April 28, 2020 Joint Meeting of Mountain View City Council and Shoreline Regional Park Community

Video

Transcript

[00:11:19] (archive recording) Unknown Speaker: Yes, yes, it seems to be just a broadcast issue that we're working on right now.

[00:16:23] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, thank you. So then I will wear the public comments. So if you'd like to, um, present public comments and you are in the attendee box on Zoom. Please hit the raised hand button at the bottom of the box. And um if you're calling in by phone, please press star 9. The city clerk will display the timer on the screen, and um, I see 3 hands up right now. Uh, so, I start off with Alex Brown. And, let's see, let's see. Alex, are you there? I don't have a, a mute button on. capability. I'm sorry, City Cork, do you have a, a mute button? I don't have it showing only.

[00:17:26] City Clerk: You should, here we go. There you go, here.

[00:17:28] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Got it. Thank you. So, I'm, I'm gonna...

[00:17:34] City Clerk: That was Alex found you at the top before things moved around.

[00:17:37] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So welcome. Can you?

[00:17:40] Alex Brown: Yes, great. Awesome. Hey, Alex Brown, Santa Ravella, North Bay Shore, Mountain View. I was really hoping for a lot more from this plan. I feel like allowing for a crossover from Lavanita that crosses the entirety of Shoreline, along with the transit improvements there, is putting us as an afterthought. I don't think that there's a well formulated plan for how to get bikers from the Stevens Creek Trail down La Vanita over to the gateway. Or up from Shoreline, from the new Terabella development up to Stevens Crew Trail or into our park. Uh, I'm just a little disappointed with this current plan. Uh, that's about it. Thanks.

[00:18:29] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. We'll go on to... Emily Ramos. You uh should be on.

[00:18:39] Emily Ramos: Right, um. Oh, that's the fun picture. Um, so I actually just wanted to comment. Uh, so yeah, legislature, uh, when you view the meeting that way, that doesn't have sound, it also is not showing up on YouTube, but that's, uh, nothing to do with the agenda item, but I just wanted to point that out, so, um, but we can hear everything on Zoom. I guess obviously um but thank you so much.

[00:19:07] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Uh, I know um, Steph is working on the technical issues right now, so please bear with us. I'm gonna go to Albert James. Welcome.

[00:19:23] Albert James: Can you hear me?

[00:20:18] Unknown Speaker: Welcome to Zoo. Enter your participant ID. You have entered the meeting as a panelist. Attendees can now hear you speak. This meeting is being recorded.

[00:20:45] Albert James: Sure, on the corners there. along with pedestrians that want to cross, and it just seems like a recipe for disaster, and something that could be easily avoided, just by elevating the bike path, past Terabella, as I showed in my, uh, presentation, and putting a bridge across, connect to the other side of, to connect to both sides of Shoreline. So that cyclists going north on Shoreline, can seamlessly connect to the bike path. by crossing over Terradell on an elevated section. Yeah, it's going to add cost, and I'm sure the elevated section that Avenue doesn't have to cost too, but this whole thing is costing 10s and 1000000s of dollars. You know, we might as well take this as desperate that we can. And so that it's very attractive for people to use and it really encourages people to use it. And the way it is now, if I was riding on shoreline, If I got the green light for Shoreline. I just keep going over the overpass instead of waiting to get onto the bike path. You know, it's only going to take you a couple minutes to get to the other side anyways. So anyways, those are my comments. Thank you very much. Anyways, in general, I think this is a good plan. That's all.

[00:21:57] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great, thank you very much. Any other attendees wishing to speak? If not, uh, city clerk. We have additional public comments.

[00:22:10] City Clerk: Mayor. I'll just report quickly. I believe that the audio issue has been resolved. Um, and um, I wanted to just inquire. We did have, um, if Mr. Vasquez is interested in speaking, um, if he would raise his hand or press star 9, if it's using his phone. Otherwise, um, I don't have any other, um, I don't have any others signed up, and I'm just going to check for emails. I do not have any emails or voicemail messages.

[00:22:41] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Great, thank you. Mr. Vas says if you see you in our attending box, If you were interested in speaking, could you please raise your hand? I don't see his hand. Going up. So with that, we will close public comments and bring it back to council. There are a few questions for the answer. Let's see. Who would like to start?

[00:23:22] Unknown Speaker: Oh I'm gonna try, try uh um. Try ace drop, both on item one, and then if there's like additional comments, we can take that, so if you uh support the recommended versus 1st layer.

[00:23:42] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Oh, questions. I'm sorry, yes, please, go ahead. Sorry, let's go ahead and ask questions, so cancel number McAllister, you want to start us off?

[00:23:49] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes please. Um, like, one question, why have the, uh, connection with Lava Anita, and not care? What was the thought process of moving it there close to the freeway and not putting it more central? For the crosswalk over.

[00:24:15] Project Manager Tina: Hi, this is TSA. You want a public works department? I'm department manager for the project. But the idea came around, um, at the, when we're developing the, working with the gateway master plan team, and there was discussion about a lot of the, a lot of Anita, is, um, does not, for the future, does not have, um, a, a great crossing in light, as it will, impact the capacity and traffic operations significantly. um with the overcrossing a la Bonita in the future. We will um be able to move pedestrian um above gray and therefore reduce one more um conflict at the street level. And those are the, um, heavy employment center as well, as you know Microsoft is on La Bonita, uh, near Macon Avenue. So, um, the interest is, uh, from the future is employees and employees, would like to enter the gateway master and site. Um, the rapanita overcrossing would be uh, an alternative for people to get to. The gateway side.

[00:25:30] Councilmember John McAlister: But it doesn't fair, also put you into more of the central district for pedestrians and for the residential properties in there, and considering that we're going to put a off ramp over there on, uh, La Bonita, that that's going to be a bottleneck with us. They're going to have to go a little bit and then wait for the on-ramp traffic to go. So, um, what what thoughts were you thinking about when um, with that new off ramp on there? Is this gonna be a small section for them to cross before they hit another stop sign?

[00:26:02] Project Manager Tina: Uh, I think it's done, you can answer to this, um, uh, and then before don't take over.

[00:26:09] Principal Engineer Lisa Au: I, um, in the, at the beginning of coordination with the property owner, I'm at the gateway side area, and there was the interest of not having a, a huge elevated structure, just right along the frontage of their property, and this, having, um, overcrossing, uh, pair, and showing, boulevard, that means the pack will continue to be. elevated, and then after reaching, um, pair avenue, it would then have to be sent further down, um, to the next block.

[00:26:49] Public Works Director Dawn Cameron: So thank you, Lisa. This is Don Cameron public works director. 1st off, as you know, the crossing of Shoreline, Amalvin, was not even part of the original concept for this bike pit bridge. It simply intended to be a north south crossing of 101. Uh, the thought of leaving an option open, that's all this design does right now for a future profit or Bonita, was taking into consideration that we could see increase by compared demand crossing up La Bonita with the, um, the growth and development, uh, Tina was referencing that's going to happen to the east, with Microsoft and few other areas there. And with the reversible transit lane happening at Shoreline and Albanita, that is not a good place for an at grade bike pet busing. So what we saw was the opportunity to not preclude and design this in a way, that there could be an overcrossing at La Bonita, uh, that personal line at La Bonita, that would allow them the reversible transit lanes to operate efficiently, provide a really great connection across shoreline at the bar, for bison tent, and that, uh, connection to the east, and eventually the Stevens Creek Trail much more efficiently. Uh, as Tina was referencing, there is a desire to get the bridge back down to grade to provide really good easy assets for bicycle pets. And the pair avenue intersection is being set up in a way with protected by planes, uh, great, uh, pedestrian crossings to be that point where it comes back down to great, creates a better, uh, more open, uh, entrance for the gateway development that's going to happen on the website or continuing north or shore, like, we're crossing uh, shoreline at great at pair, and, and that is, that to us is the best possible plan in terms of, the reversal transit land, traffic flow and goodbye comped access.

[00:28:49] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. My other question is, we're gonna have, with this, uh, beautifully designed bridge that I can say is big and wide, we're gonna be taking, um, a, uh, bike track that's gonna be on both sides of shoreline, all the way up, past, uh, where Critton or up to, um, up that direction. So why do we need to have 3 parallel bike tracks? 2 on shoreline and one on the bridge.

[00:29:22] Unknown Speaker: Catherine McAllister. So the, um, I'm street, cycling are to be maintained, and then a lot of the experienced bicyclists would prefer to, um, and have the experience, to be able to, um, pick the shortest route, a few, the, recall find the, um, schematic, the, proposed bridge. Um, actually is a pretty long route from point A to point B from the beginning of Terabella to all the way to Perr Avenue. But this is, for a lot of the experience, um, commuters that prefer to get to the designation faster. I think the option is also to for them to use the on street cycling. And I've seen the development of the shoreline corridor study. The public input period. A lot of the um info that we receive was to have these um on street facility to be remained.

[00:30:19] Councilmember John McAlister: But isn't it, um, are we gonna have to require right away to maintain the, uh, The uh uh bicycle track along shoreline, going up to, like say, Sterling Court. Um, but the proposed bridge, um, there will be, just for, if you maintain your proposed uh, bicycle lane, on both sides of shoreline, and if you went up to Charles, let's say up to Charleston, would you be requiring to take the right of way to put those bike lanes in there?

[00:30:55] Unknown Speaker: So, the, the North Bay Shore precise plan does assume, uh, does build into it a, uh, 2 way cycle track, on one side shoreline, I believe, and on the other side, that maybe, I cannot contact, it's 2 lane or a single directional bicycle lane, so that, that's baked into the North Bay Shore precise plan. However, as we, um, continue to work on plans for North Bay Shore, as, for instance, Google presents plans for what may happen in the Shore Bird area and so on, um, the exact provision of bike facilities on both sides of Shoreline will be further refined and defined and will, and any right away need, will be accommodated through approving those developments.

[00:31:43] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. And so, well, you know, we're looking at safety. Over time, I would expect, and so how much time is, would somebody save? By going, staying on shoreline versus taking the safer route over the new bridge? A minute, 30 seconds? I mean, when you say experience bikers. How many experi- aren't we trying to? We already got experience bikers, aren't we trying to encourage more non-experienced bikers, and, in terms of, uh, they've been going along that route, too. I mean, it's not, it sounds like you're building a, your, well, answer the uh, Could you answer the 1st question 1st about how much time would somebody be saving?

[00:32:30] Principal Engineer Lisa Au: I count my member. This is Lisa Allen, the principal engineer. And so with the bridge option, if someone was, um, an average bicyclist, I'm gonna say 5 miles per hour. It would take them about 8 minutes to cross the bridge. They're going 10 miles per hour. It will be 4 minutes. And so I would assume on, if you remain on Shoreline Boulevard, it'll probably take you less than four, I would say, 2 to 3 minutes.

[00:32:57] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. It's top light at one of the ramps, not gonna be held up by any stoplights. And what do you expect visual arts committee to add to the project?

[00:33:12] Project Manager Tina: The visual on the, on top of the bridge or in the built into the uh, structure of the bridge? And we'll be discussing that once we pick up artists, one, doing the call for artist process, uh, to engage them in the preliminary concept alternatives, uh, showing this, uh, one of the, sizing the presentation, there are various options. Um, we have seen arts can be incorporated just over the, strong overclassing, it can be incorporating the rolling, or the mesh in the fence, or on the surface. And the thing can apply for, um, the Terabella approach and the pair approach. And this will be closely be, we will be closely working with the artist to, uh, come up with a design and going to the actual installation and construction of the bridge structure itself.

[00:34:09] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Right, next, uh, council number 6 and then council member, not a check after.

[00:34:16] Councilmember Alison Hicks: My main questions are about how, uh, stuff is the Viking pedestrian bridge, fitting into the overall lighting pedestrian system between North Fish or and the rest of town. Um, mostly, I'm referring to Permanente and Stevens Creek, uh, likeways and pedestrians have, um, I, I'm just wondering, are, do you envision or has it been envisioned that some of them are more recreational and some more commute oriented, some are affected to be faster and slower. Um, uh, or some more pedestrian oriented, some more bicycle oriented or day, night, did I say, maybe I said already, uh, different speeds. I kind of want to get a better sense of how this fits into the overall system. Um, then that was the thing for me that was lacking from the staff report. So any comments you might have to clear that up would be helpful for me.

[00:35:24] Principal Engineer Lisa Au: Um, I can ask you that. This is Lisa out. Um, so currently we, we did a trip count um recently in February. And currently it shows most of the commuters to North Bay Shore are taking Stevens Creek Trail. Um, the highest peak hour we have is about 150 um, using Stevens Creek Trail, and then about 90 using Permanente Creek and only 22 in Shoreline Boulevard. And I'm been assuming that because Shoreland Grove are not built out with all the bicycle and pedestrian facilities. So this bridge comes about from the shoreline corridor study to connect people from the transit center to North Bay Shore. And um, the city is currently working on projects between the transit center and North Bay Shore. This is just one segment of it. Um, We are working on the design of the bike and pet facilities along Fairland Road. Um, that will lead from Central Expressway to, um, to Montesino. And all the way up to Middlefield Road, and then the facility is along Middlefield Road to this bridge is being covered by the Shoreline Reversible Transit Lane project. So that's how um, this project is working to serve commuters from the transit center. Um, that's what we've heard comments from the public. Um, regarding evenings when the trails may be closed, um, that a lot of them would probably be using this project to return south towards the city. So they use the trails, the 2 Permanente and Stevens Creek Trails during the day in the morning, and then they most likely may be using the bridge or shoreline Boulevard in the evenings during the wintertime. Um, I, I think uh, we are working on additional bike and pedestrian facilities in the North Bay Shore to connect commuters, yeah, both from the Permanente Creekside and Stevens Creek to, to get to the Shoreline Boulevard.

