[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.

City Council Meeting - August 10, 2026

Transcript