting to like read these big things
[3:33:58] and and know things already. Um, but I
[3:34:01] really wanted to take to thank uh Tom
[3:34:03] Francis and Danielle McFersonson for
[3:34:06] staying through our meeting and for
[3:34:07] being here to answer questions. Um, but
[3:34:10] also for laying the groundwork for this
[3:34:14] document, both of these documents at
[3:34:16] BOSA and giving us lots of tools that we
[3:34:19] can just plop in. And um, we very much
[3:34:22] appreciate that. And the um, the demand
[3:34:25] study, which I know was very timely to
[3:34:28] get that done. Uh so all of us, all of
[3:34:31] the member agencies could put their um
[3:34:33] water management plans together. So uh
[3:34:36] thank you. As I've said before, Bosa has
[3:34:38] a staff of nine. [laughter] It is you
[3:34:42] would not know it. It's it's incredible
[3:34:44] the quality of the work. Um and um I
[3:34:48] wanted to thank thank you guys um Ed and
[3:34:51] Paul for leading the way with the AMI
[3:34:55] and the various conservation programs,
[3:34:58] subscriptionbased programs and um and
[3:35:02] also for meeting those conservation
[3:35:04] targets that we had back in I think it
[3:35:06] was 2020 which made the report a little
[3:35:08] bit easier. Well, we don't have to do
[3:35:10] that. We did that. We did that. So, um,
[3:35:12] you know, thank you for encouraging the
[3:35:14] residents to, uh, conserve and to take
[3:35:16] part in the programs and the water smart
[3:35:20] program. There's nothing like it. You
[3:35:22] find out there's a leak, you get the
[3:35:24] notification immediately and um, it's
[3:35:27] fantastic. So, I just want to thank you
[3:35:30] for the great work.
[3:35:32] >> Thank you.
[3:35:35] I see no additional comment.
[3:35:36] Do we have a motion? Um, yeah. to adopt
[3:35:40] the resolution.
[3:35:43] >> Well,
[3:35:44] >> oh, I'm sorry.
[3:35:45] >> Uh, I should say that uh it's a um it's
[3:35:48] a public hearing requirement.
[3:35:52] >> We are
[3:35:53] >> we did public hearing. No one
[3:35:55] >> Were there any comments from the public
[3:35:57] that I missed?
[3:35:59] >> No.
[3:36:01] >> Okay.
[3:36:01] >> Thank you. I want to be sure.
[3:36:03] >> Yeah. Well, thanks for the presentation
[3:36:04] again and we will move to um we'll have
[3:36:08] a motion to adopt the resolution.
[3:36:11] >> So move second.
[3:36:14] >> City clerk, may we have the vote?
[3:36:17] >> Thank you. We're confirming we're we're
[3:36:19] adopting both resolutions to um adopt
[3:36:22] the water shortage contingency plan and
[3:36:25] the uh urban water management plan.
[3:36:27] >> Correct.
[3:36:28] >> Thank you. All right. I'll go ahead and
[3:36:30] take the roll call vote. Adams.
[3:36:32] >> Yes. Schwang,
[3:36:33] >> yes.
[3:36:33] >> Crowig,
[3:36:34] >> yes.
[3:36:34] >> Ragdale,
[3:36:35] >> yes.
[3:36:35] >> Paul,
[3:36:36] >> yes.
[3:36:37] >> Thank you.
[3:36:41] » Um, the next item on the agenda, I
[3:36:44] chuckle because this is always our
[3:36:46] favorite. Item 19, designating a voting
[3:36:48] delegate, an alternate voting delegate
[3:36:50] till 2026, League of California City's
[3:36:53] annual conference and expo September
[3:36:55] 23rd to 25th, 2026.
[3:36:58] And yes,
[3:37:00] >> we'll make this we'll make this quick.
[3:37:02] So um at the uh conference uh in
[3:37:05] September there is the uh general
[3:37:08] assembly meeting on the last day. Uh so
[3:37:10] there will be three of you there on the
[3:37:12] last day in the morning at 8:30. Um
[3:37:14] council member Schwang, uh Mayor Cole
[3:37:17] and Council Member Kwick. Um as of
[3:37:19] today, we actually just got the packet
[3:37:21] as I was sitting here. There is one
[3:37:22] resolution for consideration of vote. Um
[3:37:25] so I can send out that packet. Um, but
[3:37:27] we just need to designate a voting
[3:37:29] delegate and then if you'd like up to
[3:37:31] two up to two alternate voting delegates
[3:37:35] by motion and I need to submit that to
[3:37:37] Cal Cities um for uh it has to take
[3:37:41] place by a by a motion and vote. So,
[3:37:44] >> okay. Um, I intend to be there as uh the
[3:37:49] dele one of the delegates and
[3:37:51] >> council member Cru.
[3:37:53] >> I'm happy to be the alternate because I
[3:37:55] do not believe my colleague would like
[3:37:57] to. [laughter]
[3:37:59] >> This is great. We actually have more
[3:38:00] volunteers than usual. Um, so do we I
[3:38:04] don't see any um do we have any public
[3:38:06] comments on this issue?
[3:38:09] >> None.
[3:38:10] >> I don't believe there's any public
[3:38:11] comment. I'm not seeing any. Okay.
[3:38:13] >> Do we have a motion to
[3:38:15] >> move?
[3:38:16] >> Approve.
[3:38:17] >> And do we have
[3:38:19] >> We do have a second. And those in favor?
[3:38:22] >> Looks like Does it look like we have
[3:38:23] Mayor Coen as the delegate and then
[3:38:26] Council Member Krollic as the alternate?
[3:38:28] All right. Thank you.
[3:38:29] >> Correct.
[3:38:30] >> Okay. All those in favor?
[3:38:32] >> I I
[3:38:35] >> All right. Motion carries. Thank you.
[3:38:37] >> Unanimous vote. Um, next item 20. um
[3:38:40] discussion to establish a nonprofit or
[3:38:43] other program to accept and distribute
[3:38:45] donation funds and this will be
[3:38:47] presented by assistant city manager
[3:38:49] Mandy Brown.
[3:38:51] >> Thank you, Mayor Cole. Um this is a
[3:38:54] offshoot from council goal setting
[3:38:56] discussions that we talked about in
[3:38:57] February as well as from our long-term
[3:39:00] funding um discussions more recently.
[3:39:02] And so I'm here tonight to present a
[3:39:04] menu of options including the
[3:39:06] establishment of a nonprofit, a couple
[3:39:08] of different avenues we could go with
[3:39:10] that um as well as some other
[3:39:12] alternatives as sort of interim measures
[3:39:14] for council consideration and direction.
[3:39:18] Um the discussion at the goal setting
[3:39:20] was really focused around the formation
[3:39:22] of a nonprofit to establish funding
[3:39:25] mechanisms to support various town
[3:39:27] projects. Some of that were were
[3:39:29] mentioned were Memorial Day parade, 40
[3:39:31] Baywood and and other capital projects
[3:39:33] the town is facing.
[3:39:36] Currently, the town accepts donations
[3:39:38] and provides a taxexempt letter to the
[3:39:40] donors. Um the town of Athetherton has
[3:39:43] been brought up a few times and so this
[3:39:44] is the exact same approach that's
[3:39:46] employed by the town of Athetherton for
[3:39:48] their town hall fundraising efforts.