[00:37:32] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay, thank you. I mean, my question is here, dad, because I don't think you can design everything into every single trail. I'm, I'm wondering whether, um, this is considered more of a commute, commute path, and for example, uh, the, the shoreline, the Stevens Creek would be more of a, um, more of a recreational uh, path so that I can figure out what kind of pedestrian amenities and bike amenities get allocated to each one. Has there been any thought about, about kind of differentiating betrayals in terms of use or the bike life?

[00:38:11] City Staff: So Lisa, if I could. This is definitely being planned towards commuting. And that's why it's part of a system that will be from the downtown transit center. And all the Caltrain trains coming in and so on, and it starts with the underpass of the train tracks, the Central Expressway that we're building as part of the trains to a great separation project. At least the same, 2 of these bike lanes, the facility's been put on Sterling, which connects, connects to protected bike lane, on shoreline, that connects to this bridge to get you to North Bay Shore, and then connects to that, protected bike lane, that spreads throughout North Bay Shore to collect, to connect to employment sites. The distance that we're talking about. Yes, we can walk it, but it's gonna be a very long walk. So, I would say we will see pedestrians, but the bridge itself is over half a mile long, but the primary users are going to be bicycles.

[00:39:15] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, thank you. Thank you. Council's number, Meta check. Thank you.

[00:39:21] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Um, I, I'm curious if staff could comment on what you would expect to happen at the intersection of Carabara and Shoreline in China, of the bicycle that might get, um, that might be staging there, um, following up on Mr. James's comments, and did we look at any other configuration of the, uh, path. Um at that intersection.

[00:39:53] City Staff: So it's at this stage of the design for the post bridge. We are we haven't looked into it. We will be closing looking at the operation of this intersection, um, especially after the, um, reversible transit length is put in place. Um, rule monitor it and make modification as design continue. Um, since there's, um, facility improvement hasn't been in place. We haven't been looking at how this intersection will be operated and how to really direct all the uh potential user of the bridge could safely maneuver. Um, so again, we'll look at the intersection operation and design, another part of the design stage. And a later part of the design stage for the, this overcrossing, not something else.

[00:40:46] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay. Okay, okay. Um, because I think he raised a good point about um, what might happen at that intersection and how we want it to function very well, um, and not have a lot of, um, build up of bicyclists there. Um, let's see, also, um, I was wondering if we did take a look at, providing a little bit of relief to, especially pedestrians. Although I, I just heard that we don't expect a lot of pedestrians to use this. Um, in terms of the, like, shade. Um, I'm kind of concerned that this is a pretty long expanse of concrete, um, and metal and it could be pretty warm, uh, for people using this. And I was wondering, did we look at all at, I know that it would add to the cost, but, um, any sort of median with trees on it. So you kind of listen to the, um, overall amenity, um, on the bridge and leading up to the bridge.

[00:41:54] City Staff: Right now, at this stage, we're looking at different from the key question that we ask, especially for the bridge structure itself. And once we have a, a direction for the council, and if you, um, we can look into shating amenity, uh, how we can go in, um, with the railing, uh, there are some other consideration that we need to, um, evaluate based on Caltrain requirements. Um, usually they would like to have a, if you have a billing or fence, they'll be, we do mesh. Uh we'll have to coordinate and consult with Caltrans as well if we um provide over the head over the shading area and how that might be, how that might impact on our permitting process. That is something that we can note down and to be and discuss in the conceptual alternatives when we come back in the future meeting.

[00:42:49] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: So we can't do anything with trees or anything like that on this bridge.

[00:42:55] City Staff: Um, I don't have a answer to your exact question in terms of providing actual trees and lower landscaping. Uh, we can look into it, um, and then provide you with, um, a response to the, in the future meeting or follow up, um, response after the meeting.

[00:43:15] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay. Um, and when was the last time the bike dead committee took a look at this?

[00:43:22] City Staff: Um, They were involved in the development of the Shoreline Corridor study, um, the public input, uh, outreach process. I think they were engaged twice. They have 2 meetings, and they were the key discussion mainly was having a, a connection over the freeway, and and the result is uh separated, um, mixed use or shared use at, um, and, um, we recommended, um, a 20 feet wide bridge.

[00:43:59] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: So they're, did they have an opportunity to talk about that, a 20 foot wide bridge and what this might look like? Or is that after we review it?

[00:44:09] City Staff: Um, I, so now we, called the discussion details, uh, done. I think she's.

[00:44:17] City Staff: So we can, we understand that there was a bit, quite a bit of discussion about the business of the bridge, how it was best for bikes because, when the need for the bridge was 1st identified in the Shoreline uh corridor study. So what you're saying today is consistent with the basic uh design and concepts that came out of that study that had community outreach and worked with the ice compedestrian advisory committee. After, you know, direction for me today in terms of, um, the approach for each of these approaches, the segments, and what you want us to further explore, um, various concept alternatives will be developed, and we will be going back through the bicycle credential advisory committee, uh, with those concepts before we come back to city council.

[00:45:09] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay, great. Thank you. That's it.

[00:45:11] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Thank you. All right, there.

[00:45:17] Unknown Speaker: Great. Thanks so much. I just have 2 quick questions. So when we are talking about, um, the commuting, um, what, I was trying to scour through the soccer court to see if I missed it, is it gonna be 15 miles an hour, speed limit like it is on Stevens Creek Trail, or has there been fought onto what that'll be like?

[00:45:38] City Staff: Um, so, eat lemon typically full by length or is 15 mile per hour?

[00:45:45] Unknown Speaker: Great, thank you. And then, um, I just had one follow-up question and I think one of the, um, speakers asked this as well, talking about the law Avenida, the Stevens Creek connection. Um, and and how that might, how that might work. I was just wondering if that could answer that question.

[00:46:11] City Staff: So, right now, there are plans already in the works at bike lanes along La Bonita. Uh part of that's going to be done by the Microsoft project and part of it will be continued and finished by our North Shoreline off-ramply alignment project. So, I hope it be that, you know, we're already making these, you know, improvements along all the data that we'll get towards the trail. And then eventually if we do be able to buy this, um, bridge offshoot over shoreline, they could connect directly into those pipelines.

[00:46:52] Unknown Speaker: Great, thank you. And then I was trying to remember where the green lake, green stripes lane bar, I, and this is on Shorebird. Or Charleston, and with those also, is the idea that, that those lanes will also kind of filter in and be able to be used by, um, these future, uh, bike purchases, like pedestrian bridges.

[00:47:20] City Staff: Well, the North Spacial Precise Plan does call for protected bikeways along Charleston, and in fact, some of those have already been built, um, and are open and more are in design. It's actually a very expensive size network plan throughout North Bay Shore as North Spacial precise time gets built out and there'll be quite a bit connectivity throughout the bicycles. Right?

[00:47:47] Unknown Speaker: Okay, thank you so much. those are my questions.

[00:47:50] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, thank you. Any other customers or questions? Oh, Counselor McAllister?

[00:48:00] Councilmember John McAlister: Just my follow-up. Was there a discussion that Lavanita would connect with Stevens Creek Trail? Did somebody ask that question? That there would be bike lens connecting those up?

[00:48:23] Unknown Speaker: Are you asking that?

[00:48:24] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah, I'm asking it, does... Is there any plans for the Lavanita bike trail? Anybody ask that question?

[00:48:43] Unknown Speaker: The bike lanes are scheduled to be built on Anita. They say there will be a connection, but if staff wants to elaborate, that'd be great.

[00:48:52] City Staff: I, I think it might be easy if, if we go ahead and provide you the, the plans for Law of Anita after this meeting, uh, as a follow up report, so that you can see. what's gonna be built out there and how it will connect to the trail.

[00:49:08] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, thank you. Any other questions? from council members. If not, um, could we try to do a straw vote on, we'll take each item and if you have further comments on them, um, we'll take it after the vote. So on item one, um, the council member supports that recommendation, uh, please raise your hand. One, two, three, four, five, six. Definitely a Calister, just... support. Did you support, do you support staff recommendations?

[00:49:55] Councilmember John McAlister: Uh, let me just. As you can see, I just came off the golf course, I'm going to just turn it in here, so. It's a 2 way off street cycle track and sidewalk, including installation of street trees, landscape and street lights along the way. Absolutely. Love the design. Love the design.

[00:50:15] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. And sounds for romantic? You have comment?

[00:50:18] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I just want to add that, um, this is the area where I'd like to understand more about how the shoreline terrible intersection is going to work. Um, and I just wanted to add, um, we got some public comments, um, in regards to the landscaping. I think, um, you know, it's always nice to beautify, but, um, there are issues with, um, disability and safety, and, um, it's like the Stevens Creek Trail, although it's very lushed. Uh, we tend to have some um, issues at times so, there can be uh, um, consideration for safety and uh, 1st. I would appreciate that.

[00:51:01] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Number hit. Did you have a comment?

[00:51:05] Councilmember Alison Hicks: They're related to that. I'm also very related to a comment that, uh, council member Madica said earlier, um, although I, I share your concerns about safety. I also am concerned about, um, health and usability because of, um, I guess what I've been reading about, uh, particular, well, bike and pedestrian pathways. Um, if there's too much concrete, there, the air filtration is, is poor and also people on hot beds tend to not want to use them. So I think it's really important to balance those 2 factors. Certainly look out for visibility, but I would hate it to become kind of a concrete jungle, but then is not used because because of lack of shade or that, um, you know, adds to people, particularly in this, this time of COVID-19 adds to people's lung problems over time because, um, of too much concrete and and not a lot of, enough air filtration. So like, they want landscaping to be, and, and trace to be an important part of the project.

[00:52:17] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Council member Metachek.

[00:52:24] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Sorry, I must not have lowered my hand. I'm sorry.

[00:52:29] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay. Um, and any other comments on one, and flat, can we move on to question two? The release, uh, this council support, recommended standard bridge structure design, concrete box burger for the post bridge, with optional enhancements, be reviewed by the city council in the future meeting. If you support, um, Steph recommendation on 2, could I get a show of hands? One, two, three, four. 6, did you have?

[00:53:02] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Oh, now or when I comment first. I, I've seen an increasing number of, um, of, uh, bikeways, race bikeways that are not just very lately that are not the, the, um, concrete box types that are steel. And I, I actually asked this question in our council questions whether that has been considered for all or part of this. And the answer I got was, it wouldn't work for something that's wrong. But actually, the ones I've been reading about, it's an article, the headline, um, says enthusiastically, you know, longest bike path in the world. Um, so, I am, they're, they're very streamlined. They're very, they're, um, you know, they're, they're nice here in a lot of ways, and I think they're less expensive. So, I would like, I would like those to be at least looked into to be a part of our network. Um, So I may not be voting for this, but that just puts it on people's, um, you know, on, on that, uh, to do this, to look into it at some time that may be worth it. I think.

[00:54:21] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. I'll go to counselor clerk.

[00:54:27] Councilmember Chris Clark: Yeah, um, I, I support the staff recommendation here, I just wanted to, um, highlight one thing that I think would be, you know, a low cost way to add interest to this structure, especially if we go with sort of a standard concrete box cosa structure. Um, and I realize that Caltrans isn't simple to work with on these things, but, um, any sort of lighting element that we can incorporate that adds some interest, um, I know that Caltrans won't want them to be too distracting the drivers, but, you know, if we can just light it up in in different colors at different times of the year, or even if you can't light the entire bridge, um, if you could back light some sort of art or, or, you know, one or 2 pieces within the bridge just to draw some visual interest to it in the evening. I think that would go a long way. I think some of the most interesting bridges I've seen are actually the most interesting in various parts of the country. So, I know Caltrans is a hurdle there, but I think that would be a little cost way to uh, make something that's a pretty standard, you know, design standout um, in the Bay Area generally.

[00:55:39] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Hey, thank you. Uh, Counselor, and I check, did you have further comments?

[00:55:44] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes, on this one, um, this is the area of the section of the, uh, of crossing that I was most concerned about the heat, because you are going over many lanes of a freeway, so it's a whole lot of concrete in this area. Um, my perfect scenario would be, we would separate bicycles and pedestrians with a nice medium with trees on it in this section. Um I'm guessing that's not going to be possible. Um, but that would be my, um, perfect uh view of this. Um, uh, I am concerned about, um, uh, I did lighting, um, and I'm mostly concerned that, um, I don't want it to interfere with, uh, the birds and other wildlife in this area. And so, I don't really want this to be so distracting that, um, it attracts birds. Um, I don't know if the Belmont O'Neill, one that is shown on page 15. I really like that one. Very simple. I think it's artistic. Um, I don't know what lighting they have on that one. Um, but I, I don't want the lighting to be a distraction, and my friends probably won't let you do that anyway. Um because you don't want to distract the other people using the freeway. But, um, I want to be really careful about writing um, on this one. And that's it.

[00:57:08] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great. Thank you, Counselor McAllister.

[00:57:13] Unknown Speaker: Uh, I should have asked this question when we're going with a standard box. Was this designed because the efficiency or the cost?

[00:57:25] Tina: Um, this is Tina. Um, the recommended option is based on 2 primary consideration, versus um, lack of visibility. On that one. And the other, it's a lifecycle cost. In general, the construction costs and maintenance costs in the future for a concrete box, but a bridge is cheaper or less than a tender um, wheel trust bridge, for example. And the, as also, the steel bridge typically required specialized personnel to install. To construct, to maintain, inspect and even to do routine maintenance. The cost and disability.

