the for April the 10th. May I have a roll call please? Supervisor Marquez excused. Supervisor Tam. Present. Supervisor Miley excused. Supervisor Fort Nato Bass. Present. Present Halbert. Present. We have a quorum. For those that are able, please rise the pletch of legions. the present. President. President. We have a quorum. For those that are able please rise for the So, I'm going to go to the library and see if I can make a list of the library. I'm going to go to the library and see sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry all of our meetings. Will the clerk please provide detailed instructions on teleconferencing guidelines? Detailed instructions are provided in teleconferencing guidelines. A link to the document is included in today's agenda. If you are joining the meeting using a computer, use the button at the bottom of your screen to raise your hand to request to speak. When called to speak, please unmute your microphone and state your name. If you are calling in, dial star nine to raise your hand to speak. When you are called to speak, the host will enable you to speak. If you decide not to speak, notify the clerk when your call is unmuted, or you may simply hang up and dial back into the meeting. As a reminder, you may always just observe the meeting without participating by clicking on the view now link on the county's web page at acgov.org. When called, you will have three minutes to speak. Please limit your remarks to the time allocated. Public comment will generally alternate between person and online speakers as determined by the President of the Board and subject to overall time limits. Thank you. Thank you very much. Are there any board comments, President Halpert? Do you have a comment? No, thank you, uh, Superintendent Tam for chairing today's meeting. I appreciate you. I understand you had requested a continuance of item number five. Correct. Okay. So item number five will not be heard today and the closed session item was related to item number five. So we will also have no closed session. So let me move to our regular calendar with starting with the adoption of the minutes from January 14th and March 13th. May I have a motion, please? Move to approve the minutes. Emotion by Halpert, second by Marques. Roll call, roll. Supervisor Marques.. I supervise your Myley excused supervisor for not a bus. President Myley. I'm sorry, President Halbert. Hi. Supervisor Tam. Hi, thank you. Let's move to item number three the resolution on the general plan annual report May I have staff presentation? Good morning everybody Emola Verities they them from the planning department and I believe my slides are making their way onto the screen. There we go So I'm here to share the highlights for the county's 2024 General Plan and Housing Element Annual Reports. Next slide, please. And our recommendation on this item is to hear the presentation, take any public testimony, and adopt the resolution approving the reports. I also wanna note that if there are any revisions you would like us to make, please let us know either now or later. We did submit these reports to the state already because they do at the top of the month, but they accept revisions. Next slide, please. So, government code section 65400 mandates at the county and every jurisdiction prepare an annual report of the status of our general plan and the progress in its implementation. So that's the general plan annual reports. And then there's the annual report in the housing element that focuses on our progress in meeting the regional housing needs allocation or arena and our progress in implementing the elements programs. Next slide please. So first I'll tell you overview where our general plan annual report. Next slide. The general plan. It's required by state law. There are seven required components or elements, land use circulation, housing, open space, conservation, safety, and noise. And then there's the environmental justice elements required by Senate Bill 1000, and it can be a separate element as we have it or sprinkled in throughout the rest of the general plan. Next slide, please. We're kind of unique as a jurisdiction in that we have three general plan areas, the Kastra Valley general plan, the Eden area general plan, and the East County area plan. In those area plans, as you can see in the top three rows of the table, we have covered a lot of our required elements. And then we have a number of county-wide required elements like our housing elements, and then county-wide optional elements, like the Parks and Rec element or the Community Climate Action Plan. Next slide, please. We also have many specific plans, six, specifically. In specific plans, link the broader policies in our general plan to the on-the-ground developments by having or providing development standards and more site-specific policies. Most of our specific plans are in the West County and the urbanized area, the ACBD, the Ashland Terrell and Business District, Castra Valley, Central Business District, the Fairview area, the Madison Avenue, which is up in Castra Valley, in the San Lorenzo Village, specific plans, and then we have one specific plan out in East County, Little Valley, specific plan. Staff and consultants continue to work on the update for the Caster Valley Central Business Disarch specific plan. We're hoping to bring that or complete that work sometime next year. And then next on the docket for an update is the San Lorenzo Village specific plan. We are currently working with MTC staff to begin that process because the funding came through them. Next slide, please. So last year was a pretty big year for General Plan projects in the county. In August, your board adopted the Environmental Justice Elements. And in December, your board adopted the housing element. And of course, with the adoption of the housing element also came