[3:39:49] There is a little bit more to that story
[3:39:52] which I'll cover in a second. Um but
[3:39:54] just to clarify that we we do have an
[3:39:56] established process that works um for
[3:40:00] most cases right now to accept
[3:40:02] donations.
[3:40:05] They'll outline these sort of three
[3:40:07] options and really the difference is the
[3:40:09] level of control that the council wants
[3:40:11] to have and the level of specificity
[3:40:14] around what those funds are used for or
[3:40:16] earmarked for and then the level of
[3:40:18] resources required really related to
[3:40:20] staff time. Some funding um especially
[3:40:23] when we're talking about the taxexempt
[3:40:24] nonprofit um and then some sort of lower
[3:40:27] cost options in terms of uh the amount
[3:40:32] of time that it takes. um but that could
[3:40:34] add some clarity around our current
[3:40:37] processes.
[3:40:39] So, this is the most complicated one and
[3:40:41] the staff report was very long, so thank
[3:40:44] you for for getting through it, but I
[3:40:45] just wanted to make sure that we
[3:40:46] outlined all of the options and all the
[3:40:49] considerations. And so, I'm not going to
[3:40:51] read necessarily all of this, but uh
[3:40:54] really the process for it is you
[3:40:56] establish the purpose. What is the
[3:40:57] nonprofit going to be in support of? Is
[3:41:01] it going to be specific to 40 Baywood
[3:41:04] for example? Um or is it going to serve
[3:41:06] a multitude of interests? And so what
[3:41:08] does that purpose statement look like?
[3:41:10] Um the filing of the paperwork. Uh so
[3:41:13] name of incorporation, articles of
[3:41:15] incorporation, organization, bylaws, and
[3:41:17] then the board of directors. So this is
[3:41:20] uh where it gets a there's a little bit
[3:41:22] more for you to to think and give us
[3:41:24] direction on is if it's under the
[3:41:27] umbrella of the town and members of the
[3:41:30] council. some or all are serving as the
[3:41:33] governing board, then it becomes like a
[3:41:35] Brown Act commit, Brown Act uh body. And
[3:41:38] so that will require the posting
[3:41:40] requirements, noticing open to the
[3:41:42] public. It's just a li little bit more
[3:41:44] labor intensive, but it does allow you
[3:41:46] to retain that level of control. Um, and
[3:41:49] so that's again just a trade-off that I
[3:41:51] wanted to flag for your consideration.
[3:41:55] Um the are taxexempt donations and so
[3:41:58] that can be very attractive to people
[3:41:59] that are uh making these donations. And
[3:42:01] then there's the annual tax filing and
[3:42:03] reporting requirements. This would be a
[3:42:06] lift from town staff whether it's city
[3:42:08] manager's office in consultation with
[3:42:09] finance and city attorney's office.
[3:42:12] There is some upfront costs to the
[3:42:14] establishment of a nonprofit. Um and so
[3:42:16] again, those are just uh we've we've
[3:42:18] heard sort of informal quotes. I didn't
[3:42:21] put them in the staff report. Um, some
[3:42:23] cities had uh estimated around $10,000
[3:42:26] for that initial filing. Um, but don't
[3:42:28] quote me on that. I I it's just what
[3:42:30] other cities said. I have we don't
[3:42:32] exactly know what that initial startup
[3:42:34] costs or what the staff time necessarily
[3:42:36] would be involved. Um, we just wanted to
[3:42:39] flag that for consideration.
[3:42:42] So, uh, advantage obviously greater
[3:42:45] flexibility, generational of goodwill
[3:42:47] from the community members. are probably
[3:42:49] more likely to donate to a nonprofit
[3:42:51] rather than a government entity. Um, but
[3:42:54] there obviously are some disadvantages
[3:42:55] that I've already pointed out, the
[3:42:57] incorporation, uh, corporate
[3:42:59] formalities, the Brown Act adherence,
[3:43:02] um, in the staff time that goes into
[3:43:04] that. Um, and then another comment that
[3:43:06] we'd heard was competition with other
[3:43:07] nonprofits in the community for
[3:43:09] fundraising. So making sure that
[3:43:11] whatever the purpose statement ends up
[3:43:12] being, which we don't need to
[3:43:14] necessarily discuss this evening, um but
[3:43:16] just making sure that that is thought uh
[3:43:19] out so it doesn't compete with existing
[3:43:21] nonprofits in town.
[3:43:25] So going back to the Athetherton
[3:43:26] example, so the town of Athetherton did
[3:43:29] accept donations as a government entity
[3:43:32] uh for their civic center. There was
[3:43:35] also a third-party nonprofit that formed
[3:43:38] called Athetherton. Now, this was formed
[3:43:40] by residents. Um, and they really just
[3:43:42] existed for this brief period of time to
[3:43:46] do the fundraising for this capital
[3:43:48] project and then they ceased to exist.
[3:43:50] Um, so they didn't have to adhere to any
[3:43:52] of the Brown Act because it was
[3:43:53] completely separate. They did all of
[3:43:55] their own filings and fundraising and
[3:43:57] they were able to really sort of control
[3:43:59] that purpose statement. This is an
[3:44:01] example of one that's very narrow in
[3:44:03] scope and obviously in term of it its
[3:44:06] life because it no longer exists.
[3:44:10] Another example are sort of the typical
[3:44:12] friends of model. Um and so this is one
[3:44:15] uh that that I was familiar with. It's
[3:44:17] again another third-party nonprofit but
[3:44:19] they their purpose is to exist to fund
[3:44:22] raise for city projects specifically. uh
[3:44:25] while their purpose is to support all
[3:44:28] parks and programming and activities,
[3:44:31] they also fundra for specific projects.
[3:44:34] And so they have um on their website
[3:44:36] something for general fund programming.
[3:44:39] They also have one specifically for dog
[3:44:40] park, skate park, track and field. And
[3:44:43] so they have um specific uh carveouts
[3:44:46] that people can donate to. So this is a
[3:44:48] another option sort of in comparison to
[3:44:51] the Athetherton model where it can be
[3:44:52] broader but also have specificity for
[3:44:55] specific projects. And so I just wanted
[3:44:58] to share this as another alternative.
[3:45:02] Uh the other options are a little bit
[3:45:05] simpler. We do have a policy uh on
[3:45:08] memorial and donation policy and this is
[3:45:10] really related to fixtures like benches.
[3:45:14] Um, and so what we could do is we could
[3:45:17] amend that policy to add some
[3:45:20] specificity for how we would receive
[3:45:22] those uh funds that are donated um and
[3:45:26] establish any sort of guidelines. So we
[3:45:28] could amend this existing policy is one
[3:45:31] option.
[3:45:33] Obviously, it's very low barrier to
[3:45:35] entry to amend a policy, but it doesn't
[3:45:38] address the concern um that people may
[3:45:41] be more likely to donate to a nonprofit
[3:45:42] entity rather than a governmental
[3:45:44] entity.
[3:45:46] kind of similar. This could be a
[3:45:48] separate not necess not necessar
[3:45:51] necessarily a policy. It could just be
[3:45:53] guidelines that the town staff uses um
[3:45:56] based on council direction to just
[3:45:58] define the process and accountability
[3:46:00] measures, transparency protocols, how requests are submitted just to so
[3:46:05] that we have something in writing for
[3:46:07] how those donations can or will be used.
[3:46:14] So, it's more of a staff process. So I
[3:46:17] it was more about level of control and
[3:46:19] the involvement that the city council um
[3:46:21] wants to have in this u this would again
[3:46:24] be just a very uh easy thing to
[3:46:26] implement but to allow that more clarity
[3:46:29] on the process.