[00:58:12] Unknown Speaker: Okay, no, those make sense. So I guess you can put lipstick on a pig and make it look good. Okay. That's fine. Thank you. I do support it.

[00:58:21] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great, thank you. Any other comments on item two? If not, we'll go to question three. Do let's cancel support the recommended design considerations, such as the site light option and a wider deck area to facilitate travels on the proposed and future bridges within the pair avenue approach. Uh, if you support staff recommendation. Can I get a show of hand? One, two, three, four, five, six. Uh, and I'll take comments, council number, and a calendar, and then count another.

[00:58:53] Councilmember John McAlister: I like the approach. I like the, where they were talking about the, uh, skylights, but I'm still concerned about the approach to La Venita. Uh, I know it's, it's uh, conceptual that we might go down there. But I think, um, hopefully when it comes back to us, more research, as the public works director said that we'll get a better idea what's going on to a lot of Anita. But, uh, I, I support everything about that one concept until I get clarity.

[00:59:25] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Counselor, I met a check.

[00:59:27] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. So, um, I really like the skylight option that staff has proposed. I think that will add a lot. Um, I share council member McAllister's concern about what happens at La Bonita. Um, like the Terabella intersection. I feel like this is another one where we need to carefully think through, um, all the likely scenarios and how we're going to address that, um, to make it, uh, good for almost of transportation. And then, um, this was not in the staff report, but, um, it was shown in the presentation. I, I do have concerns, I'm just start saying it now, um, about the visual that was shown for what the, um, the section that could go to a lot of, might look like, um, that to me is a very unfriendly bird design. Um, so we talk about bird friendly. That bird unfriendly, um, with the, uh, suspension structure part of it. So, well, I think you can have a gateway, um, Bridge there. I don't think it should be one that is not conducive to the natural environment in North Bay Shore. Thanks.

[01:00:41] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Any any comments on item 3? Uh, I did have, at least, a majority, it's 7 on the 1st question, it's on the 2nd and it's on the 3rd question, so, uh, council majority support for, um, staff recommendation on all 3, um, and then, if there are any overall comments, something on that, check there that we comments, or was this from previous, right?

[01:01:09] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Sorry, I keep on forgetting to unraise or to lower my hand. I meet me, but forget to lower my hand.

[01:01:18] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: I'll try to do better about that too. All right. Okay, um, I don't see any other comments. I just want to thank staff for bringing this forward. This has been, I feel like a, a very well anticipated project, and so, um, I'm, I'm excited to see it's moving forward, and I, uh, expect it will be in it, uh, process and coming back to us in the future, uh, for more refinement, so look forward to that. So with that, we will close any other and stuff. Is there anything else from staff? Okay, great. uh with that, we'll close the study session and move on to the regular agenda, we have 3 minutes, so please take a 3 minute break and we'll be back at uh 630. Thank you. 5 of this. So, I will go ahead and our regular session at 631 of the meeting to order, um, an announcement, um, for my plate. This meeting will be conducted in accordance with state of California, executive order N dash 29 dash 20 dated March 17, 2020. All members of the city council are participating in this meeting by video conference with no fiscal meeting location. Members of the public wishing to observe the meeting live, may just go at mountain view.legisstar.com on YouTube at mountain view dot gov slash YouTube and on Comcast channel 26. It's noted on the meeting agenda, members of the Republic, nature guide, or public comments during the public comment period for an item by signing up at mountain view.gov slash DC underscore speakers. Any emails and voicemail messages received by 5 PM today are forwarded to the city council. Emails received after 5 PM and prior to the close of the public comment period for the agenda item will be read into the record by the city clerk and any voicemail messages received will be played by the city clerk. All votes will be taken by will call vote. Now, I'd like to ask if we click to proceed, but we call. Thank you.

[01:07:14] City Clerk: Council member Clark.

[01:07:16] Councilmember Chris Clark: Here?

[01:07:16] City Clerk: Council member Hicks.

[01:07:21] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Thank you.

[01:07:22] City Clerk: Council member Mattachek.

[01:07:24] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Here,

[01:07:25] City Clerk: Council member McAllister.

[01:07:27] Councilmember John McAlister: Yep.

[01:07:27] City Clerk: Council member Ramirez. Vice Mayor Kameh.

[01:07:32] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Here,

[01:07:33] City Clerk: Mayor Abi Koga.

[01:07:34] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Here, thank you very much. Thank you. So all counselors are present, and we will move on to item three. We have a couple of presentations this evening. Uh, the 1st one, we'd like to start off with 3.one is an update on our COVID-19 relief activities by our city manager, Kendra McCarthy. Welcome.

[01:08:08] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Hello everyone. I'm gonna share my computer screen here. Okay. You all see it? Great, all right. So, good evening, council member, today marks the 6th week that we have been sheltering in place and just yesterday we learned that the current shelter in place order would be continuing through the end of May. Yeah, I wanted to start off by saying that I recognize the sacrifice that this takes uh, for our community and our staff, and the overwhelming uncertainty and stress that many of us are experiencing. And I do want to assure the community that the city team is rising to the occasion and we are continuing to serve with determination and flexibility. And we're doing our very best to adapt to the daily changes and uncertainty of how this crisis is unfolding as the weeks and months go on. And so tonight I'd like to share a few important updates this evening and also highlight some positive development. So the 1st thing as per usual that I do every week, I'd like to share, um, an update on the donations to our together and the donation portal. So as of today, the fund has received 554 individual donations, um, totally in almost a $100,000 and the rent relief program has around 290 donations. And around 57,000 and the business relief program has 254 donations totally in around $42,000. So, again, I just want to reiterate uh, and thank the community for their generosity. And pulling together to provide relief for those of our community members who need help with rent or small business assistance. Then I also want to provide an update on where the rent relief program is, um, as of Friday. Um, some data information. So far there have been around 1600 applications and of those applications in process. There are around 1438 applications. A 196 households have been assisted so far with an average check of around $2100 and I also included the breakdown of the area median income. So you can see that the program continues to primarily fund with over half of the funding going towards people who are in the 0 to 30% of the AMI range. And then between 30 and 50% um, around 16% of people. And then those who are under 80, excuse me, 51 to 80%, almost 23% of the applicants are in that range. So the program does continue to maintain the spirit and the parameters that uh city council talked about a few weeks ago. And the new development that I want to talk about tonight. I'm very pleased to be able to announce that our small business resiliency microphone program is expected to launch tomorrow. And before I get into the details, I want to thank staff for all of their work and efforts on this in particular business development specialist, Tiffany Chew, and personal analyst, Melvin Gaines, who worked very hard on this project over the past month. At the same time. I do want to also recognize Dean Miller with the Los Also Community Foundation. They have been a great collaborative partner with the city and really working creatively with our team and our corporate partners to bring this program to fruition with Main Street launch. The total of all available funds for the small business resiliency program is close to $1000000. This includes funding from the city, uh, where the city contributed $400,000. Uh, Google, who contributed $400,000, LinkedIn, who contributed 100,000, and then the generous donations from our community members through the Together MV Fund, which I just described that are around $50,000. So as I mentioned, the program is expected to launch tomorrow, through the Main Street launch website, and they are taking a phase approach to this launch. So, tomorrow, the release inquiry form will be available on the Main Street launch website, and on May 1st, the loan application opens, and Main Street launch will begin to work through the 1st batch of applications, um, just at the administrative level and start to process those applications. On May 11, the loan application closes. The loan application period might be extended based upon the number of applicants received in the 1st batch and then the availability of funds. But at this point we are planning on closing it on May 11th. And we will have an opportunity to create a wait list and inquiry forums in case more funding becomes available. So in terms of the details of the program, the available micro loans will be up to $10,000 at a 0% interest rate with a 3 year payback period. Interested parties can submit an email to SM, Biz, BIV, COVID-19 help at mountain view.gov. So again, that's SM Fizz, COVID-19 health at Mountain View.gov. And this information will also be pushed out on all of our communications channels tomorrow, including a press release on the city's website, on our social media channels, through the Chamber of Commerce, the, um, call center that we're setting up that I will describe in a little bit, and then also through the Central Business Association. So, again, we're pleased that this, uh, funding that the city council provided a few weeks ago, um, has come to fruition in terms of this program, and, um, we're hopeful that this will be a great, uh, resource, the small businesses of our community. Then I also wanted to highlight, um, quite a few of the small business efforts that are underway right now. And right now, staff are working closely with the chamber and the downtown business association to showcase all of the businesses that are open, including the restaurants, at www dot I love mv dot org. And you can go through this. I loveMb.org and you will see a list of all of the available businesses that are open and you can scroll through. Staff are also allowing businesses to display temporary signs right now. So, banners and A-frame science are allowed for businesses to advertise that they're open. We are deferring sidewalk cafe permit fees to October of 2020. We're also allowing businesses right now to operate on sidewalks. So for example, um, if there are uh, businesses that are offering to go food, uh, we are allowing those to be operated on sidewalks. I also wanted to mention that there's a small business round table event hosted by the chamber on May 13th at noon. And at this point that um event is expected to have local banks there. So we'll be providing information on small business funding opportunities. And lastly, we have launched an effort city wide with a great number of city staff who will be calling all businesses in the city to touch base and talk about the resources that are available to our small businesses. So as I mentioned, we have a large team of staff that are working on this effort and they will be doing this proactive outreach to the small business community and this effort is expected to start next week. Then the other program that is launching tomorrow is our landlord assistance program. So like the small business resiliency program, um, this will be a service through Main Street launch, and again, in partnership with the Loss also Community Foundation, uh, working with the city team on setting this up. So, it will be similar to the, um, resilience program that I just described in terms of the timing. So the release inquiry form, um, will be tomorrow, launch tomorrow through the Main Street launch website, and then the loan application itself opens on May 1st. And then Main Street launch will begin to work through the 1st batch of applications at that time. And also, um, just like the prior program, the loan program is expected to close on May 11. So, in terms of some of the details, right now, the micro loans are anticipated to be up to $5000 for one month, and borrowers may apply for funds for a max of 2 months, which would be $10,000 total, and that is dependent on funding availability, and the number of requests that come in. Um, so like the small business resiliency, um, program at set a 0% interest rate, and the repayment period is for 12 months. Then the other program that I've been launching this week that uh council funded is the utility bill assistance program. So council allocated $100,000 for setting up this program, and what uh, the program parameters are, is that customers may apply to receive a $50 credit per account. And that is equal to about a 20% discount on an average monthly bill, and it is going to be 1st come, 1st served, and people who are interested, they contact, um, by email or phone, and the email is revenue staff at mountain view dot gov, or they may call 650-903-6317. And then I also wanted to point out that right now, the city is not shutting off any service due to nonpayment. We're also losing penalties and interest on any late payments. And staff is also working in good faith with customers on payment arrangements as unique situations arise. So, um, as I mentioned, there will be a form that, um, the utility bill customers can fill out and they can email, um, the revenue staff at mountain view dot gov or call that phone number to get that email. Or excuse me to get that form. And I also wanted to end um, with information that uh, we learned about today, um, through in large part to donation from our library. So, um, there were a number of students at um, Mountain View High School and engineering class who were concerned about the shortage of PPU equipment at local medical facilities and they wanted to do something with their 3D printers and other technology. And so they created a project to design and print space shields and so-called ear savers. um to help folks that may need them. And our city library donated the city's 3D printer to help students make these space shields and ear stapers for frontline workers. And so far, the students have printed frames for over 120 face shields. And they have ordered for about 100 more. Students have donated these spatials to Mountain View healthcare, which is a local skills nursing facility. And they've also donated to school district workers who are handed out meals over 500 students a day. So we're very pleased that, um, the students were able to use the library 3D printer to help with these efforts. And then just the same as in prior weeks. I want to encourage everyone to take the census. It is open until October 31st and we want to make sure that everyone in our community is counted. So I encourage everyone to go online and throughout their census. And then lastly, just a reminder that people may sign up for our 3 times a week community briefing. Um, they can text him the COVID, the 22828 to receive an email with an update 3 times a week about our latest COVID-19 effort. So with that, um, that concludes my update this week and I am happy to answer any questions.

[01:21:16] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great, thank you. We do have a question, Counselor Medicheck.

[01:21:23] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yeah, I just want to make sure I heard correctly. Um, the details of the loans for small businesses via Main Street launch. Um, and so I know that email um, address has been used for businesses to express interest prior to the start of the launch. Um, but then I heard you say that people should go to the main street launch website and um submit something. Is that, um, like, which queue are, are we gonna work through to allocate the funds that we have? Is it the email list? Or is it what you submit on the website?

[01:22:07] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: So the email might Sorry, I don't know, is there feedback? Um, the email list is for interested parties to register their interest so that we can then email them and let them know when the program launches. So they will have to go to Main Street launched to physically click on the button and go through the process of applying. But we wanted to make sure that we at least had an interest list of our businesses so that we could proactively reach back out to them and say, the program's launched. Here's where you go. Here's what you need to do.

[01:22:41] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay, so, um, tomorrow they should all get. an email at the same time that's launched.

[01:22:47] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Yes,

[01:22:47] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: and will there be? I'm just looking on their website and it looks like they're working with several different um cities and so there'll be a special place for Mountain View.

[01:22:56] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Yes, exactly.

[01:22:57] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay. Okay, great. Thank you.

[01:22:59] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: They've created a special page just for the Mountain View program and so that will be highlighted and and you see that they they have worked with San Francisco and Oakland and they'll be a very special page just for the Mountain View program.

[01:23:11] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Great. Thank you.

[01:23:14] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Cam for Ramirez.