significant amendments to the Eden area and Castra Valley General Planes, as well as the Ashland Cherryland Business District, Castro Valley Central Business District, a fair view area and San Lorenzo Village specific plans and we are all working to start implementing those two elements. Then of course staff have continued working on the South Livermore amendments, which you were originally scheduled to hear about today, but have been continued. And sorry, so staff are also working to address recommended revisions on the safety element and community climate action plan updates, and we're hoping to complete those later this year. Next slide, please. So that's pretty much it on the general plan update. Now I'll tell you about the housing element annual progress report. And I just want to note that because it's been adopted for about four months, I don't have a lot of fun updates on our programs yet. We're still working on that. Looking forward to tell you fun things about them next year. Of course, there are like 19 pages describing every program in program in the staff report. So we're happy to answer your questions, but this will mostly focus on the regional housing needs assessment or allocation, excuse me, or Rina, next slide, please. So this is a big table breaking down the kinds of housing units that the county's permitted during the 2024 calendar year. All these units that we've permitted, so permitted, not necessarily completed, go towards meeting our regional housing needs allocation, arena. And arena is 4,711 units. That's for an eight year period, 2023 to 2031. So the top section tells us about what kinds of units were permitted. We had 227 units of housing total permitted last year. In 120 or about half of those were accessory dwelling units or ADUs or of those units or parts of duplex, triplex, fourplexes, three units of manufactured housing were permitted. And then 100 units were either single family attached or detached, and it's about 50, 50% there. Right now we don't collect income information for essentially any of the kinds of units. If something's not deed restricted, lower, very lower middle income, we tend to assume it's above moderate. In the case of 80 use, we refer to an A-Vag study from about 2020 that shows that broadly in the Bay Area about 30% of 80 use are very low income, 30% low, 30% moderate, and 10% above moderate. So that's what we're referring to with that approximate breakdown of 120 units. It's randomly allocated in the process. So the lower half of the table, you'll see that as of last year, we have met almost 13% of our RENA 610 units. Now if we were going to fully meet our RENA during the eight years, we would need to be permitting about 590 units a year. Obviously, that's not happening right now. But on the flip side, the previous cycle is 2015 to 2023. We permitted 673 units total over the eight year period. So we're not keeping up with our increased rena, but we have increased the number of units being permitted in the county each year. I also did a little bit of research yesterday to see what local are neighbors. Excuse me, who have posted their APRs? What the percentage they've met? The state hasn't put up their data portal, so I can't see everybody's yet. But Oakland completed 12.4% of their arena, livermorm, 11.9, 3-month 7.8, Conjurkasa County, to shy of 12. We're in County of 7%, Berkeley hit 20%, or 22%, but they are Berkeley. So I do think we're in good company with heading about 13% in terms of our Bay Area neighbors. Next slide, please. And this is the same information but broken down by our communities. Castro Valley had about 75% of units permitted last year. A significant part of that is a development on the boulevard that's finally received their building permits. And then you can see about 18% of units, 41 total, were in the Eden area in the sprinkle throughout Fairview and the East County. Next slide, please. So those are kind of all the highlights, the big overview of our annual reports. Did just want to share a little timeline, some feedback we've received from our presentations. Last month on March 3rd, we brought the draft APRs to the planning commission. A majority of commissioners then voted to continue the item. The two reasons they gave were one. They wanted to look at our very long list of programs more. And two, multiple commissioners expressed that they did not appreciate voting to acknowledge work on the housing element because they previously voted not to recommend it to approval to your board. The next planning commission waiting two weeks later, in a five to one vote, they agreed to or voted to approve its recommendation to you all. We submitted it before April 1st deadline to the State Department of Housing and Community Development and Office and Land Use. And office, excuse me, they changed their name relatively recently. Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation. And here we are today asking for your approval. Next slide, please. That's all I got. We are happy to take any comment and do our best to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you very much for that presentation. These are important reports, even though we were in the early stages. Are there any comments or questions? Supervisor Myle. Thank you. Let me see. I didn't see the PowerPoint. Do we have that PowerPoint? Not printed out. I'm very sorry. Okay. There was one slide. The one that for the housing element, if you could go back into that housing element, okay, is towards print it out my bad apologies. Then that hold it right there. Okay. All right. I need you to see that real fast. Again, okay, that's good. Now, as staff done, any follow up with the Casher-Holly Board Station? Any conversations with board on that? Morning, sir, Vice-Resort, Lope has plan director. So we did have, as you know, a supervisor of that meeting with