[3:46:32] This is just a summary slide of the sort
[3:46:34] of highlevel advantages or disadvantage
[3:46:36] for when you have your discussion. Um
[3:46:39] and I know I went over that very quickly
[3:46:40] but um there's a lot more in the staff
[3:46:42] report. So, I'm happy to answer any
[3:46:44] questions or expand on any of the
[3:46:46] points. Thank you.
[3:46:49] >> Thank you. Um,
[3:46:52] any questions? Any additional questions
[3:46:54] to assistant city manager on this? Yes,
[3:46:58] council member Trunk.
[3:47:00] >> And thank you, Mandy, for u your
[3:47:02] presentation. Um help me understand that
[3:47:05] uh in terms of all three uh options um
[3:47:09] in terms of
[3:47:13] uh residents um interest or inclination
[3:47:16] to um to donate. I I think that you
[3:47:21] earlier on uh option one that is a
[3:47:23] nonprofit is appealing to the residents
[3:47:26] when they um donate to a nonprofit
[3:47:30] versus the other two is the u is the
[3:47:34] government agency. Is that correct?
[3:47:37] that that's sort of an informal
[3:47:40] anecdotal um point, but we also may just
[3:47:45] need more awareness that the town can
[3:47:48] accept tax exempt donations in most
[3:47:50] cases. Um so it could be an education
[3:47:54] thing, but I also think optically people
[3:47:56] tend tend to be more likely to donate to
[3:47:59] a nonprofit rather than a government
[3:48:00] agency. But if we had something like
[3:48:02] donor guidelines or a policy on specific
[3:48:05] projects for example. So we said this is
[3:48:07] how you donate to support the town's
[3:48:10] 40 baywood for example. Um maybe that
[3:48:14] would fill that sort of gap um that
[3:48:16] there is in the current
[3:48:18] >> right and and I think that what I'm
[3:48:20] trying to understand is that I I see
[3:48:22] that um there are now government
[3:48:25] agencies considering nonprofit or the
[3:48:28] 501c3 as as an options to fund raise
[3:48:32] sort of allow that flexibility of that.
[3:48:34] But by the same token, I think that
[3:48:36] we're um as you mentioned in the
[3:48:38] presentation, there's a conflicting uh
[3:48:41] interest in terms of people wanting to
[3:48:44] support a project and
[3:48:47] the entity at the end of the day is
[3:48:49] still the government agency. So all
[3:48:51] three the options um the the entity is
[3:48:56] applying or donating to a government
[3:48:59] agency. Um albeit the project may be
[3:49:02] different and maybe there is a finite in
[3:49:05] terms of the pro the scope of the
[3:49:07] project or the continuity of the 501c3
[3:49:12] is is that um there there are more
[3:49:15] flexibility in terms of the various
[3:49:17] project that now uh we're able to cover.
[3:49:20] Is that is that correct?
[3:49:22] >> Yes. And that's why I also kind of
[3:49:24] covered the like option A one uh where
[3:49:28] there's [clears throat] a separate
[3:49:29] nonprofit establishing itself and doing
[3:49:32] all of its governance documents because
[3:49:34] that could still support the town and
[3:49:36] the town projects. Um but it wouldn't be
[3:49:39] subject to all of the sort of red tape
[3:49:42] that comes along with a municipality
[3:49:44] establishing the nonprofit itself. So, for option A, you're saying that
[3:49:49] there is a subset of if it's a u it's
[3:49:53] run by the the citizen rather by the our
[3:49:57] um government. Is that what you're
[3:49:59] saying?
[3:50:00] >> Yes. It wouldn't necessarily be town
[3:50:01] staff completing the paperwork. It would
[3:50:04] take That's why it's not really up there
[3:50:06] as an option because I don't we don't as
[3:50:08] town staff don't have control over
[3:50:09] whether or not someone wants to form a
[3:50:11] nonprofit. But it is another way to
[3:50:14] serve a similar purpose as if there was
[3:50:17] a a separate nonprofit uh away from the
[3:50:20] town.
[3:50:20] >> I see. Thank you.
[3:50:23] >> Yes, Council Member Adams.
[3:50:26] >> Uh I have a lot of experience with this
[3:50:30] and uh I feel that I have some questions
[3:50:35] first before. So we're doing questions
[3:50:38] or comments? Both.
[3:50:39] >> Um both.
[3:50:40] >> Okay. Question number one, have we
[3:50:43] received any donations?
[3:50:47] » Yes, we have. I don't have the data on
[3:50:50] how much, but we have received donations
[3:50:53] directly to the town in the past.
[3:50:54] >> And I'm sorry, you said in the past. Are
[3:50:57] you asking specifically now or
[3:51:00] >> in the as a town?
[3:51:02] >> Yes, in the past. Okay. Yeah.
[3:51:04] >> Yeah. I just don't know how much we've
[3:51:06] gotten in
[3:51:07] >> through the through the parade. we've been sort of the conduit for our
[3:51:10] donations. That's just an example.
[3:51:12] >> So, the parade's a good example because
[3:51:14] we actually have a group that solicits
[3:51:17] those donations. And would we as a town
[3:51:20] be prohibited from soliciting donations
[3:51:24] even forget as option A or B, but as
[3:51:28] option C. uh we can make the guidelines
[3:51:32] known, but can we also say and currently
[3:51:35] we're looking for support for X?
[3:51:42] No, thank you for the question. Um yeah,
[3:51:44] you you council members definitely can
[3:51:46] go out there and try to encourage people
[3:51:48] to make donations. Um the only uh legal
[3:51:50] issue that exists out there and it would
[3:51:52] have to be individually a council member
[3:51:54] saying something and then getting a
[3:51:56] promise that someone's going to donate.
[3:51:57] It wouldn't just be I think the entire
[3:51:59] council if you were going out there in
[3:52:01] the community and saying please donate
[3:52:02] to this project um I don't think this
[3:52:04] rule would kick in but we can look at a
[3:52:06] little closer but under the uh fair
[3:52:07] political practices commission
[3:52:09] regulations there's something called
[3:52:11] beested contributions so anytime you as
[3:52:13] a council member um get donations either
[3:52:16] to a nonprofit of your choice um or to
[3:52:18] the government agency and it's $5,000 or
[3:52:21] more from a single source, you are
[3:52:24] required to report that and it's just a
[3:52:25] disclosure requirement. it doesn't
[3:52:26] create a conflict of interest for you.
[3:52:28] It's really just getting word out there
[3:52:30] that there's donations being made
[3:52:32] because you're as a council member,
[3:52:34] you're making the request and that's
[3:52:35] really the only legal issue that exists.
[3:52:37] But definitely council members could go
[3:52:39] out there and say, "Please donate to
[3:52:40] this project. We really need your
[3:52:42] support."
[3:52:42] >> And I'll just just add on to that that
[3:52:45] Athetherton did send out like a mailing
[3:52:47] and saying if you'd like to support the
[3:52:48] town center project, you can donate to
[3:52:51] these two options. And so they kind of
[3:52:53] plugged both the separate nonprofit as
[3:52:56] well as donating directly to the town. I
[3:52:58] don't know if I assume they're a city
[3:53:00] attorney. It was cleared with them. Um
[3:53:02] but also friends of uh groups like
[3:53:04] friends of the powto parks. I know they
[3:53:05] advertise in the recreation guide for
[3:53:07] example. So they do solicit donations
[3:53:09] >> and we could in our uh e month or weekly
[3:53:13] [snorts] e newswsletter
[3:53:16] remind people that this is an
[3:53:18] opportunity to give etc. So we don't
[3:53:20] we're not procl precluded from doing
[3:53:23] that as a town.