[01:23:16] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, Mayor, uh, and thank you for, uh, for the update. information here. I just have a few questions. So 1st um, uh, regarding the small um, landlord relief program. We have 2 programs that that both um sort of address similar needs in different ways. And, you know, it's a relatively small product funding, but for small landlords who are unable to benefit from that program, and they still be able to benefit from the rent relate program. And similarly, you know, those small landlords may have tenants who apply for the rent relief program, but we may exhaust the funding before those folks are able to benefit. So, um, we use this opportunity to make sure that, um, small landlords who are, who are, um, applying for a loan, are also aware, are made aware of the rent relief programs, so that way they can encourage their tenants to sign up through CSA. Is that something that we're already planning to do?

[01:24:30] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Yes, I believe so, but we will make sure that staff is letting the landlords know about the other program as well so that they're aware of both resources.

[01:24:39] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Fantastic. Um, and then, uh, we haven't really talked too much about it, but, um, and, and. I I don't claim to have a lot of knowledge about this, but I know that, you know, through FEMA and and maybe some other federal and and cities are able to get reimbursed for some costs associated with COVID, um, a response. during, uh, San Jose, for instance, got a big check recently. Um, I just, we've been sort of keeping track of our expenditures related to COVID response, and the staff have a sense of how much we're likely to, be able to be reimbursed by the federal government or for our work.

[01:25:24] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Yeah, so that is actually something that staff is assessing and we have that included in the staff report that will come next week. Um, the financial update uh, which is planned for May 5th. And at that time, we will have an estimate of all of the potential FIMA reimbursements in the total that we have. I don't want to say what the amount is now because I actually don't have that staff report in front of me, but that is something that we will be bringing to council and we'll have an update in the staff report next week about that.

[01:25:55] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: And then the last question is, um, I know there's a tremendous amount of work going into what operations will look like. Um, you know, sort of once we get past this initial emergency response. Um, and, uh, you know, I can, this is an high end list of priorities, but, um, advisory bodies, um, are starting to meet, again, EPC, RHC. Um, but not all of them. And I'm wondering if ultimately we will, uh, start having virtual meetings for every advisory body, uh, in in particular, may as generally, I think, when you have to figure out the, the work plans for the, the commute fiscal year. And so is is staff already um, preparing for that transition for for all of the advisory bodies. Um, and and other sort of being back into the, the, the routine we had prior to, um, uh, the issues.

[01:26:56] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: So, so I can answer that briefly and then I'll also ask our assistant city manager to jump in, um, yes, we are assessing what um, it might look like for the advisory bodies to meet again. I will say that, um, it will not look like the normal way of doing it, um, as before, just simply because of the staff workloads right now, um, which are very heavy in terms of focusing on the COVID-19 crisis and a lot of the staff who serve as staff to the advisory bodies are the same staff that are working on our emergency efforts right now. Um, so we do have a plan underway and I would ask our assistant city manager to discuss um, the next steps, but we are actively talking about what that will look like and then how the work plan process will be right now. I would imagine that it would just be a little more limited than it has in years past limited in the sense that we just won't be able to undertake the number of um projects and initiatives that um may have been possible in the past. So I think we're gonna have to put some realistic, um, you know, expectations and figure out what we can and can't handle, um, at a staff level, but that's something that I know that the staff that are staffing those committees. Um, or excuse me, the advisory bodies they're working on and then I would just ask um, our assistant city manager to jump in if there's any other um details that I may be missing.

[01:28:26] Assistant City Manager: Um, the city manager has given a good overview, um, we have the staff in the city manager's office that are connecting with the liaisons, so you should be advised with the body to determine what their, um, uh, ability to meet during the month of, uh, name might be, um, one of the things that we've determined, although it's been, um, I think during member when getting virtual meetings through video, um, uh, scheduled. They still take a tremendous amount of support, not just from the staff leaves on, of the advisory body. So, um, the, you know, our close office and our IT department. And so we are still expecting for the month of May to not be business as usual with the bodies and that those meetings would go forward really only if they have urgent items that needed to be addressed during the month of May. And based on their reality, our staff is in the manager's office talking to liaisons, the advisory bodies around. What are the, the items in their current work plans that won't really be um, feasible to have been completely by the end of this physical year and therefore carry forward. And then what minimal number of other items might be of high priority, um, that could be considered in June for adoption as part of the more, um, uh, streamline, um, work plans for the advisory body going forward. And then we, you know, still need to look at our, um, you know, schedule for counsel coming back, saying we have a normal schedule, so then it would be in September, that there's advisory body work plans to come to counsel for adoption as we typically do.

[01:30:10] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yeah, thank you, Counselor McAllister, and then Counselor Hicks.

[01:30:15] Councilmember John McAlister: Thank you. So I noticed somebody, there was 196 people were assisted for the low rent for rental release. Last week was about a 100 and, I'd say about a 186 were, what was the number of people were held last week?

[01:30:37] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Let me pull up those numbers. Did you have another question and I can look at those numbers if you want to ask the, the, the other question?

[01:30:46] Councilmember John McAlister: Nope, that's it?

[01:30:48] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Okay. So last week. I think I'm gonna have to get back to you on that council member, McAllister. Don't have those numbers readily available, but I'll find out and let you know.

[01:31:01] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, thank you.

[01:31:03] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Hicks?

[01:31:06] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Okay, well, while we're on the subject of event relief, so we now have 3 programs related in one way or another to uh renter or land relief, and I'm just wondering if there's any screening to make sure I would just like to make sure that release is spread around. Um, and I'm wondering if there's any screening to make sure that, um, the same applicants are not, um, applying to both landlord relief programs. I don't know whether that's been thought through. I would particularly hated the same person got very savvy at applying and applied to 2 for the same time period or got a disproportionate amount. So, if I were to set up that whole set of programs. I would I would want to check for that. And I'm wondering if that's happening. Um, I'm also wondering if someone can, uh, apply for tenant relief and landlord relief, you know, for the sang unit. I'm just wondering about screaming about some of those duplications. I'm also wondering if a person, a landlord can evict the tenant and then apply for a release for that. Whereas I would prefer that if they got the release, they keep the tennis. So, various questions about screening, duplications and those somewhat overlapping rules of money.

[01:32:42] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: So I'll try and take all of those. So the 1st thing is, in terms of screen applicants, DSA is administering the rent relief program for renters, and then main street launch is administering the small business assistance and the landlord program. And just because of the parameters that staff have outlined, I would say it would be very rare for a landlord to be getting assistance through the rent relief program that CSA is administering. And then also apply for funds um through the program through mainstream launch. But that is something that we can make sure that we are asking as part of the program launch, um, in terms of just the, the landlord, um, portion of it that they're administering, you know, have you received funds through the city's rent release program. You know, I think that's something that we can make sure that we um are putting in place. And then in terms of the parameters for that program. So, um, for the small landlord program, the borrowers, um, may not evict tenants for nonpayment of rent due to COVID-19, um, until the, um, basically, they have to be in compliance with the urgency ordinance, um, defending evictions or nonpayment. So, um, there are parameters around that as well, that, that they can't fit the money and then, you know, evict people right away. Um, then in terms of, um, the applicants applying to both programs, so we wouldn't have folks who are getting rent relief apply to the landlord program, and as I said, I think it would be more rare for a landlord to apply and get rent relief through CSA, um, just because they are requiring proof of where the person works. Um, and that they are paying rent, um, to a landlord because the money goes to the landlord. If you're asking whether people who are getting the rent checks from CSA are the same people that are applying for the landlord program, I think that is going to take some work um in terms of getting that information from CSA. Um, but the council direction um, from last time was that this program would be for um, landlords who own less than 9 units or no more than 9 units, and it could be used for items such as uh, capital, improvement items, or insurance, premiums, um, or, you know, other costs on a case by case basis. So, not necessarily only, um, to pay, you know, mortgage payments. Um. So I think we would definitely have, um, more work to do to try and cross reference with CSA, who all the landlords are that have been receiving the rent relief payment, if that's what you're asking.

[01:35:44] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yeah, I just think I've seen through other programs that I've been involved with. Let's say, sometimes people get very savvy at fighting. And I just want to make sure since, you know, I would like to give to people I need. I want to make sure that we just ask the simplest questions to make sure that doesn't happen. You know, get a print out of who we're writing checks too. If we're writing, you know, several 100 checks, we can look at who those entities are and also, um, you know, as, as you said, have you applied before, just a couple of simple things, whatever we can do very simply to make sure that we're, um, you know, spreading the check to those in need and and kind of, nobody's kind of double, double looking the check.

[01:36:33] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Thank you and we'll we'll have that data. I know all of that data is being collected, so.

[01:36:39] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you so much. Great, any other questions? I just want to think, um, our city manager and all of our staff once again for all the hard work that's been put into the relief efforts, um, it's really quite amazing to see how much has been accomplished in those 6 short weeks, and, um, and ate me at a, a virtual town hall meeting last week, and, um, There's definitely a lot of questions, a lot of uncertainty, but um, I, I felt, um, good that as the city, um, we've been responsive to as many people as we could be. So, thank you to, my city manager and all our staff for all the hard work. Thank you.

[01:37:29] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So we'll go on to item 3.2. This is a presentation by the environmental protection agency, Region 9 Superfund Project Manager, Eric. I hope to experience that, right? The cleanup of the Jasko Chemical Corporation, Super Spen site, and the upcoming listing process. the can singola. welcome.

[01:37:56] Superfund Project Manager Eric Canting Waller: Hello, uh, good evening there. Can everyone hear me all right? Okay. wonderful. I'm gonna share my screen. Okay, can I have not see the presentation? Wonderful. Okay. So, good evening. Uh, my name is Eric Canting Waller, and I am the superfund project manager with the United States Environmental Section Agency for the Jasko Superfund Site, Mountain View. Um, The Jaska Superfund site is a half of this website that was added to the national priorities list for Superfund list, which is a list of the most contaminated, hazardous websites throughout the United States that have been approved for federal cleanup by the US EPA. Um, tonight, I'm here to talk about the cleanup of this superfund site. And the upcoming deletion of this site from national priorities list. The listing is the combination of over 30 years of ice cleanup work, and it's a major achievement for EPA, the city of Mountain View, and its residents. So we're very excited about it. We are proud of our efforts to protect human health from the environment. By cleaning up contaminated land and restoring it to productive use. The psycholist thing will also dovetail nicely with future bike use and redevelopment, and will enable a formally contaminated, hazardous wayside to become a self safe and healthy home. For 100s of future, mountain view residents. So the Jaska superfund side, just a little bit of context here is located near the intersection of Shoreline, Avenue, and is, um, in the Shoreline West neighborhood. The Jasko Chemical Corporation repackaged and formulated chemical products from 1976 to 1995 at a approximate 2 acre parcel that is surrounded by residences. And the facility handled numerous chemicals such as methodolide, paint center, um, teenage alcohol, and all of these chemicals are what we call volatile organic compounds. And as the name would suggest, what that means is nature chemicals that at room temperature will naturally evaporate slowly over time and go into the bath phase. which means they can go up through contaminated groundwater and soil, and up to the surface where they can reach people. So elevated levels of volatile organic compounds were detected in soil and groundwater. And this was most likely due to past storage and disposal practices of the site. So basically what the JOCO Chemical Company did. If you can see on the right map on the right hand side. They would offload, uh, rail cars full of these chemicals from the far, uh, realized it used to be that they're now used by Caltrain. And they would repackage them and store them in large underground tanks, and make household cleaners, greasers, solvents, as well as industrial chemicals that were used in the semiconductor manufacturing industry. The superfund cleanup process is an ongoing for a number of years, and it consists of 5 main sets, um, assessments, where we look to see whether there is contamination at a site, or whether it's likely characterization, where we define the nature and extent of the contamination, and affect possible solutions and remedial technology. The record of decision, where we select one of those remedial technologies, to remediate the site, clean up, where we actually start, you know, turning dirt, or installing some of these systems, whether it's a downwater system, or uh, removal of soil. And then finally, we're all the way at the end of the process, where we do monitoring and uh, 5 year reviews. And finally, delete the fight from the national priorities once the site cleanup goals have been met. These are a couple of photos, um, that show some of the remedial actions that were taken. So we removed 8 underground storage tanks, ranging from 5 to 12,000 gallons. The excavated contaminated soil, and remove volcanicals that were left on the site, um, after the site closed down. There were three main types of media that were contaminated the site. Oil, oil, vapor, and groundwater. Soil, vapor, um, you know, those are gaps that form in the soil when tentacles evaporate over time. So picture, you know, it's really seeking out, not, um, you know, something that would be comparable to a boiling pot. To remediate the soil, EPA excavated the soil, disposed of some of it offsite, and also use fire remediation, which is microbes to degrade some of the contaminants soil. For groundwater. A groundwater treatment system was installed, that used carbon absorption treatment with an airstripper unit to remediate the site that water. So basically bad water extraction walls were installed. The water was pumped through the surface, and then treat it using the treatment system you see here. And the system was turned off in 2002. So, in 2002, cleanup goals were met for soil and groundwater treatment at the site. However, we continue to monitor groundwater at the site. for another 8 years until 2010. And that was to confirm that the decreasing trends that we saw in contaminant. So we confirmed that those trends were continuing, and that the levels didn't increase after time. At this point in time, all response activities are complete, and the criteria for deleting the site from the national priorities was has been met. In addition, uh, EPA conducted 25 year reviews. And what a 5 year review is, is basically, um, it's where EPA goes back to a site after the mediation has been complete. And we go and confirm that the remedy is still functioning as originally intended, and that it's still protective of human health in the environment. So we completed 25 year reviews, one in 2007, another in 2012. And there was also both of those reviews were that the remedy was still functioning as intended. So from there, you know, we're kind of at this point where no further response is needed. For me, our overall goal, which is protecting human health and the environment. It then brings me to the next slide on site redevelopment, and these pictures might look familiar to you. Because I know that you've been briefed on this development by Mr. Michael Ducati, Prometheus Group. And so they are the private real estate development company that is leading the redevelopment at the site. So there's a 226 unit apartment complex that is currently under construction. There is an environmental covenant for the property. A covenant was lodged in 2010. Um, with the county of Santa Clara. And the environmental covenant basically says that there is some project requirements, environmental project requirements that must be met, in order to ensure that future construction and redevelopment of the site is protective. And while the regional water quality control board is the lead agency, um, for oversight and compliance with the covenant, uh, government also does say that GPA, uh, has a role as well. So some of the project requirements include the installation of the deeper intrusion mitigation barrier. So this will go under the project. And basically this is, you know, a shooting that will go to prevent vapors from, uh, you know, the site, from going into any future development. They're also being post construction monitoring and adherence with the soil management plan. Some of the public benefits of the site redevelopment include $150,000 a year in anticipated tax revenue for the city of Mountain View, around 2000 construction jobs, um, an alternate mitigation proposal of $140000 to support affordable housing offsites. A .4 acre park, and the use of part of the development for a future multi-use pedestrian bike path that would connect the shoreline west neighborhoods with bypass across central expressway that might link up to downtown Mountain View or other neighborhoods in the future. So, a little bit about the super fun site deletion process, the EPA, uh, files that fills out report and confirms that the site is eligible for deletion. We then get concurrence from our state counterpart, which in this case, well, the California Department of Toxic Substances Control, and then here's the step where we're at now, is where EPA publishes, what's called the notice of intent to delete in the federal register. Um, that is essentially the public, um, platform for the federal government. Once the notice is published, that initiates a 30 day public comment period. And then, after the flea received comments, EPA considers the comments, and publishes a responsiveness summary, and, um, finally, that gets published in the federal register again, as the final notice and deletion, and then the bike is officially deleted from national priorities. So we anticipate on publishing the notes of intent to delete around May 11th. And EPA is requesting assistance from the city council, there's a staff person I could, uh, get in touch with after this meeting, to discuss ways in which you think would be effective to get the word out to residents and encourage them to submit public comments. That would great. Uh, public comments can be questions, concerns, or against the deletion. You can submit comments by emailing them directly to me, or through the federal register. EPA will also be working on getting the word out through a public notice in the Mountain View voice. potential postcard mailing to nearby residences, as well as, um, a potential press release and social media outage. And with that, I think I'm at my time. So thank you very much.