BART a couple of weeks ago related to the cash or valley bar station. This fold isn't folded in with our transit oriented communities work. A couple of weeks ago your board accepted $2 million from MTCA back to be able to explore transit oriented communities at both the Bay Fair and the Cash Revali part station. That work will evolve the next 18 months or so to be able to explore the possibility of moving the part station into a closer time frame for development. Right now it's pretty far out to the future. So that work will like I said will evolve and will include presentations at a variety of community meetings including max and planning commission. So right now the um the Bay Fair Park station that's part of those that part of that development is included in arena numbers. It is in our site, Sympathoria. Okay, but cash of all He's not correct. Okay, because you know I'm still trying to sure. Yeah, if I can get that in our arena numbers before Cycle ends then that's why I'm gonna keep raising it. Mm-hmm. Then East County The East Pleasanton So so where are we with that because I heard the city might want to annex East Pleasanton that is true yes so have we received an application yet from the developer because right now we're including that development in our arena number. That is correct, yes. Have we received an application? Yes, we have. Where is that in the process? So there's two applications out there. One of them is a Builders Remedy project, as you may recall, the Builders Remedy allowed developers to submit applications when we didn't have a adopted housing element. And so came in in 2024 There was a previous application that was more I guess a Traditional standard application that came in earlier than that I think it was in 2022 for a senior project out there and so those are both sort of working their way throughout process that they have Environmental documents that underway. No hearings yet, but we did hear the same information in terms of the desire for, I think the city and the developer both think that there's benefits to them being approved in the city, mostly for municipal service purposes. Right, right. So if it's annexed, are we gonna be negotiating any of the ring numbers? Are we going to give all the ring numbers? It is an negotiation. Yes. Okay. Right. Well, keep, definitely keep, keep me a prize of that. I don't know what hasn't gone to Lafko yet, but definitely want to keep a price of that. Because I think their trade offs, because you know, quite frankly, I think think having it in X is a good thing but maybe if we can keep some of the reigning numbers yes that's our our perspective as well. I might have one other question you look at the PowerPoint again. Okay we have a supervisor of our cast and person helper. Thank you, Chair. Thank you for the presentation, Olivia, excellent job. With respect to, I know you mentioned, our housing element has only been adopted for the last four months. So next year when we review the report, will it be around the same period of time? So next year we'll have had it for about a year and four months. Yeah, hopefully. Is it typically this month that we reviewed? Ideally, we'd bring it to you before April 1st, which was our original plan. Okay, before it's due to the state. Got it. Okay. And then with respect to the programming, I know we just enacted just cause protections just went into effect March 6th and then we are going to be conducting a review Have to go back to my notes. I know we wanted it at the year mark But I have a lot of discussion around that so I have to go back and review Where we landed but what's your understanding in terms of when an update will come back to the board on the implementation of just cause. We had 12 months from the time Sandy Rivera Community Development Agency right here. We had 12 months from the time that it was adopted, so that would be early next year. Okay, and then where are we at with prior to the pandemic there is discussion around fair chance and some of the other tenant protections. What's the status of those discussions? So there are a number of if you recall there are a number of tenant protections that were introduced to the board and we had a phasing in which we were going to can bring these amendments to your board for consideration or ordinances for consideration. And so we will have to coordinate with the county administrator but ideally if we can bring that through a board work session and we can go over what those ordinances are and get the board's feedback on on those priorities. I do know some of the ones that are top of the list are anti-harassment, which is also one of the programs that are also one of the MTC options in terms of receiving funding. And so, and then the other is rent registry and pilot proactive rental inspection. So those are the three that are on my radar, but there is definitely a long list, fair chances and other one. Of course, when we were considering fair chance, at that time there were some other litigation that made us put that on the side for a little bit. Okay, is it possible to request the work session. Come back to us. I would say. In July, I know we have to get through this budget season, but July possibly early August. We'll work toward that. Okay.. I know that East County has very limited capability to build new homes because much of the area out there's covered by measure D we have no plans to build homes out there. And that's not going to change. And so I'm wondering the state people or whoever puts together arena numbers, are they counting that land as buildable? Are they giving us arena numbers, expecting that we could build on that land? Because you know, it's technically, you know, you could build on it, but it's protected. And so I want to make sure that we're not, that they are not, that they're fully aware of that, and that