[3:53:26] >> That is correct.
[3:53:27] >> Okay, great. Well, here's what I would
[3:53:31] really recommend is
[3:53:32] >> we can get comments from everyone first
[3:53:34] before we make recommendations.
[3:53:35] >> Okay.
[3:53:36] >> Um any additional comments from anyone
[3:53:38] else regarding the options that are
[3:53:40] submitted and then we'll have a
[3:53:41] discussion.
[3:53:43] >> I had two questions.
[3:53:44] >> Yeah, go ahead. Go ahead. Which one? The
[3:53:46] first question is just um a logistics
[3:53:49] question which is if someone made a
[3:53:51] donation uh for a particular purpose
[3:53:54] like the um police station or town hall
[3:53:58] or even Memorial Day. I know I know I've
[3:54:01] written that check for the past couple
[3:54:02] years. Um not a big check. Um how is
[3:54:06] that tracked?
[3:54:09] » Um I believe finance tracks it. So when
[3:54:12] they do the parade for example, they
[3:54:13] have a separate
[3:54:15] whatever the right financial term is.
[3:54:17] It's bucket.
[3:54:18] >> Okay.
[3:54:20] >> Liability account for to make sure that
[3:54:23] those funds aren't comingled in any way.
[3:54:26] >> Okay. Great. Um and then the the next
[3:54:28] question I had is with regard to um 40
[3:54:32] Baywood in particular. Um, if if that
[3:54:35] works out, if we were to um, you know,
[3:54:40] rent it out for a wedding, uh, does that
[3:54:43] mean we can't be a nonprofit or can we
[3:54:46] still be a nonprofit because we're not
[3:54:50] technically profiting? The money go
[3:54:52] would go back into 40 Baywood.
[3:54:57] It can certainly raise revenue as a
[3:55:00] nonprofit and we just um
[3:55:04] it would just not have to sort of um
[3:55:08] make a substantial amount of profit. So
[3:55:10] it would have to be on how the purpose
[3:55:11] of the organization also it's narrowed
[3:55:13] to 40 Baywood or if it's something
[3:55:15] greater. Um but I don't think that that
[3:55:17] necessarily would preclude it from being
[3:55:19] from a nonprofit status.
[3:55:21] >> Okay. Thank you. A and as uh the
[3:55:26] nonprofit, they would have to issue a
[3:55:30] receipt for that donation with the
[3:55:35] amount that the person who gave the
[3:55:37] donation benefited from that. So that it
[3:55:42] is only above that amount that is a tax
[3:55:46] deduction. So, this isn't if you were
[3:55:50] renting it, it wouldn't be someone
[3:55:52] saying, "Gee, I'm going to give a
[3:55:54] donation and throw my party." That That
[3:55:58] is not legal.
[3:55:59] >> Yeah. I I wasn't thinking of it as a
[3:56:01] donation at all. I was thinking it as an
[3:56:03] opportunity for the um property to get
[3:56:07] some revenue, but yeah, I wasn't
[3:56:09] thinking in terms of a donation. They if
[3:56:10] they want to donate on top of their
[3:56:12] wedding, that's great. But thank you.
[3:56:15] >> Um yes, Council Member Krillic. So, just
[3:56:17] a couple things. Um, I don't think, and
[3:56:20] this is putting the cart before the
[3:56:22] horse, but that the 501c3 would be in
[3:56:25] charge of renting the property. I mean,
[3:56:27] that would be something separate. The
[3:56:29] 501c3
[3:56:30] if it was if we established it through
[3:56:32] the town, could help to support the
[3:56:36] property when it needs something, but it
[3:56:37] doesn't mean that that would that the
[3:56:39] 501c3 would be running the property.
[3:56:42] That could that could be two separate
[3:56:44] things. Um, and then the other thing I
[3:56:46] just wanted to say about the parade is
[3:56:49] this is how it all started with
[3:56:51] fundraising for the parade is we missed
[3:56:53] out on at least one significant donation
[3:56:56] because without a 501c3 number, we
[3:56:59] couldn't accept a donation from a DAFF.
[3:57:02] So, um, so we missed out on a couple of
[3:57:05] those and just laying the groundwork for
[3:57:07] what I think is going to be, um,
[3:57:10] community outreach for what we want to
[3:57:12] do here at town hall. it seems that this
[3:57:15] could be an advantage.
[3:57:17] >> Um I I'm still not clear on all these
[3:57:21] options, but sort of um an overview as
[3:57:24] to what I would prefer, which is or at
[3:57:28] least like to see in terms of questions
[3:57:30] and clarification,
[3:57:32] which of these options keeps the um
[3:57:36] governing body at the center of the
[3:57:38] decisions? Because what I'm trying to
[3:57:40] sort out in my head is how do we prevent
[3:57:43] individuals within the council or within
[3:57:46] the staff from making promises to
[3:57:48] entities about donations and and perhaps
[3:57:52] you don't have oversight as to some of
[3:57:54] those conversations and decisions? How
[3:57:57] do we prevent ourselves from stumbling
[3:57:59] into conflict of interest and
[3:58:01] potentially misuse of funds? which one
[3:58:04] keeps the
[3:58:06] greatest um legal authority in the
[3:58:10] council as a body to make that decision.
[3:58:14] >> I would say probably option A, but
[3:58:16] really at the core of it, all three
[3:58:19] should address that option. It's just on
[3:58:21] varying levels of degree of um continued
[3:58:24] oversight.
[3:58:25] >> Yeah. You know what I didn't like about
[3:58:25] option A was it really takes away a lot
[3:58:28] of oversight from the council and and I
[3:58:31] really think the council needs to be at
[3:58:33] the center of this. I mean in other
[3:58:34] words both the financial um proceeds
[3:58:39] need to come back and reviewed with the
[3:58:41] council such that the entire community
[3:58:43] is aware as to how much money is being
[3:58:45] don donated and how the money is being
[3:58:47] spent and also there has to be some
[3:58:50] legal process as to how we solicit you
[3:58:53] know clearly if we can establish public
[3:58:55] ways of doing it such that it's above we
[3:58:58] what we don't want is an individual to
[3:59:00] say to one of our council members I'm
[3:59:02] ready to make a donation If you do
[3:59:06] this without it coming to the council,
[3:59:08] the entire community needs to know
[3:59:09] that's a conversation. It's being had.
[3:59:11] Yes, council member Adams.
[3:59:13] >> I I think that's really at the heart of
[3:59:15] my problem with this. Um the board of
[3:59:20] directors of the nonprofit is
[3:59:22] responsible for those decisions, not the
[3:59:25] council. And they need to
[3:59:29] it it's very hard for a nonprofit
[3:59:31] because it's hard to establish one. It's
[3:59:33] hard to run one. Your 990 dictates
[3:59:37] exactly what you can raise money for.
[3:59:41] And if you expand it too broadly, you
[3:59:44] won't get your 501c3.