[01:50:25] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Hey, thank you very much, Mr. Cancellado, for coming joining us and with the presentation. Are there any questions from council members? Um, I don't see any, I, and I wanted to just respond to, or at the city manager, um, the staff will fill up with, Mr. Cantino, about getting the word out to the public, about the, the, and I see, I see a nod, so, um, oops, our staff will be in touch with you. Thank you very much for taking. Thank you very much.

[01:51:06] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great. So you wanna move on now? to, and I'm sure, a consent calendar. Is I don't will be approved by one motion, unless any member of the council, this is to move an item for discussion. The reading of the full text, the resolutions will be waived unless they cancel the request otherwise. Would any member of the council like to pull an item? Don't be, please raise your hands in the box, if you do, see any. Would any member of the public on the line like to provide comment on an item on the consent calendar? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom, if you're an attendee and attendee box. Or cause star 9 on your phone. The city park will display the timer on the screen. Um, I don't see anyone in the box, raising their hand. Uh, City Creek. Do we have any other public comments?

[01:52:03] City Clerk: No other public comments, Mayor.

[01:52:05] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Great. Um, So, with that, then, I'll, so, so, coverage and educate emotion, council member quick.

[01:52:17] Councilmember Chris Clark: Yeah, so I'll move the consent calendar, which includes item 4 by 2 adopt a resolution approving the final map of track number 10504982 Bonita Avenue, accepting dedications and making findings as required by the code, if you read entitle only for the reading waived. And a 4.3 adopt a resolution, amending table 1998, designating 12 minute parking zones previously adopted by resolution number 18250 versus new it. To Mountain View City code section 1998, you read the title only for the reading light.

[01:52:51] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. And cancel on America check, is that a 2nd?

[01:52:55] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: It is, I'll 2nd promotion.

[01:52:56] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great. Thank you. Any other discussion on the confront calendar, motion by counts number, Clark, 2nd like counts 9 Miranda check. Uh, if not, I'd like to call a low call vote please.

[01:53:10] City Clerk: Council member Clark. Council member Hicks. Council member Mattachek.

[01:53:17] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes,

[01:53:18] City Clerk: council member McAllister.

[01:53:20] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah?

[01:53:20] City Clerk: Council member Ramirez. Vice Mayor May.

[01:53:26] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes,

[01:53:26] City Clerk: Mayor Abby Koga.

[01:53:28] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Hi.

[01:53:29] City Clerk: Thank you. Ocean Pascu 7 0 with no extensions.

[01:53:35] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you very much. We'll go onto item 5, oral communication. This question in the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the council on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are allowed to speak on any topic for up to 3 minutes during this section. State law prohibits the council from acting on nonagenda items. But any member of the public on the line, again in the attendee box, um, like to provide comment on a non-agenda item. If so, please click the raise hand button and zoom, press star 9 on your phone. You will do have one member of the public um in the city court will uh show the timer on the screen. So Mr. Albert G, welcome back. You should be on.

[01:54:22] Albert G: Oh, let's see. Okay. There you go. Okay, thank you. I just had a quick comment. Sorry, my preox part. Even during this shutdown, I've been walking in, biking around the North Bay Shore area. And with people completely shut down, It's, you know, there's nobody there, but I've noticed recently, interesting phenomena. A lot of cars parked on amphitheater Parkway. At 1st I thought maybe they were construction workers, but there's really no construction going on there at Charleston East. And finally, I realized those are cars are owned by people that are using a safe parking lot. And then, yeah, it makes sense. They're living in their RVs, but they still have to use cars to get around. And so, I'm just wondering if that's ever been considered, there's certainly a lot of space there. I could, you could, you know, open up a little car parking lot for the people, the people's cars. Because, you know, they have a bit of a hike to go from there to their parking space on amphitheater Parkway. Yeah, Antecedar Parkway has looted parking, and I kind of wonder if once things start ramping up again. going to be full of construction workers, and then where are they going to park? So it's just a. observation and I hope that maybe somebody's thought about it and they think he's doing something about it. Thank you.

[01:55:42] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Are there any other members of the public in, on Zoom wishing to speak? I don't see any other hands raised. Um, do they have any other comments?

[01:56:01] City Clerk: No other comments, thanks, Mayor.

[01:56:05] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. I know we're not supposed to comment, but, um, I did want to just respond to Mr. James, that Steph is looking at the situation. Um, that's part of the safe parking of opening, safe parking lots, and this is our news, so we're discovering new things as we go, but that issue is being looked at right now. Thank you. So, uh, with that, I will close public comment on non-agenda items and go to item 6 or public hearing, 6.one and zoning text amendments regarding accessory doing units, family daycare homes, and planned community development. And I actually have the pulenter's name. Uh, we have Britney Whitehill, assistant planner and Sesame Williams, planning manager, learning administrator. So welcome to both of you.

[01:57:07] Assistant Planner Brittany Whitehill: Hi there, can you see my PowerPoint presentation?

[01:57:17] Unknown Speaker: It's really small, Brittany.

[01:57:19] Assistant Planner Brittany Whitehill: Okay, let me see if I can expand that.

[01:57:22] Unknown Speaker: Okay. She should be able to hit that fire.

[01:57:30] Assistant Planner Brittany Whitehill: Let's see. My apology. There we go. Is that okay? Awesome, thank you. Good evening, mayor, and members of the city council. My name is Brittany Whitehill, and I enjoyed tonight by planning manager and zoning administrator Stephanie Williams. The item in front of you consists of zoning ordinance amendments pertaining to accessory dwelling units, also referred to as ADUs, family daycare homes and planned community permits. In fall of 2019, the governor signed into law several bills amending multiple government code sections related to ADUs and junior ADUs, as well as SB234 related to family daycare homes. This legislation became effective on January 1st, 2020. Upon reviewing new state legislation pertaining to ADUs, that has identified necessary, zoning ordinance amendments, including allowable voting districts, and ADU development standards and regulations. Additionally, state law requires jurisdictions to permit ADUs in multifamily districts. Finally, under state law, owners of unpermitted ADUs built before January 1st, 2020, may request a 5 year delay of enforcement of certain building and zoning violations. Staff will be proposing an amnesty program alongside the zoning code updates in order to comply with this state legislation and incentivize the legalization of unpremitted ADUs. The zoning ordinance currently permits ADUs in the R1 district on properties with an existing or proposed single family home. State law now requires jurisdictions to permit ADUs in all residential zoning districts, and mixed use districts which allow for residential uses. Whereas the zoning ordinance currently limits AD is to a maximum of 700 square feet. State law mandates that jurisdictions allow studio and one bedroom ADUs of up to 850 square feet. And AD is with 2 or more bedrooms of up to 1000 square feet. Cities must allow both attached and detached ADUs to be constructed 4 feet from the side property line and 4 feet from the rear property line. The zoning ordinance currently allows legal conforming garages and carports to be converted to 80 years. Now, under state law, cities must allow conversion or replacement of legal non-conforming structures with ADUs. Currently, the R1 district requires 2 parking spaces for the main house, one of which must be covered. And ADU requires one additional parking space which does not need to be covered. Currently, the zoning ordinance allows certain exceptions for the ADU got the requirement. Under state law, if a garage or carport is converted to an ADU, no replacement parking needs to be provided. Staff proposes to update the zoning ordinance accordingly. Under state law, cities must allow 80 years in all multifamily votes. 80 years shall be permitted within portions of an existing multifamily dwelling structure that are not used as livable space. Up to 25% of the number of existing multifamily units in the building, but at least one unit shall be allowed. Previously cities had the option to allow junior ADUs. However, now the state requires JD JADUs to be allowed in single family homes. A junior accessory dwelling unit is defined as a unit that is no more than 500 square feet in size, includes an efficiency kitchen, is contained entirely within the walls of a single family home, and may include separate sanitation facilities, but may share sanitation facilities with the single family dwellings. JADUs do not require additional parking. In the fall of 2019 SV 234 related to family daycare homes were signed into loss. The objective of the legislation is to streamline the administration of childcare licensing facilities, to increase the supply of licensed childcare homes. This legislation became effective on January 1st of 2020. Currently, large family daycare homes, which allows 7 to 14 children, require a nondiscretionary conditional use permit in all residential zoning districts. Large family daycare homes must provide one additional parking space per employee and are subject to additional standards, such as a pickup and drop off plan in an outdoor play area. SB 234 relaxes many requirements associated with large family daycare homes by requiring cities to permit them by right in all residential districts. Additionally, SB 234 prevent cities from requiring additional on-site parking for employees. No additional standards such as a pickup and drop off plan or outdoor play area. Staff is proposing to update affected code sections accordingly. Finally, Steph proposes minor amendments to the planned community permit section to clarify that the purpose of a planned community permit is to allow for creative, innovative development within a context of defined community goals. The proposed amendments clarify that in some cases, variations from the applicable precise plan standards may be granted, but in order for these variations to be granted, proposals must clearly demonstrate superior site and building design and comply substantially with the intent of the requirements in the applicable precise plan. EPC reviewed the proposed text amendments at the March 4th public hearing, and unanimously recommended approval of the text amendment. In conclusion, staff recommends that counsel approve the proposed text amendments. This concludes staff presentation, and we will be happy to answer any questions that you have.

[02:03:45] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great, thank you very much. We'll go to counsel questions. Are there any council members with questions? Raise your hands. That's from the clerk.

[02:03:58] Councilmember Chris Clark: Um, yeah, I had, um, to, uh, the, and just so I, I understand, it looks like, um, from the staff report, um, the, um, the short term rental prohibition, the, the primary difference is, um, so the state law prohibits short term rentals in all detached ADUs. 300 feet, all junior ADUs and all accessory. Showing in some multi-amazones that were committed after January one. Um, it sounds like your, your staff is proposing to, um, that it's basically all ADU is detached or attached. So the big difference that I, I noted there was, was attached, including attached. And so I'm just curious if, um, if you happen to know why the state exempted those, um, just, um, if we're, if we're going to include them, I'm just trying to figure out if the state had a reason for excluding attached, um, from a short term rental. Um prohibition.

[02:05:10] Planning Manager Stephanie Williams: So, I don't, we don't have the, the highway, um, the, uh, the,

[02:05:23] Councilmember Chris Clark: Okay. Um. Okay, and then, uh, the 2nd question, um, staff, uh, in, in looking at the, um, the ADUs of BMR unit, uh, I know that when the report you said, you don't anticipate, um, that a lending program result in a certain amount of additional affordable units on your new basis, but you can have an informal program. And so just looking ahead to, um, to plan Bay Area 2050 and and likely, um, you know, us needing, um, you know, quite a few of, of, um, Quite a few, probably um, housing allocation, especially um, in for the lower end of the spectrum, in terms of AMI. I was just wondering if, if we had the ability to ramp up a lending program in the future, if we think it would help us meet those goals, maybe not necessarily right now, but, um, I'm just curious, if we should, if that's something that we want to look at, if we should do it now, or if we have the ability to spin that up later on, once we get our, I mean, allocations and, and are trying to work through our, our housing element.

[02:06:40] Planning Manager Stephanie Williams: Yeah, so I would like to refer that uh, questions for housing managers, and while. Uh... Ready to participate?

[02:06:54] Housing Manager: Sorry, Tim. Hi, so good evening. Can you hear me?