they're not counting rena numbers for us to achieve based on something that is protected by, by the voters. Do we know? I would need to review the methodology that they use to create rena because it goes through the state department of finance I want to say. Then MTC breaks it down further. I understand that our rain is very similar to the communities of Hayward. similar to population levels in those cities. With regard to building a building in the East County, we do have that option there. It is limited, of course. You could build ADUs. Of course, we're bringing together, which was continued today, the clustering development as well. But you can build in the East County, it is limited. And so those arena numbers, whatever the methodologies is, we can bring that back to your board in more detail. But it is comparable to the other cities of similar size. So, Heather, one additional comment is that Measure D has built in an escape valve for compliance with our housing renavigations if certain findings are made. So it is a very narrow window, but there is the option within Measure D to exercise that option to build greater numbers of housing out there. Certain findings can be made. Okay, then a question I have for our planning department of how we constructed this. I should know it probably off the head, but as we've constructed our plan now for the portion of East County, how many units are we quote, unquote, planning for with the exception of the East Pleasanton with taking that out. So East County with the exclusion of the East Pleasanton Builders Rights project, how many other units are currently in the plan? we we exclude the East Pleasanton developments, none other than projects that already had permits and while we were developing the plan, which is I don't know how Sir 3. Okay thank you. No other questions thank you. Mr. President, Miley? Yes, I just want to circle back. Uh-oh. Since Mr. President Mark is... No other questions. Thank you. Supervisor Miley? Yes. I just want to circle back. Since Supervisor Marquez raised the issues of tenant protections, it's my understanding that the unincorporated services is supposed to review all of our laws, mediation, rental inspection, the just cause, all of that package that we've enacted after the 12 month period, and then bring that to the board. I thought that was the process. And then in terms of the new stuff, yeah, I'm fine. If that comes to a board work because, you know, we're trying to figure out whether or not what kind of prioritization is it in registry? Is it anti-arassment? Is it, you know, rent stabilization? You know, just what would we queue up next? Now in terms of fair chance, we did support fair chance, but Linda's shaking her head, but we were advised by county council, that legally we couldn't enact fair chance, and I've already asked county council to review that because it's come up again. We'll hear from county council at some point on that as well. So just kind of giving you a context. And then there's one other thing. Yeah, the staff don't want to defend the CDA agency, but I know within the housing and community development department, they've been pretty focused, I think, on what we're going to do with, you know, with the affordable housing. And I think we'll be hearing more about that shortly because we need to figure out what we want to do in terms of a bond measure or some approach around affordable housing. So that we can move ahead and I can provide more information from MPC and a supervisor best you from A-Bag, but that's a big concern. Supervisor Fortinapas. Thank you to the staff for the presentation and the very thorough report. I'm interested in hearing a little bit more about ADUs. I know that we exceeded our goal. Would you mind sort of reviewing again how we categorize the ADUs by income level? Totally. So at this time, the county does not collect information. Asking like, are you going to rent this, or is your teenage son going to live in it? Or are you going to use it as an office? MTC is asking people to do that, but I don't think a regiores diction has. So back in 2020, a bag did a study that basically said on average throughout the bay, 30% of ADUs are affordable to people very low income, 30% low income, 30% moderate, and about last 100% above moderate. So that's what we've been using the past three APRs. We will have to use a different methodology next year. So stay tuned. Okay, thank you for explaining that. And obviously if we are able to create a rental registry that would allow us to get more accurate information. Lastly, I just wanted to share that back in 2020, I helped to co-sponsor Oakland's fair chance ordinance And just last December we heard an evaluation of that. So maybe I'll share that with Sandy if she has not already seen it so that you've got information on how that has been working in one of our cities in the county. Thank you. Any other word comments or questions? So let me just chime in on a couple of topics. First, Surveys are mildly is accurate in terms of the process of trying to evaluate the current mental protections that we have in place through the unincorporated services Committee and then looking at that next level. When I just arrived on the board, we did consider fair chance. It went to litigation, but subsequently there had been state law that had been put in place to help with like expunging records for those that were formally incarcerated. if they had like a clean record for three years and to help with some of the issues that were being addressed with fair chance, whether it's housing or employment. So when we have that conversation, I think we should have a full understanding of what has transpired since 2020 as well with state law. The question I had was on the timeline. We had already submitted our progress report to the state on March 21st. So it doesn't really