[3:59:48] Uh the process is complicated and it
[3:59:51] continues to be complicated. But my fear
[3:59:53] is it's it's awfully hard once you've
[3:59:56] done that not to want to keep going. And
[3:59:59] so if someone comes to you with a
[4:00:01] donation and they say they're the only
[4:00:03] ones who who want to buy new shoes for
[4:00:07] the police department every year or
[4:00:10] whatever they want to do that isn't on
[4:00:12] the agenda of the town. It's really hard
[4:00:16] for the the nonprofit to say no. And I
[4:00:22] just feel we ought to give option C the
[4:00:25] biggest chance of success because I
[4:00:30] don't think we have explained this now.
[4:00:32] It's not going to work for donor advised
[4:00:34] funds because donor advised funds are
[4:00:37] actually money that you've given to an
[4:00:39] entity to invest only
[4:00:43] in nonprofits. So I think what I'd like
[4:00:49] to see us try is to use option C which
[4:00:52] we already have in place doesn't cost
[4:00:55] option B that we have in place
[4:00:57] >> no C
[4:00:58] >> and and
[4:01:00] really try a campaign of sorts and see
[4:01:05] what happens that way we have not
[4:01:07] inserted a board of directors a 501c3
[4:01:11] a lot of work and actually a lot of
[4:01:15] paperwork. Uh, and we can exactly see
[4:01:19] how much this limits what we might be
[4:01:23] doing uh, first because I, as I said, I
[4:01:27] didn't even know we could do this and I
[4:01:30] didn't know how much we had received and
[4:01:33] it doesn't have to wait for 40 Baywood
[4:01:36] to come together. We could try it on
[4:01:38] some other project.
[4:01:40] >> Yeah. Council member Crowley. Yes. I
[4:01:43] believe one of the options is that the
[4:01:46] council is the board of directors
[4:01:49] >> and I think we have enough on our plate
[4:01:53] [laughter] already to not take that on
[4:01:56] without at least trying to exercise what
[4:02:00] we already have in place.
[4:02:03] >> Um um let me just ask a quick question.
[4:02:06] Option C, does the staff report to the
[4:02:09] council in terms of what the entity is
[4:02:12] doing?
[4:02:13] >> That that's what I was going to say
[4:02:14] actually was that we don't have those
[4:02:17] processes sort of written down. Staff
[4:02:19] does follow a certain process. We could
[4:02:20] write it down and we could make it
[4:02:22] whatever the council desires. We could
[4:02:24] have regular reporting or council
[4:02:26] accepts a donation. We could make that
[4:02:28] whatever you desire.
[4:02:31] >> Okay. Go ahead. Yes, council member
[4:02:33] Chong.
[4:02:34] >> Thank you. Um so a couple questions that
[4:02:37] I I I thought of is that um currently on
[4:02:40] the presentations you have mentioned
[4:02:42] about the 40 bay words you mentioned
[4:02:45] about the memorial day parade um and
[4:02:47] then there is the option B where current
[4:02:51] policy allow us to have receive some
[4:02:53] kind of donation such as some artwork or
[4:02:56] whatnot you know I mean so there there
[4:02:59] are opportunity to do that but in if you
[4:03:02] look at them they're not they're Apple
[4:03:04] oranges there are different
[4:03:05] functionality there are different
[4:03:07] purpose and so for the Memorial Day
[4:03:10] parade perhaps that is a straight
[4:03:12] donations to support events and that is
[4:03:14] finite and that is something that in
[4:03:18] that um dollar amount that is manageable
[4:03:21] um in terms of working on that whereas
[4:03:24] the 40 bay was um in terms of the
[4:03:27] maintenance work and all these other
[4:03:29] stuff that the the funding or even you
[4:03:33] know our capital improvements for the
[4:03:35] town hall or for that matters. It is
[4:03:37] much more engaging and so there's a fine
[4:03:40] line of
[4:03:42] the residents donating it or a building
[4:03:46] versus whether [clears throat] how it
[4:03:49] just events. I think that there are
[4:03:51] differences. My main question is what is
[4:03:54] the staff time on the option A, B and C?
[4:03:58] And the reason is drafting a policy
[4:04:01] presented to the council for us to uh
[4:04:04] make comments and then adopt is
[4:04:07] different from running a 501c3. And on
[4:04:11] the diets you just heard several
[4:04:13] questions raised regarding the
[4:04:15] complications of it and the challenges
[4:04:17] foreseeable that we need to overcome.
[4:04:20] Not to say it's not going to happen. I
[4:04:22] think that there's a lot of um cities
[4:04:24] that are now considering 501c3 as an
[4:04:27] options. But that being said, it is
[4:04:30] complicated. It's sort of a no man's
[4:04:33] lands at this point and it could be the
[4:04:35] potential of being misused is there. So
[4:04:39] there needs to be outreach is to see if
[4:04:41] there are opportunities. But mainly I'm
[4:04:44] just curious as to to what extent the
[4:04:46] staff time for all these options how
[4:04:49] it's going to engage and once we set it
[4:04:52] up how much the maintenance time that
[4:04:55] you is going to be incorporated in this.
[4:04:58] >> Yeah. I mean I would say option I option
[4:05:01] A would be a very high in terms of staff
[4:05:03] time um to just establish it and then
[4:05:06] also to support the Brown Act another
[4:05:10] sort of entity um and any sort of like
[4:05:12] marketing efforts and bookkeeping that's
[4:05:14] required and whereas BNC would probably
[4:05:17] be low to medium depending on the level
[4:05:19] of oversight and continued um
[4:05:22] fundraising. I know just to go back to
[4:05:25] the parks uh friends of the parks group,
[4:05:27] they sort of have a model where they the
[4:05:29] city says we're going to do a letter of
[4:05:32] intent. This is a project that we're
[4:05:33] going to fund raise for. And so they
[4:05:36] kind of put that messaging out where
[4:05:37] they have that agreed upon project. Um
[4:05:40] and so that's another sort of option
[4:05:42] that you could add in BNC. And so that
[4:05:44] would involve regular reporting or
[4:05:46] status updates. So, um I think B and C
[4:05:49] could be high depending on the level the
[4:05:51] level of uh reporting uh that the
[4:05:54] council desires, but um I don't I do
[4:05:57] think option A will just be the most
[4:05:58] time inensive,
[4:06:01] but it also allows for uh the donor
[4:06:04] advised funds um fundraising as another
[4:06:07] option. So, it's just trade-offs
[4:06:08] >> through the mayor. Um just one more
[4:06:11] questions. I I I know there is an
[4:06:13] interest of having some somewhat of a
[4:06:16] control from the council uh because um
[4:06:20] at the end of the day all these projects
[4:06:22] or events does impact the town right so
[4:06:25] from that perspective it makes sense for
[4:06:27] the council to be engaged in that but
[4:06:30] are there um different kinds of models
[4:06:32] as to how that looks like because you
[4:06:35] know there's
[4:06:37] to the to council member Adam's comments
[4:06:40] you know we all have a lot on our place
[4:06:43] and how do you then differentiate this
[4:06:45] is one more council meetings um versus
[4:06:49] this is a nonprofit board meetings
[4:06:52] right
[4:06:54] in that discussions.
[4:07:01] So, we got some ideas tonight in our
[4:07:04] very first presentation from the um
[4:07:07] consultants on the scale of the town
[4:07:11] hall project from a financial point of
[4:07:13] view. How do you think we're going to
[4:07:15] get there if we don't give ourselves the
[4:07:18] tools to make it easier? I mean, this is
[4:07:21] a big big lift and we we're going to
[4:07:24] need to fire on all cylinders and we're
[4:07:27] going to need to pull every lever we can
[4:07:30] to bring in this money, public money,
[4:07:32] private money, however we can, but it's
[4:07:35] a big lift and we need the tools to get
[4:07:37] there.