[02:07:04] Unknown Speaker: Yes.

[02:07:05] Housing Manager: Yeah, okay. Good evening. So, there's always the possibility of having a lending program, however, um, because of the level of affordability we require for BMR, right now, with our BMR rental, it's about 65% AMI, there's quite a gap there. So I think the, the lending gap. I haven't done the math, but the, the gap to, between market rate and the 65% am I, I think is pretty sizable. So, it would have to be a fairly, um, fairly large, uh, loan program. I don't know if that is something that the council is interested in pursuing.

[02:07:49] Councilmember Chris Clark: Okay. Okay. I think I'm interested in spending up a big administrative program and just more interested in not tying our hands down the road if we if we realize that we're going to have a tough time meeting our, um, meeting our, um, um, arena numbers, but, um, right, that's all I had. Thank you, mayor.

[02:08:10] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. We're going to Counselor Ramirez.

[02:08:17] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I wanted to follow up on a couple of the, uh, responses to the written questions. Uh, so 1st um. uh I want to make sure I understand what the state requires for junior 80 use. Um, I'm, uh, there are single family homes that are constructed on properties that are now zoned R2 and R3. Um, and while I understand in the future, there could be, uh, a multifamily property on those, um, on those lots, you know, right now, just a single family home. And so I wanted to better understand why, um, we wouldn't need to, and in the other challenge too, is that single family home is a permitted use in R2 R3 and R4 districts. So I, I'm, I'm trying to understand why we were not also modifying the zoning code to allow junior ADUs in single family homes on or in those districts.

[02:09:36] Planning Manager Stephanie Williams: So, uh, Part of the answer was, is, it was included in the, um, the responses, and that is correct, that it's needed that our 2 are free, and you have a single family home. You do have the opportunity to add to it. And um. Some of the additional that is by right, and if you had a JADU with a recorded cabinet, on your property, it could, um, prohibit you from then adding that additional visiting, um, the, um, HCD also recommended that, um, anything R2 and about in terms of military family zoning, the kind of a limit, in terms of what is considered military family, for 80 years. years. As well as there is the, the provision, if you are in our fewer arcade, have it still reforming home, you can still do a detach, they do, as well as intro coversion.

[02:10:39] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So, um, I'm, I'm aware of a, of an old, in a family home on a, in our 3 district that has, what I'm guessing is probably an unpermitted JADU. Um, so, if it's, or, is that a legal, non-conforming use, or how, how do we treat those kinds of junior 80s?

[02:11:06] Planning Manager Stephanie Williams: So if there's an existing single-family home that has an unlimited EVU of any kind in it, they could come in for a legal conversion of that and it would depend on a variable internalization of the day it is, if it's in, um, the garage or, another non-habitable portion of the home that could be eligible, um, to be converted to the AVU.

[02:11:34] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Uh, but if it's, if it's, if it's like an extension of the home itself, where there's an, it's physically connected to the rest of the house and there's also, um, an exterior for, is, would that, would, Would that be, there's no way to get that recognized as a legal pay to you?

[02:11:59] Planning Manager Stephanie Williams: If there is a multi-family district now. Yeah.

[02:12:06] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um, and then, um, for the, the setback issue, um, because I'm, I'm, it would be, I'm still sort of struggling with that. So, you could have an attached EDU. Um, but if you have a detached ADU, it has to be 10 feet away from any other structure within the property. And I, I'm not sure I under, I fully understand why. Um, you know, it, particularly too, if we're, if we're allowing detached EDUs to have a, you know, um, 4 feet away from the property line. There could be a detached ADU in the adjacent property. So you'd have 8 feet between the two. Um, under state law. So I'm, I'm, can you help me understand sort of what, what, the intention behind the 10 foot interior step back is?

[02:13:10] Planning Manager Stephanie Williams: But the intention behind it was to be consistent with the detached accessory structure requirements, which do require test food, and the major driving point behind that is, uh, fire and building code, um, life safety separation, substantial off and building modifications that need to be done through structures. that are closer, especially if they're both habitable in order to be so violating. So, in an effort to, like, it was easier for people and be consistent with their regulations, a recommendation was a 10 set separation.

[02:13:53] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um. And, uh, the only other question was, uh, about the CRA district. So, um, it sounds like the the written response. It may be helpful to clarify that small and large family daycare, uh, is permitted in the CRA district. Not currently part of the staff recommenda- staff recommendation. So, um, what, if we, we might include that clarification, should we incorporate that into, into, um, what our motion is made?

[02:14:34] Planning Manager Stephanie Williams: Yeah.

[02:14:36] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much.

[02:14:40] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Hey, thank you. Yes, Counselor, Meditrek, and then Counselor and McAllister.

[02:14:45] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Just one question. And in the, if you build an ADU, in a multi-family structure, um I see what it says, the setbacks for the side and the rear, but I don't see and I probably missed it. If there's any requirements, um, in terms of the separation between the 2 different, um, structures, similar to their, in the, um, previous section, for single family homes. So is there that 10 foot requirement in a multifamily structure if you're adding ADUs?

[02:15:34] Planning Manager Stephanie Williams: No, it would be for the decat structure.

[02:15:37] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: So where, where is that? I was looking on the top of page 15 of attachment one. Sorry. And expected to see it there.

[02:15:50] Planning Manager Stephanie Williams: Uh, so we would refer to the, especially the limit, um, the pilot? On the, on page 14? That's correct, yeah, 31, 13, 13, 1st person.

[02:16:07] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay, so that covers, that's general ADU requirements. Okay, got it. Thank you. That was it.

[02:16:19] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Council member, Madison, uh, McAllister and then Council member here.

[02:16:23] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah, thank you. This seems like an interesting, uh, exercise. But, it appeared there was much discretion on part of staff. Was there? Are you just incorporated what they, uh, smiling there's Stephanie, yes. Was there much discretion?

[02:16:45] Planning Manager Stephanie Williams: There's not a lot of discussion given to us.

[02:16:49] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. So if somebody takes a, um, we give amnesty to somebody. To, um, is that reported to the a county assessor, and then they will start be paying taxes, property taxes on these units if we, uh, allow them to, uh, bring it up the code.

[02:17:12] Planning Manager Stephanie Williams: Any, any building from it? That building, the building division is reported to the county deck, and they are, um...

[02:17:21] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, perfect. So those who have uh illegal are non-conforming might just stick with their current deal instead of lay low, save some property taxes, potentially.

[02:17:36] Planning Manager Stephanie Williams: They could,

[02:17:36] Councilmember John McAlister: okay. On the BMR, there was a discussion about uh restricted deed. Could you tell me a little bit about that restricted deed, how long it is, who can put it on, who can take it off? And what was the purpose of a restricted deed?

[02:17:58] Planning Manager Stephanie Williams: So the covenant that's required for a JADU is actually another requirement under state law that wasn't something that we were proposing, but it is a requirement and we would be required to record it. Um, by the occupancy of the JADU, and if you were to remove the JADU, then you could, um, remove the company.

[02:18:24] Councilmember John McAlister: So it's at the discretion of the owner.

[02:18:29] Unknown Speaker: And so what does that covenant do? What, what is the purpose behind it?

[02:18:37] Unknown Speaker: So the company, it does hit the land, and it, the intention of it is to explain that it is a separate ABU within the structure. And if it does run with the land, it would also, um, It will form and limit future property owners. um, that might buy that structure that has the ABU in it. prohibitors.

[02:19:06] Unknown Speaker: So if a new owner wanted to buy that property and just take off the, they could just do that.

[02:19:19] Unknown Speaker: Yeah, I mean, the company does say you need, you need, um, permission of the city.

[02:19:26] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, okay. Okay.

[02:19:29] Planning Manager Stephanie Williams: Councilman McAllister.

[02:19:31] Councilmember John McAlister: I think there, these are some questions we might have to get back to you on because, you know, we, we've thought about it and, you know, a lot of us are asking ourselves the city, so, um, as we find out more information about the implementations, we, we'll get back to you.

[02:19:47] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. Uh parking. It sounds like the only way we can do anything about parking is put parking restrictions on the street.

[02:20:02] Unknown Speaker: We can't require parking for any of these units, but, you know, uh, uh, a residential parking program could go into effect, but it would also allow people living in the ADUs to get parking spaces, I would imagine. Um.

[02:20:20] Councilmember John McAlister: I guess that's one of the, okay, so that was for coming. Now on the 4 foot step back. Now, San Jose, did I read or someone says that they have a 6 foot setback, had that been put in place before the new state law?

[02:20:40] Unknown Speaker: Yeah, I'm, I'm not sure about, um, performance with state law, but they are, but that's greater for the fight and there than Thorpe.

[02:20:54] Councilmember John McAlister: So, let's say, uh, we have a situation where we have new construction, and somebody wants to build an ADU at the same time. The ADU allows a four foot setback. The main house also get the four, the main structure also get a four foot setback? Okay, thank you. and then they snag me. Oh, other council members, that's most of my questions, thankfully, um, I did appreciate many of them, but council member quarts about the BMR. I agree that maybe that's something we should explore later. I have a simple question about amnesty. My leaning towards amnesty would be there would be good reasons to just let it be longer. For instance, if one was using the, um, say, a garage or any, any particular, except for a unit or a part of the house as a teenage bedroom. It wouldn't need a kitchen app. And it might be more than the suggested amnesty before he wanted to convert that. So, preference would be to lengthen that period, but if there are good reason to keep it, because I would hate to foreclose that on someone. But is there a good reason to make the amnesty period shorter as suggested in the staff report?

[02:22:37] Unknown Speaker: The staff is recommended 5 years. It aligns with the state law, um, for, um, destroying enforcement on. So is really meant to align those 2 if that, I mean, the council wanted to extend the, the non-state component of that, which is related to the building permit, and the building permit processing timeline, but there's something that you could, um, direct staff to do. But in terms of the non-enforcement, that is dictated by.

[02:23:13] Unknown Speaker: Oh, um, and just answer the, the 2nd part of it, which is, many of these ADUs that are illegal. Um, sometimes have, um, life safety issues. And we feel like 5 years is a good enough timeline, but we don't want to be in a position where the city knows and there's sort of an indeterminate amount of time where somebody's living in that unit. Um, and 5 years we feel is, is, um, uh, a good period of time to allow the person to bring it under, um, you know, sort of correct.

[02:23:57] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, okay, thank you. Is there?

[02:24:03] Unknown Speaker: Great, thank you. I also had a question about the amnesty program. I think um for some of the things set up in the staff report. There was a question, capital question related to, you know, what would be the administrative burden on something like a 80 BMR program. I was wondering when it comes to the amnesty program, if we went with the 5 years. Um, what that might look like for staff in terms of a workload and getting that up and running and could share a little bit more with us.

[02:24:36] Unknown Speaker: Definitely, maybe you can share about workload and what it would mean in terms of C.

[02:24:44] Unknown Speaker: Sure, so, um, AD formates are done necessarily as building from it, so, um, those can come in anytime they like. So, in terms of administering, um, the amnesty program, I don't think that would be, uh, a extra work on that. It would just be, you know, a matter of escalating food and. And, um, practically the permit. So, administratively, it's not, it wouldn't be a.

[02:25:20] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great, thank you. Any other questions from council members? I guess I had one going back to the covenant for affordable housing. I, I, I was trying to understand um what, what the benefit would be to be this.

[02:25:45] Unknown Speaker: The benefit of deed restricting an ADU would be, um, a assuring that it would be affordable in perpetuity, as per our BMR requirements, having it affordable to a household who earns no more than 65% AMI, if, um, that would be the direction the council would want to know. I think that would be the benefit just, uh, an affordable unit in purpose.

[02:26:13] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: I'm sorry, I guess they should have added for the owner of the property. Is there some kind of tax benefit or some other benefit that is the owner or property owner?

[02:26:25] Unknown Speaker: It could be assessed for the ADU they could be assessed at a lower rate since it is deed restricted as many of our BMR ownership units are assessed at a low rate so that could be a potential financial benefit to the homeowner.

[02:26:43] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, great. Thank you. Counselor McAllister, do you have some questions?

[02:26:48] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes, Tim, so just follow up on the mayors and that's what I was asking earlier. You use the word perpetuity for the unit. Well, what if they sell the property? Can that covenant come off? Of course, you say, once it's filled, it's there in perpetuity.

[02:27:06] Unknown Speaker: Um, the BMR agreement or the BMR restrictions run with the land. So it would not, um, terminate, uh, change of ownership. It is with the land.

[02:27:20] Councilmember John McAlister: And so, when the new owner, when the new owner takes over this property, they said, okay, I agreed to that, I agreed to that, to the agreement, and have you seen many people do this willingly?

[02:27:36] Unknown Speaker: Um, on the ADU level, no, but I would just equate it, for example, if you had a apartment complex with some BMR unit, and it changes from one owner to another, that is a factor in the sale when, when it, when the, um, when the property is sold.

[02:28:00] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, but, you know, the only difference is that you're dealing with a single family's primary residence, and then now you attach the single unit, which may not be compatible as the family's changed dynamics, and that's...

[02:28:18] Unknown Speaker: This is actually suggested by the EPC as um, a potential program for people who want to voluntarily, um, you know, um, have the IDs be listed as DMRs. Uh, but you're right. One need not be listed, one might choose to rent it at a low rate. So we don't see a whole lot of takers for this program. Uh, but it's the beginning of a framework, um, and the city money in helping them. There might be some springs attached, it might look a little different. Um so we're not proposing a program at this time, but just starting to discuss elements of it.

[02:29:01] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, thank you. That was helpful.