[4:07:39] >> Um, yeah. No, I agree. I think this is
[4:07:42] going to be a very intense undertaking.
[4:07:45] However, um, you know, I and I'm all in.
[4:07:48] However, I I think um our primary charge
[4:07:52] is to run the town and we are not a
[4:07:55] nonprofit entity. Um, while we can do
[4:07:58] this and this we can get support from
[4:08:00] the staff, I don't want us to lose sight
[4:08:03] of what our primary objective is as as a
[4:08:06] city council. And um I I do think
[4:08:10] mitigating
[4:08:12] um staff time with our own time in terms
[4:08:16] of presentation to us perhaps twice a
[4:08:18] year is reasonable. And you know the
[4:08:22] what I sort of envision is this the
[4:08:25] residents in this town love this town
[4:08:26] and they become very engaged once you
[4:08:29] can inspire them to become attached to a
[4:08:32] project and I really believe that could
[4:08:34] really take off and we could be the
[4:08:36] inspiration to get them interested in
[4:08:38] the different things we're trying to do
[4:08:40] at town hall but at the same time we we
[4:08:43] we're not going to try to be expert on
[4:08:45] something we don't do. we, you know, we
[4:08:48] still we're really running a town. So, I just sort of want to get back to that
[4:08:52] fundamental um task for us, which is not necessarily to do fundraising per
[4:08:57] se, although we must do it for some of
[4:09:00] the projects we're interested in, but
[4:09:01] that's not our primary mission.
[4:09:07] » So, u I I think in actual fact, we may
[4:09:11] end up with a 501c3, but I don't think
[4:09:14] that's where we should start. I think we
[4:09:16] should start with guidelines.
[4:09:19] Pardon me.
[4:09:22] » Uh and then I also think having filled
[4:09:26] out, you know, registering the charity
[4:09:28] with the California state government
[4:09:31] every year, uh filing your form 990
[4:09:36] every year. If you raise a certain
[4:09:38] amount, you actually have to start
[4:09:40] having not just an audit of the
[4:09:43] nonprofit, you have to have a single uh
[4:09:46] single line audit, which is even more
[4:09:50] complicated. If you get any government
[4:09:52] funding, that might be influencing this,
[4:09:55] too. I just think we we don't have to
[4:09:59] panic. We don't have a program that
[4:10:02] we're selling yet. We we're still in
[4:10:05] discussion. uh about how much we would
[4:10:08] be spending. So I think we can take the
[4:10:12] luxury of just getting our donor
[4:10:14] guidelines together and actually
[4:10:16] starting to think about how how would we
[4:10:21] approach people and if we can approach
[4:10:24] them and say this is taxdeductible
[4:10:26] and frankly
[4:10:29] it's going to go directly to an a
[4:10:31] specific project. I think it's worth
[4:10:34] taking the time to do that and uh if we
[4:10:39] find that we have donors who are
[4:10:41] reluctant because of that we can
[4:10:43] reassess it and u I think we also
[4:10:48] need to look at uh when you do a
[4:10:51] campaign you have various levels of
[4:10:53] donors etc. We would have to hire
[4:10:55] someone for that. We probably have to
[4:10:57] hire someone to work on the taxexempt
[4:11:01] nonprofit. So I kind of think a a toe in
[4:11:05] the water would be to try to get our
[4:11:08] guidelines together.
[4:11:09] >> So that would be a hybrid of um B and C
[4:11:13] perhaps putting together a policy
[4:11:16] guidelines
[4:11:18] that embeds um B and C in a manner that
[4:11:23] suits our needs without going all in for
[4:11:26] a 501c and all the heavy lifting
[4:11:29] involved. Um, Vice Mayo Adams, I'm
[4:11:33] sorry, Vice Mayor Rexio.
[4:11:34] >> Um, yes, I I I think I'm going where
[4:11:38] you're going in terms of B, but not um
[4:11:42] not expanding 419 since that is that's a
[4:11:46] great policy, well written, no need to
[4:11:48] touch it and that is, you know, physical
[4:11:51] objects. So we would do something like
[4:11:54] 419 that would be um for monetary
[4:11:59] donations and then make it clear that
[4:12:02] they are segregated for what you the
[4:12:06] project you donated it for you donated
[4:12:08] it for and also that it's tax
[4:12:10] deductible.
[4:12:13] So having heard that um city attorney
[4:12:15] can we get um support from um our legal
[4:12:19] council um within BBK to help draft a
[4:12:22] policy or guidelines to perhaps move
[4:12:25] towards B or C something along those
[4:12:27] lines and bring it back to us and we can
[4:12:29] find
[4:12:29] >> I don't know if staff needs our
[4:12:31] assistance right away or wants to send
[4:12:33] us uh something that they've come up
[4:12:35] with that we can review but yes
[4:12:36] certainly we can definitely help assist
[4:12:38] with whatever policy gets created.
[4:12:41] Does that does that does that sound
[4:12:43] reasonable to the rest of the council to
[4:12:45] move along those lines of guide of a
[4:12:47] guideline and a policy that could be
[4:12:49] modified
[4:12:51] will be brought back to us. Okay. Thank
[4:12:53] you, Mandy. Thank you very much for
[4:12:56] putting this together. It's very
[4:12:57] helpful. And um, Council Member Krillic,
[4:13:02] I I really appreciate your passion and your energy and your focus on
[4:13:08] something this very important. Um, and
[4:13:11] would just like to reassure you, at
[4:13:12] least personally, I would like to
[4:13:13] continue the work in making sure we
[4:13:15] accomplish our goals. But thanks again
[4:13:17] for all that you do along those lines.
[4:13:21] Okay. Next, we don't that's it for this
[4:13:25] is to give directives, correct? Nothing
[4:13:28] more.
[4:13:30] All right. The next item is city council
[4:13:33] items. All right. Do my colleagues have
[4:13:36] anything they would like to report from
[4:13:37] previous meetings?
[4:13:41] » Starting with
[4:13:43] council member. Yes.
[4:13:45] >> Thank you. Um I um attended the
[4:13:48] emergency service council uh meeting and
[4:13:51] the council approved a purchase of a
[4:13:55] type one hazmat vehicle to replace the
[4:13:58] old one that has been in use for 25
[4:14:02] years. Um the purchase would allow um a
[4:14:06] $135,000
[4:14:08] saving if we can uh utilize the trust
[4:14:11] funds that's been um collected over the
[4:14:14] years. Um but that also means that um in
[4:14:19] 2027
[4:14:21] all the cities will be facing a 2.72%
[4:14:24] increase in membership. So just to put
[4:14:27] that out there for um you to be aware of
[4:14:31] it. And then the other thing is that um
[4:14:34] thanks to Mayor Cole and our city
[4:14:37] manager's office and also our fine
[4:14:40] police departments and um CCFD uh the
[4:14:44] fire departments. Um they welcome the
[4:14:47] little league uh baseball team from um
[4:14:50] Taiwan Shinu Elementary
[4:14:53] and um the players and also the coaches
[4:14:58] really appreciate the opportunity to
[4:14:59] visit our town to see the drone demo and
[4:15:02] then to meet the K9 mink. Um so it's
[4:15:06] been fantastic. Um they are currently
[4:15:09] competing in um Kansas City's um based
[4:15:13] Ruth um tournament and I was told that
[4:15:16] they won their first tournament so it's
[4:15:19] going great. So thank you all.