[02:29:03] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great, thank you. Any other questions from council members? If not, I'll open this up for public comment. If there are any members, uh, participating, uh, in through Zoom and the attending box, who would like to speak on this item, please, put the, raise hand buttons at the bottom. I don't see any. So, uh, City Quick, do you have any other public comment?

[02:29:32] City Clerk: No other public comment received after 5 PM and no voicemails for this item, and I don't have anyone signed up to speak.

[02:29:38] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Thank you. Uh, close public comment and bring it back for council discussion in emotion, Councilman Ramirez.

[02:29:49] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, there, and just to make it easier to understand me also, I'll try. I support the staff recommendation. Um, there are uh, a couple of tweaks that I would be supportive of if other members of the council support them. Uh, the 1st is, including small and large family daycare, uh, permitted uses in the CRA district. I think that aligns more closely with the requirement in state law. Um, and then the others are probably a little bit more challenging. Just to, to answer, Council member McAllister's question about San Jose, uh, the modifications were made last year in response to state law, and they, uh, adopted a 6 foot interior setback. So they're combined with state law on the fore feet, but the 6 foot into between structures and the interior of the property. And if other members of the council support something less than 10 feet, I would support that as well. Um, I think it's consistent with the direction that the state, uh, law is sort of pushing us towards just to make it a little bit easier. And particularly if there happened to be unpermitted ADUs in properties. I would, I'm going to support the, the amnesty program, um, and I, what I want to do is make it. you know, easier for folks to come forward and um, and make sure that, that, you know, their properties are income class. They have, uh, restrictions that sort of affect them make it impossible for these folks to buy. They're not going to participate in the amnesty program. Uh, so I, I, I do think looking at the interior setback would make sense. Um, I don't think that other members of the council support it. Um, and, you know, the, the last thing would be the junior ADU issue for single family homes in R 2 and R 3 districts, uh, you know, again, you know, if, if nobody else is supportive. I'm fine with a recommendation, but it's similar, where, where there are existing single family homes in those districts, particular, particularly those that may have unpermitted JEDUs, um, at the very least in the zoning code, saying, in these districts, where single family homes exist, and no other types of presidential structures. Um, junior ADUs are permitted. Um, and if you, you know, do something other than a single family home and would not be able to have a junior age. But all of this would be just sort of with the institution of folks to comply with the law. And where the law doesn't allow them to, we can reasonably anticipate that those folks will not reply. But fundamentally, very comfortable with the staff recommendation. Um, I know some of those things are probably not going to happen, but at the very least, the CRA district issue or small and large family daycare, um, that's, that's one of the, uh, changes I'd like to see incorporated into, uh, the motion. uh thank you. that's all.

[02:33:03] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, thank you, counseling a matter check.

[02:33:06] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. So, I'm happy to 2nd the motion. I agree with staff's recommendation and I'm okay with including um the small and large family daycare in the CRA districts. Um, the other items that council member Lemo brought up. I'm okay actually with the staff recommendation, but I do support the one edition you made. So if uh, that's okay uh, with you on 2nd that, that motion.

[02:33:39] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I did make a motion, but if you'd like me to, I'm happy to move the staff recommendation with that one.

[02:33:45] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Oh, I thought you made the motion, sorry?

[02:33:47] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Oh, it's okay, Mom. Happy enough to make it.

[02:33:50] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay. Great. So there is an ocean on the floor from Council of America, 2nd is by Council of the Meda check, and we have Council of the clerk.

[02:34:00] Councilmember Chris Clark: I was just going to say, I don't, I don't know if we need to read this, and if so, Christian might need to provide the, um, provide the wording.

[02:34:10] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yeah.

[02:34:11] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: Yes, thank you, counselor required. Motion would, uh, properly be the introduction of the ordinance, uh, language which is in the captions and the recommendation. It's also the title of the ordinance, and then with the addition to uh, modify the commercial land use table to include small and large family daycare homes as permitted in the CRA district. So, um, the maker of the motion uh, should, should read the title of the ordinance plus that phrase.

[02:34:50] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I do so now, or after all of the comments from council numbers.

[02:34:55] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: We take council number Hicks, and then if you can, uh, repeat the motion, that'd be great. Yes, number Hicks?

[02:35:04] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Well, mine has been somewise to repeat the motion. I think I just wanted to be, I pull up, but I supported everything that you said, uh, all the transit commit, uh, council member Ramirez, but I wasn't, you said one change on the ADUs, and I heard it as several. So, I'd like you to repeat that, so I'm clear on what you're, what you're proposing.

[02:35:30] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: See, Counselor Ramirez, if you could repeat your motion. Appreciate it.

[02:35:35] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um, so I moved to, uh, and I'm, I hope I'm looking at the right language here. introduce an ordinance amending section of chapter 36 zoning ordinance of the city code to update accessory dwelling unit and home-based childcare regulations to align with new state regulations and modifications. Planned community permit regulations to be read, I don't only further reading waves and set a 2nd reading for many 12 2020. And also, um, the, uh, the modification pertaining to small and large family, uh, uh, with account of care, uh, homes, uh, allowing that as a permitted use, um, in the CRA, uh, zone industry.

[02:36:21] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: That's correct.

[02:36:24] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great, thank you, and uh, well, 2nded by Counselor MetaCheck, we have more discussion, Counselor McAllister.

[02:36:33] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah, um, I find it sort of ironic that the city is working to get vehicles off the street, and we're increasing our neighborhood parking district, and now it's, being uh, being over uh ruled by the state government, so, we're trying to do one thing and make it better, and the states making it a little worse for, or harder to make it, so. Uh, I'm supporting the motion, but it's just, uh, it's tough to run a city that maintains the quality of life standard different than the state and other communities. And uh, I'm disappointed that we have to give up our council responsibilities. to, uh, deal with, with the, violent majority doesn't do, so, those are my comments. Thank you.

[02:37:27] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Any other discussion on this item?

[02:37:32] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Just 11 presentation. um, uh, This does include the amnesty program, right? Which is not part of the zoning code, but a set of program that is recommending.

[02:37:49] Unknown Speaker: Well, we're looking to counsel, um, to get some direction on that.

[02:37:53] Unknown Speaker: Yeah, consolation is that they did not do service and confirmation on moderation.

[02:38:01] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Okay, and if it's okay with the secondary, um, I'd like to include the, the 5 year amnesty program as recommended by that.

[02:38:11] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: I agree with that, and I also agree with council member McAllister's comments. I believe the EPC also raised concern about parking issues. But yes, council member Ramirez. I agree with your including that. I just kind of assumed it was, bye.

[02:38:31] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great, thank you for that clarification. Any other discussion on this item? If not, could we have a will call vote, please?

[02:38:40] City Clerk: Council member Clark.

[02:38:42] Councilmember Chris Clark: Yep.

[02:38:43] City Clerk: Council member Hicks.

[02:38:45] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yes.

[02:38:46] City Clerk: Council member Mattachek. Council member McAllister.

[02:38:51] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah.

[02:38:52] City Clerk: Council member Ramirez.

[02:38:54] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Yes.

[02:38:55] City Clerk: Vice Mayor Kameh.

[02:38:57] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes,

[02:38:57] City Clerk: Mayor Abbe Koga.

[02:38:59] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: I,

[02:39:00] City Clerk: thank you. Mission carries 7 0 with no extensions.

[02:39:05] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you very much. And, um, I would like to continue on, uh, to new business, item 7.one, adopt a resolution. Depositions governing employee compensation and benefits for all bargaining groups. Um, um, and I have assistant city manager and chief operating Officer Audrey Seymour Randberg. For renting?

[02:39:36] Assistant City Manager Audrey Seymour Randberg: That's correct.

[02:39:40] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay.

[02:39:44] Assistant City Manager Audrey Seymour: The screen. Are you able to hear me? Hello?

[02:40:03] Unknown Speaker: Yes. Yes. Yes, you are very good.

[02:40:05] Assistant City Manager Audrey Seymour Randberg: Thank you. And I'm now sharing my screen. My apologies for the delay. Um, Madam Mayor, members of the council. Um, I am, uh, representing our HR team, presenting to labor agreements. Um, I'm joined on the line by our human resources manager, Sue Rush, and senior human resources analyst, Lucy Bishop. Um, agreements for all employees um, are expiring in June, um, which require us to bring forward um, uh, replacement agreements now, unfortunately, in the midst of our current emergency. Fortunately, we had already begun the process of negotiations and were able to quickly reach, um, a shared interest with the employee group to narrow the scope of the discussion. Um, this is what made sense. Um, in light of the impacts of the COVID 19 emergency. Um, and there's impacts for both on the time of our emergency responders and our management team who were focused on essential services, and also um, the impacts on the city's finances. In light of the current fiscal uncertainty. We are bringing forward an agreement for one year only. And addressing only a limited number of items. This agreement does include a coma, which achieves the city's interest of providing the community with exceptional service going forward, just as we are seeing now, um, in the emergency response for COVID-19. The cost of this cola has been built into the fiscal year, 2021 expenses that will come forward as part of a balanced budget in June. I'm now going to summarize for you, the terms for employee groups, and I will be making distinctions between um, our safety and sworn employees, as they are known, and our non-sworn or miscellaneous employees. This is a reminder for the council and the public swan employees, or those that provide emergency response services, um, in our fire department and police department, and those are made up of the groups of our police officers association, our international association of firefighters, and the unrepresented fire managers, including the fire chiefs and the unrepresented police managers, including the police chief. The non-sworn, um, group is made up of our FCIU bargaining group, the non-sworn members of the police officers association, um, the Eagles group, as well as the unrepresented confidential employees and the unrepresented department heads. So focusing 1st on the non swan employees, for all of the members and all of those different groups that I mentioned, the agreement calls for a 3% cost of living adjustment. Um and in addition, a one time allotment of lead hours in the amount of 21 hours. There's a cleanup item with regard to pension cost share for members of the pension plan that are um in Sepha. Um, such that the total employee contribution stays at the current agreed upon um, level. Um, there is an additional item for SCAU, non-sworn CAA and eagles, which will discontinue cost share, for pepper employees, and then annual, um, incomes that speech the helpers, um, annual compensation limit. Moving on to the terms for the non for the sworn employees, for all of the employees in those groups, their agreement is for a 4% constituting adjustment, and a one time lead hours in the amount of 42 hours for employees who are on 40 hour workshifts, and then 59 hours for employees who are on a 56 hour shift schedule. In addition for, um, the POA and IAFF members, the same, um, term referred to on the prior slide, that limits cost share, um, or stops it, um, at the point that the Calcare's annual income limit is, uh, reach, um, is, uh, in place for POA, Swan and IAFF. In addition, we bring forward at the same time. Um, terms for hourly employees, uh, who are also on represented, um, and that includes the same 3% cola for the miscellaneous classifications and a 4% cola, for those classifications that are timed, ties to sworn safety positions. And then the same um adjustments previously mentioned around the pension cost here, um, where applicable would apply to the hourly employees, and the only a few of those that actually are council members, um, and usually that's because they came to the city already, um, as members of the council system. Uh, wrapping up the final provisions are, uh, to recognize exceptional COVID service, um, and the 1st item is to provide authority, the city manager to be able to make individual awards, to employees in any classification in the city, um, in recognition of exceptional performance. in excess of their regular hours and regular duties in response to COVID-19 pandemic. Uh, similar authority already exists for the city manager to have the potential to provide such recognition to the department heads, and this authority would extend that uh, authority to the city manager to be able to do that for other classifications as well. And then finally, in recognition of the need for the city leadership team to be accessible at all times and working remotely, uh, the proposal is for an increase in the cell phone allowance by um, $15 per month and an increasing management leave by 24 hours. As I mentioned, the cost of the proposed compensation package will be presented as part of a balanced budget, um, when that comes to council in June, um, and for reference, the, the cost for the general funds for the, the coal was approximately 3.5 1000000 um, and across all funds, it would be approximately 4000000 so the all funds would be the general fund plus the enterprise funds, the development services funds, and so forth. Um, you know, to provide more information about the cities to school, uh, condition and how, while we're certainly being impacted by the service virus, there are, uh, a pandemic and emergency, um, the city's 1st revenue base is going to help the organization. Whether this disruption and more information about that will be provided by the city manager in her financial update to the council next Tuesday. With that, I will conclude my remarks and then available for questions.

[02:47:59] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you very much. Any questions from council members? Let's see, any? Uh so then I will open this up for public comments? Uh, are there any members of the public wishing to speak if you are in the attending box, please, does the raise hand button? I don't see anyone, so, uh, City Crick. Are there any other members of the public wishing to speak?

[02:48:30] City Clerk: Mayor, I do have one email that was received after 5 PM. That'll go ahead and read into the record. This is from Serge Bont. Honorable mayor and city council in normal times, and even more so in light of the pandemic, city employees should be recognized and rewarded for their great service they provide to our community. Alas, we're not in normal times and many cities around us. Menlo Park, Palo Alto, are already debating which services to cut. While it's heartening to read that quote, although there are impacts to the city's financial status, the city is fortunate to have a diverse revenue base and currently projects to be able to weather the current economic disruption, end quote. There is no indication of how nor at what cost. Since a fiscal update is planned for next week, May 5th, it would seem more prudent to table this agenda item to May 12th in order to better assess if the city can afford these otherwise well-deserved raises, sincerely Surgebont Mountain Dew resident. And that is the only email that I have. Thank you.