[4:15:23] >> Yes, council member Crowley. Thank you.
[4:15:26] Um I went to sound the San Francisco
[4:15:28] roundt and they presented their fly
[4:15:31] quiet 2.0 O program and council member
[4:15:34] Adams attended as well and we had an
[4:15:36] ADRB meeting. Um thank you so much to
[4:15:39] Liz Reese. She's our senior planner at
[4:15:42] the moment. There she is. Um and also
[4:15:45] went to the council of cities at Sonteo
[4:15:47] which is very interesting. It was
[4:15:48] actually at the waste treatment plant.
[4:15:50] Um but it was interesting tour.
[4:15:54] >> Thank you. Um council member Adams any
[4:15:57] report?
[4:16:01] So, uh, here I am outfitted supporting
[4:16:04] the, uh, Taiwan team at, uh, Shingpool.
[4:16:08] And this arrived in my box, and I
[4:16:11] thought it was pretty snappy. Uh, next
[4:16:15] slide.
[4:16:18] Uh, I wanted to rem this was such a
[4:16:21] fantastic thing that was actually four
[4:16:24] of the council members were there. We
[4:16:26] missed you, Marie. But, uh, Sonteo
[4:16:29] hosted the council of cities tour of the
[4:16:31] wastewater treatment plant, which is
[4:16:34] stunning, exemplary. Uh, next slide. We
[4:16:40] toured it. Uh, we
[4:16:43] discussed the water program. We looked
[4:16:46] at their headquarters and their sort of
[4:16:49] central central uh, oversight. It it was
[4:16:54] really an extraordinary experience to
[4:16:56] see how well at least half of our solid
[4:17:01] waste goes to this treatment uh plant.
[4:17:04] The other half goes to Berlingame. So
[4:17:07] was very very interesting and in I I
[4:17:10] just love the council of cities. Uh
[4:17:13] next, uh I wanted to comment uh council member Krill was the chair of
[4:17:21] the airport roundt uh for several years
[4:17:26] uh and I wanted to thank her for helping
[4:17:29] me become a part of the technical
[4:17:32] committee. I wanted to make sure
[4:17:34] everyone knows that SFO's parallel
[4:17:36] landing uh was banned and it is that ban
[4:17:41] has now ended at least with uh the FAA
[4:17:45] now allowing staggered parallel landings
[4:17:48] and that's going to start uh August
[4:17:50] 12th. So that's going to start right up
[4:17:52] this week which should provide some
[4:17:54] relief after a summer of frequent
[4:17:56] delays. That's a quote from the
[4:17:59] chronicle and it's from the SFO
[4:18:02] spokesperson Doug Yankl. So, this is
[4:18:06] really an exciting opportunity for me
[4:18:08] that I thank uh council member Krlic for
[4:18:13] uh letting she will still continue as
[4:18:15] the voting member, but I get to play
[4:18:17] with all the technical stuff which makes
[4:18:19] me happy. Next uh public works
[4:18:22] commissioner meeting an update. Just
[4:18:25] another reminder that the work continues
[4:18:27] on Tartan Trail and on Parkside. Things
[4:18:30] we've waited for for a long time and it
[4:18:34] probably will still take a long time,
[4:18:36] but it's really exciting that we've made
[4:18:39] progress. The next slide will tell you
[4:18:43] uh about a weekend update. There was a
[4:18:46] leaking pipe that was repaired and I
[4:18:50] actually have the pipe
[4:18:59] This is just a small portion, but it can
[4:19:02] tell you. You can see the corrosion and
[4:19:05] the hole in this really heavy dirty
[4:19:09] thing.
[4:19:13] » Yeah, that's [laughter]
[4:19:15] we'll donate that. Um, it was assessed
[4:19:19] as a leak, not a break. and uh the uh
[4:19:23] public works. I want to just explain how
[4:19:26] the thinking goes to try to really
[4:19:28] minimize the impact uh in an area for
[4:19:32] example like this program. They opted to
[4:19:35] wait until Monday initially because they
[4:19:38] were just going to monitor it and they
[4:19:39] didn't want to disturb the citizens
[4:19:42] weekend since many, you know, the repair
[4:19:45] was going to mean that many homes would
[4:19:47] not have water for a while. So they
[4:19:50] thought it would hold. They had put a
[4:19:52] clamp on it. They thought the clamp
[4:19:54] would hold. When they reassessed it,
[4:19:56] they said on Saturday, "Not good
[4:19:58] enough." And they went back in on
[4:20:01] Saturday and completely uh replaced that
[4:20:05] section of the pipe. And I just want to
[4:20:08] congratulate them for going through a
[4:20:10] process of decision making that is
[4:20:14] complicated and not always uh
[4:20:16] transparent to the public who may think,
[4:20:18] why isn't this being fixed right away?
[4:20:20] So, there are a lot of considerations
[4:20:22] that went into it. Uh, but we're going
[4:20:25] to have more like this. We have a lot of
[4:20:28] pipes that are
[4:20:30] uh mates to this little guy that's here.
[4:20:33] So, expect that public works is always
[4:20:36] doing the best they can for us. Next
[4:20:39] slide.
[4:20:42] Tobin Clark ad hoc committee. Uh, we
[4:20:45] have met and we have some exciting news
[4:20:47] that Mayor Cole will be talking about.
[4:20:50] uh some public meetings that are coming
[4:20:53] up in October so that there will be uh
[4:20:56] the opportunity for people to really
[4:20:58] comment on this. Something I didn't
[4:21:00] mention today when we talked about the
[4:21:03] Tobin Clark project. We haven't really
[4:21:06] gotten the public feedback that we need
[4:21:09] to proceed with this at well. So, uh
[4:21:12] Mayor Cole will talk about that next.
[4:21:17] uh Rethink Waste had to uh redo its
[4:21:21] public education and recycling technical
[4:21:23] assistance plan which I read and
[4:21:25] commented on and it's very good if you
[4:21:29] want some reading next.
[4:21:32] uh Hillsboro Beautification Foundation
[4:21:34] had an email vote on a new concept uh
[4:21:38] and it's going to start up in September
[4:21:40] and you will probably receive
[4:21:43] invitations to support this harvest
[4:21:46] dinner that they are planning. It's very
[4:21:48] exciting. Next,
[4:21:52] uh telecommunications. You've already
[4:21:54] heard uh that we are going to continue
[4:21:58] this survey through September. I really
[4:22:01] want to underscore what uh uh Mandy
[4:22:06] Brown told us. This takes a little bit
[4:22:08] of time, takes about 20 minutes, but it
[4:22:11] will help you know the speed of the
[4:22:14] internet uh reception that you're
[4:22:17] getting in your home as you're doing it.
[4:22:19] If you're doing it on a phone or a
[4:22:21] computer, it's it's really actually
[4:22:23] going to give you some information, but
[4:22:25] mostly it's going to give us information
[4:22:27] about the town. That's really critical
[4:22:30] for these decisions to be made
[4:22:32] appropriately. And I think that's the
[4:22:33] end last slide. Thanks.
[4:22:37] >> Yes.
[4:22:39] >> Thank you, representation. Um, Vice
[4:22:42] Mayor Ragdale.