[02:49:31] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, thank you very much. As a close public comment and bring it back to council. Any, um, discussions? Um, I don't see anyone. I just wanted to, um, mention or I make some comments, um, I know these are, um, unusual times, um, and, um, so, a lot of, so, the situation, um, had to do with timing, but, um, I, I want to thank staff for, uh, working hard to, uh, bring agreement, um, fairly quickly on this matter. Um, I, I believe that um, we have been very mindful of uh, the economic situation that we are expecting to face. Um, it is a one year deal, um, in usual cases, we would probably be coming to a longer, uh, term. Um, but because of the situation, we just, uh, and, uh, we reached agreement to keep it to one year. And, um, I, I know we always have critics, frankly, when we do this, um, but I would say, you know, our staff has been working extremely hard, especially now, um, just like, just because they're city employees, um, doesn't mean that they face, they don't face the same challenges as everyone else is. in terms of um economic uncertainty. So, um, we have worked hard. the best budget next week, but we have a preview. We've been all informed that we should be, um, that, but balanced, um, have a balanced budget, and, um, as mentioned, part of that is because we've had, um, a very fiscally prudent organization for a very long time, and, um, during the last great recession, um, when we did have to look at a cuts or deficits or, uh, ways to save money. Um, we asked our employee groups to help us, and they did, and so, um, in light of the history that we have, and I think we are unique right now. Um, other cities around us and I, I know the, one of the papers, uh, mentioned Palo Alto, uh, they face a $30000000 deficit, um, other cities are facing deficits, so, um, we are in a fortunate situation where we will be able to balance our budget, um, for the upcoming year. And so in light of that, I think, um, we've reached a good balance, um, and rewarding our employees for, um, the work and service is done, um, And for as much as we can predict, uh, we, uh, our economic financial situation, um, and and being able to balance the budget. I feel that this is important for us too, um, to uh, approve these agreements. So, with that, I have, I see council member clerks here and back.

[02:52:38] Councilmember Chris Clark: Yeah, so I'll just, um, I'll make a motion, but uh, 1st I'll just echo the mayor's comments, I think, um, I know, um, it's important to understand, like, you know, a couple of things. One is that this is, um, this is a one year agreement, and I think we would, um, this gives us the opportunity one to recognize our, our employees, um, for all that they're, they're done, and they are doing, and we'll continue to do. Um, it also gives us the time that we need to assess the long term impact of the situation on, um, on the city's fiscal well-being so that we can sort of better negotiate a, a longer term agreement away next year. Um, and, um, as the mayor has, and others have pointed out many times are, we, we are unique in that we, not only that we have a, you know, diverse revenue streams, and we've been very physically proven over the years, but, We have good relationships with our employee groups, and um, they have recognized in in prior downturns, um, is, especially the, the really significant one in 2008. The, the city's position, um, that, and, and they've, um, you know, they've been very willing to work with us, and so, I think, um, from my perspective, um, this is a way of, of everyone coming together to ensure that we have an extra period of time where everyone has some stability, and we have the ability to assess the long-term impacts of this, on the city's, um, you know, physical condition, and I have no doubt that next year, um, when we're at in the Yoshin table, work together in good faith, um, to come up with a longer term agreement that works for everyone because, um, we want to, um, We want to, um, do right not only by our taxpayers, but by our, our employees as well. And, um, with that also, thank you, Audrey Sue, and everyone who worked um, to get this agreement in place in, in very short order, um, and had to sort of do a 180, um, in the middle of all this when everything sort of crept up in terms of timing and, and thank you again to our employee groups who are willing to give us the, the extra time that we needed to, um, sort of assess how everything shakes out over the next, um, 9 to 12 months. So that all means that we adopt a resolution authorizing the city manager, or does we need to amend the memorandum of understanding between the Eagles and the city of Mountain View for the period July one, 2020 through June 30th, 2021, to be written title only for the reading wave, to that we adopt a revolution authorizing the city manager, her designate, to amend the memorandum of understanding between the International Association of Firefighters. So for 1965 and the city of Mountain View for the period of July one, 2020 through June 30th, to be read entitled only for the reading wave. Re adopt a resolution authorized in the city manager, or it doesn't need to amend the memorandum of standing between the Mount View. We talked to an association and the city of Mountain View for the period July one, 2020, through June 30th, 2021, to be read title only for the rewave, for adopted resolution authorizing the city manager, or designate to amend the memorandum of understanding between the service police international union, local 521. And the city of Mountain View for the period July one, 2020, June 30, 2021, to be read only for the reading wave, 5 without resolution authorizing the city manager, doesn't be modified compensation for unrepresented, confidential employees, fire managers, police managers, department head, council appointees, and hourly employees for the period of July one, 2020, June 30, 2021 would be entitled only for the re wave, and fixed adopt a resolution authorized in the city manager to provide recognition to employees for their exceptional performance trend to come with 19 pandemic emergency We read titled, like for a relay.

[02:56:23] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you and thank you for reading all of that. Council automatic check, is this the 2nd?

[02:56:29] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: It is a 2nd and I just want to add that I appreciate, uh, you know, comments mayor of Bakoga and those of Council member Clark, and I agree with them, so I'm happy to 2nd this.

[02:56:40] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Any other discussion on this item? If not, could we have a roll call though, please?

[02:56:47] City Clerk: Council member Clark. Council member Hicks. Council member Mattachek. Council member McAllister.

[02:56:58] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah?

[02:56:59] City Clerk: Council member Ramirez. Vice Mayor Kameh.

[02:57:04] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yes,

[02:57:05] City Clerk: Mayor Abi Koga.

[02:57:07] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Hi. Thank you. Thank you. Mission carries 7 0 with no extensions. Thank you very much. And move on to our last, um, nature item, item 7.2, policy on the discontinuation of residential water service for non-payments, in compliance with the water shut up, shut off, protection at SB 998, and I don't have the listing of food is presenting. So, Mr. presenter, oh, it's our finance director, Jesse Takahashi. welcome.

[02:57:40] Finance Director Jesse Takahashi: Good evening, Mayor Abby Koga and council members. Uh, as you mentioned, I'm Jesse Takahashi, city's finance and administrative services director. The Adam before 8th night is a request to formally adopt the policy, via resolution, and introduce, um, an ordinance amendment in order to implement the provisions of Senate Bill 998. Also known as the Water Shut Off Protection Act. And let's see if I can. This up here. Are you able to see the presentation? Okay. Okay. Okay, here we go. Sorry about that. So, um, FP 998 was signed into law in September 2018 and became, uh, effective February one of this year for uh, many providers and April 1st for others. It was meant to provide additional protections for those that are unable to pay the water utility bill, by providing additional time to pay before being shut off, as well as requiring water utilities to provide additional options for making payment arrangements. It applies to residential customers only, requires a written policy, and prohibits urban and community water suppliers from shutting off water to an account for at least 60 days from the time a bill is considered delinquent. There are a number of requirements and provisions that are detailed in the proposed policy, which is exhibit A to your attachment, number one. I will broadly summarize the requirements of this bill. Also contains the city contact information, and by the way, I just wanted to point out the email address, uh, and in your packet was, uh, had a typo in there. That'll be correct, um, email address is revenue staff at mountain view.gov. And that will be corrected in the final copy of the resolution. So aside some basic contact information that's required. It is also required to be translated into 5 different languages other than English. Um, plus any languages that are spoken at least by 10% of the people in our service area. For us, in this case, that would be Russian. In addition to the minimum 60 day, uh, the local requirement, the city must try to reach customer by phone or in writing, to discuss various options for reverting water shut off, including any deferral or possible amortization of payments, petitioning for uh, a bill review or um, an appeal. If the city is unable to uh reach the customer, uh, the city must make a good faith effort to visit the residence and leave proper notice, uh, at the residence of maintaining shut off, as well as a copy of the shut off policy. Must be 998 prohibits, water shut off for any customers, where a certification of a primary care provider states a shut off could pose a serious, uh, health threat to a resident at that premise, the natural hardship exists, and the customer is willing to enter into a payment arrangement. Uh, the city is required to provide information regarding what is required to restore service as well. If the customer household can demonstrate, uh, that it meets um low income criteria, uh, than the city is going to be limited to charging, um, uh, up to $50 for reconnect as, during normal business hours, uh, or $150 uh, in the off hours. Where a tenant landlord, um, the relationship exists, and the occupants of residents are not the account owners, but he has to provide written notice to, uh, the residents there, uh, the pending set off as well as give them notice, uh, how they can become a separate customer without any obligation for paying a delinquent bill. And then the city also lastly has reporting requirements, um, annually, uh, on its website as well to the state board, uh, water resources, uh, with respect to a number of residential service, um, disconnects or shutoffs, uh, due to non-payment. Along with the policy, uh, adoption, an ordinance amendment is also needed to, in order to ensure the proper implementation of, um, this bill. Scheduled, uh, this ordinance is being introduced tonight, uh, and uh, would be scheduled for final adoption at the next regular meeting, which is currently scheduled for May 12th. Uh, to then adopt the, the uh, ordinance would then be a 2nd 30 days um, after it's adopted. And finally, um, these are our recommendations, um, being requested in order to implement the provisions of uh, SB 998. Uh, and this concludes uh, the presentation, and I'd be happy to answer any questions you have.

[03:03:13] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you very much. Are there any questions from council members? I didn't see any. Uh so then I'll uh open up public comments. Are there any members of the public wishing mistake if you're in the attendee box, please, get the raise hand button? I don't see anyone, so I will close, I'm sorry, I should go to the city, because we're running other members of the public.

[03:03:43] City Clerk: No emails received after 5 PM and I don't have anyone sign up to speak. Thank you.

[03:03:48] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Right, thank you. Then I'll both public comment and bring it back to the council, Counselor McAllister.

[03:03:54] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes, uh, after uh, great discussion we just had. I'd like to make a motion to adopt a resolution establishing a policy on the discontinuents of residential water service for nonpayment, implementing Senate bill 998 to be read entitled only, further reading wave, attachment one to the council report, and to introduce an ordinance amending chapter 35 of the city code relating to discontinuation of water service for nonpayment, be read entitled only, for further reading wave, and set 2nd reading from May 12, 2020, attach to it in the council report.

[03:04:31] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, uh, Councilman America, check. Is this the 2nd?

[03:04:35] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: It is our 2nd time motion.

[03:04:37] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great, thank you very much. Any other discussion on this item? If not, uh could we have a real small boat, please?

[03:04:46] City Clerk: Council member Clark.

[03:04:48] Councilmember Chris Clark: Yeah.

[03:04:49] City Clerk: Council member Hicks.

[03:04:51] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yeah.

[03:04:51] City Clerk: Council member Mattachek. Council member McAllister.

[03:04:56] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah.

[03:04:57] City Clerk: Council member Ramirez. Vice Mayor Kameh.

[03:05:01] Vice Mayor Ellen Kamei: Yeah,

[03:05:02] City Clerk: Mayor Abby Koga.

[03:05:04] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Hi.

[03:05:04] City Clerk: Thank you. Listen here, you 7 0 with no extensions.

[03:05:09] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you very much. We'll move on to item 8, council staff committee reports, is that any, uh, counselors? Wishing to give a report. Uh they sing.

[03:05:24] Unknown Speaker: Hey, I just wanted to show that the, uh, council youth subcommittee met today at 4 PM, uh, related to, uh, youth wellness, these mental health, and we'll be, uh, have a couple follow-ups. We had members of Czech, uh, lockout school district, MDLA, and looking forward to the next conversation where we'll have more community partners and school district present to continue the item. That's it.

[03:05:53] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great thank you. Counselor Amanda check.

[03:05:57] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. I just want to report on my attendance at the Santa Clara County airport land use commission meeting, where um actually weighed in on, whether or not San Jose, uh, changes to their zoning ordinance, who are consistent or inconsistent with the airport, um, comprehensive land use plans for the airports in Santa Clara County. And it's the changes for ADU and tiny homes and the things we discussed earlier tonight. Thank you.

[03:06:33] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great, thank you. Any other summers, this week? Um, I was just report that, um, as mentioned earlier, uh, last Thursday, we had our virtual town hall meeting. Um, we had over 200 people signed up, um, so it was, I thought, uh, quite successful. We had congresswoman issue reporting from DC after she had just taken the vote on the stimulus package. A lot of questions without, when we were opening masks, um, some of the issues there with, um, a lot of them are, frankly, uh, probably county related. We're following the county order, so um, I I think we we're trying to um, this guy will explain that the differences between city and county, um, but overall I thought it was a, a good event and thank you. I saw some of you on, uh, on the list of attendees, I appreciate your participation too. And I also wanted to mention that, um, I'd been in conversations with, uh, council member business in Palo Alto, um, who, uh, has a public health background. And so she's been very concerned about the, um, the availability or lack there of testing, um, as that was one of the, um, requirements for the shelter in place order to be listed. And so, um, there's, uh, been calculating, we've extended, we extended the conversation, um, to, uh, North County City, so on Friday we had a discussion, um, just, uh, facilitated by our cities, association, um, ED, uh, which included Sunnyvale, that would be, Palo Alto, and, um, a lot of, uh, I think the conclusion is, well, there's just a lot of questions that we have about how to get more Testing sites up and like the, um, what the challenges are to doing that. Um, so we've, uh, we agreed to send a letter to the county asking for more, uh, more information to answer our questions. Um, so I signed on to that letter along with, um, we ended up expanding it to all 15 cities and 9 mayors who signed on to that letter. So the hope is that we will get more information and our questions, um, ask, so if there is opportunity to, um, put up more testing sites and there's something the cities can, um, help them doing that. Um we would definitely like to know what that is. Um, anything else from house members? Staff? If not, uh, city attorney, is there a session report?

[03:09:10] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: There is no pro session report tonight.

[03:09:13] Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Uh so then, you know, adjourn this meeting at 834 and the next city council meeting is scheduled to be held on Tuesday, May 5th, 2020 at 6 PM. Thank you very much and have a good evening. Take care. Thank you.

• ← Previous
• Next →