[4:22:45] >> Yes. I have a few slides here. Um,
[4:22:50] ebikes. Um, as Mandy said, uh, tomorrow
[4:22:53] the board of supervisors are considering
[4:22:56] their ordinance on ebikes. clarifying
[4:22:59] the law, clarifying enforcement and
[4:23:02] enhancing enforcement, including uh with
[4:23:05] regard to sidewalks, which is less of an
[4:23:08] issue obviously in Hillsboro with regard
[4:23:09] to sidewalks, but uh it's an important
[4:23:12] ordinance and um they will be hearing
[4:23:15] that their meeting starts at 9:30 and
[4:23:18] it's number six on the agenda, so
[4:23:19] probably won't be too late. Um and uh
[4:23:23] Diane Papin's bill that would give us a
[4:23:26] um pilot program for ages 12 and up for
[4:23:29] ebikes uh is yet to be voted on by the
[4:23:32] Senate uh the Senate floor, but
[4:23:35] hopefully that goes through. Um there
[4:23:37] are some traffic issues that residents
[4:23:40] had that um uh the staff put together a
[4:23:44] fantastic meeting to address their
[4:23:47] concerns. Um so I appreciate that. Next
[4:23:50] slide.
[4:23:55] Um, oh, the youth. I love the youth.
[4:23:57] California Associ association of youth
[4:24:00] commissions. I mentioned because our
[4:24:01] Hillsboro kids started it and uh they
[4:24:04] are working really hard on getting other
[4:24:06] towns to develop youth commissions and
[4:24:09] uh they have zooms with them and um
[4:24:11] sometimes I pop onto those zooms and and
[4:24:14] helps. Um you heard about the
[4:24:17] wastewater. It was so interesting. Uh,
[4:24:20] fantastic. It was a little smelly,
[4:24:23] [laughter]
[4:24:24] but uh, the interesting thing there was
[4:24:26] that the, um, employees,
[4:24:29] none of them knew they would go into
[4:24:31] this. They seem to really love their
[4:24:32] jobs. And one guy's like, I was a music
[4:24:34] major. Another guy was like sociology
[4:24:37] major or something. So, um, looked like
[4:24:39] a fantastic job and something to keep in
[4:24:42] mind, um, for our kids. Um and uh
[4:24:46] council member Schwang uh was there for
[4:24:49] the um teenert. I popped in for their
[4:24:52] graduation ceremony. Um but the the C
[4:24:56] team did a fantastic job.
[4:24:58] >> 27 teams
[4:24:59] >> 27 graduates
[4:25:01] >> f and they they came they came multiple
[4:25:03] days you know they they love it. They
[4:25:05] don't just show up the first day. They
[4:25:06] came multiple days and um it was very
[4:25:08] exciting to see. And next slide.
[4:25:12] Um this is oh uh the youth again um
[4:25:17] their Silicon Valley youth climate
[4:25:18] action summit um in Certino I went on
[4:25:22] Saturday was fantastic these kids will
[4:25:25] give you hope how much they care about
[4:25:28] the climate um and how they are so good
[4:25:31] with action they have a whole action
[4:25:33] task force they have a a summer program
[4:25:36] for three intense weeks and they had uh
[4:25:39] I don't know like 50 kids in that or
[4:25:41] something Um so at the very end of it
[4:25:43] they have a summit and Josh Becker was
[4:25:45] the keynote speaker and um there were
[4:25:48] elected officials sprinkled about to
[4:25:50] give them advice on uh when you write a
[4:25:52] letter or make a public comment uh what
[4:25:55] is most impactful for the electeds to
[4:25:57] hear. And next slide there's Josh
[4:26:00] Becker. I like this. We are the first
[4:26:02] generation to feel the effect of climate
[4:26:04] change and the last generation who could
[4:26:06] do something about it. That was a quote
[4:26:09] that he brought to us. And next slide
[4:26:12] and same summit. Next slide.
[4:26:16] Uh West Light Energy. Hopefully you're
[4:26:19] getting used to the new name. Um I
[4:26:22] attended the various meetings. There was
[4:26:24] an exciting uh ribbon cutting uh for low
[4:26:29] in not low-inccome housing for multif
[4:26:31] family housing. Peninsula Pines in South
[4:26:33] San Francisco. They have these
[4:26:36] complicated chargers where everyone can
[4:26:39] charge at the same time. Every
[4:26:41] resident's space has a charger and
[4:26:44] there's their smart chargers and you can
[4:26:46] tell it I don't want to, you know, you
[4:26:48] pay for it, right? I don't want to
[4:26:50] charge in the expensive times. I I need
[4:26:52] to go really far tomorrow. I want to
[4:26:54] charge all all the way. I don't care how
[4:26:56] much it costs. Um and so there's they're
[4:26:59] level one chargers and hybrid level two
[4:27:01] chargers. um largest multif family
[4:27:04] complex with the Chargers in California
[4:27:06] and um I think second largest um in the
[4:27:10] US in the western and US at least. So
[4:27:13] that was very exciting to go to that and
[4:27:16] um we had Kevin Mullen there and Diane
[4:27:20] Papen there and um state officials as
[4:27:24] well. And next slide
[4:27:27] and uh that's not too exciting. I think
[4:27:30] that's it.
[4:27:32] Um thank you. Thanks for the updates. Um
[4:27:34] I don't have much much more to add. I
[4:27:37] did attend some of the a few of the
[4:27:38] meetings that have already been reported
[4:27:40] on so I will skip those. um just the
[4:27:43] Tobin Clark um project um with the
[4:27:48] project manager and the the feasibility
[4:27:51] studies continues to move forward and we
[4:27:54] still have a lot of work to do, a lot of
[4:27:56] heavy lifting, but and we're going to
[4:27:58] have spec a study session scheduled for
[4:28:02] um October 12th at um 400 p.m. which is
[4:28:07] the date of our city council meeting. So
[4:28:09] the hope is that we will possibly have
[4:28:11] to move close session around around
[4:28:13] that, but it's anticipated to be an hour
[4:28:15] and a half and October 26th, which is
[4:28:19] also a Monday at 6:00 p.m. And we are
[4:28:22] doing outreach to um residents at the
[4:28:25] Tobin clock sites and of course the
[4:28:27] entire you know town of Hillsboro. all
[4:28:30] the residents are encouraged to attend
[4:28:32] and um contribute to the conversation in
[4:28:36] on the September 14th
[4:28:39] um agenda. probably will have um the
[4:28:44] adoption of a subcommittee which will
[4:28:46] begin to open these meetings to anyone
[4:28:48] in the community and that may be on at
[4:28:52] this point we haven't decided if it's
[4:28:53] going to be on consent calendar or if
[4:28:55] it's going to be a discussion point but
[4:28:56] either way the council will have the
[4:28:59] opportunity to discuss it further if it
[4:29:00] needs to.
[4:29:02] Um, firewise, management continues to be
[4:29:06] very aggressive and I really am quite
[4:29:09] impressed with the new ideas they keep
[4:29:11] coming up with as far as how to keep the
[4:29:12] community safe and I'm really thankful
[4:29:15] for that board. Um, nothing specific to
[4:29:18] add this point.
[4:29:21] Any additional report? All right, we did
[4:29:25] pretty well in which case this meeting
[4:29:27] is now returned. Thank you. Yay.
[4:29:34] at 6:00 p.m. on the 26th and 4 p.m. on
[4:29:37] the 12th.