need board approval before it gets submitted. That is technically correct. I believe the state law says that we need to show our relevant legislative body. That's what we've done the past several years, just because that's how the timing worked out. Okay, so next year, are you to do something similar or next year? My goal will be the same as this. It was this year, which is to get it through the planning commission to you all before April 1st. Okay. I appreciate that. Thank you for that clarification. Do we have any public comment on this item? There are no public comments. Okay. May I have a motion for adoption of the resolution? I'm sorry. We do have comments. Thank you. Kelly, go ahead. Thank you for taking my public comment. This is Kelly. On the idea that the county doesn't have any. Anything to contribute East County has nothing to contribute towards building housing. That's technically true. There's a hard nobody lives out there. Only a few thousand people live out in East County. And they weren't given hardly any rena allocation except for this this thing in East Pleasantton which is getting might get annexed by the city of Pleasantton. But in the same way that the city of Pleasantton can annex that thing, there's a lot of land. And it's the sphere of influence. It's called the local agency formation commission of Alameda County. And they have something called sphere of influence. So that it liver more can expand in various directions. And they can do whatever they want, whether they build housing or industry or whatever. With the with the land within their sphere of influence. And the same with Dublin, Dublin is expanding with this Dublin Boulevard extension. So they're going to be building something along that road. And if they choose to build housing or industry or whatever they do, it might, if they go the housing route, it might apply towards Strina. So the way to get arena to get housing units built in East County is to give, give land to these cities and let them annex the land. Very simple. That's how, how, how we can get more development and we can, it's a way to get around measure D and it's perfectly legal. And then also the, I used to be very critical of the county for not meeting its reeninembers this cycle and where it's running at about half producing, about half the housing units that it's supposed to be producing. But you know, if you compare to the other jurisdiction, as your staff said, there are not that major restrictions that are ahead of you on pace in the Bay Area. For example, Fremont was comparing itself to other places and saying that they were a little bit ahead of other places right now but as your staff said, no, they're behind. They're behind. The Alameda County unincorporated is producing, I think, about half the rate that it should, and Fremont is producing it about a quarter of the rate that it should, and other places like the City of San Jose or San Francisco are producing it like one fifth or one eighth of the rate. So this county is not lagging far behind all the others right now. And freemod is and so is a number of other places. So yeah, thank you very much. There are no more speakers. Thank you. Thank you for those comments. We have a motion to approve the general plan reports and the housing element annual report. I'll move to adopt the resolution of proving that 2024 general plan annual report and housing housing element annual reports. I have a motion from our cousin second by my Lee. Please roll call vote please. Supervisor Marquez. Aye. Supervisor. My Lee. Supervisor for not a best. President Albert. Aye. Supervisor Tam Aye. Motion carries. Thank you. Moving on to item number four. This is the public hearing on the first reading and introduction of the ordinance nominating to properties in San Lorenzo for the register of historic resources. staff report please. Good morning supervisors my name is Dominic Luccazi with the Alameda County Planning Department. Today I'll be presenting a brief action item that two properties to the Alameda County Historical Register as landmarks. They're located at 16026, Paceo Del Campo and 2-25, Villalenares in San Lorenzo. Next slide. Here you can see the nomination timeline, which included presentations to the park's Recreation and Historical Commission, Eden Mack, Unincorporated Services Committee, and TNP on Monday. Today, staff requests that your board hear this presentation. Take public comment, and adopt an un codified ordinance to place these two properties on the County Register as landmarks. Next slide. Here's a map of San Lorenzo that shows the location of the two nominated properties. And just for some quick historical context, the properties are located in the San Lorenzo Village, which is one of the first master plan communities in the United States. The village was built by David Bohannon, and he was a nationally influential real estate developer who pioneered the use of mass production techniques in housing construction. Next slide. Here's the first nominated property. It's a one story single family home that sits on a parcel that was formerly agricultural land. David Bohan embought this lot and the surrounding parcels in 1944 to develop the San Lorenzo Village. And the house is an intact example of the post-war minimal style often referred to as GI houses. Next slide. Here's the second nominee. Bohanin purchased this parcel in 1950 and it's another intact example of the postwar minimal style and it embodies a later phase of the San Lorenzo Village development. Next slide. So according to the historical preservation ordinance a building is eligible for designation as a landmark if it meets one or more of the criteria listed here. And as highlighted in the board letter, both applications meet four out of the six criteria. Next slide. So staff received many comments from the public during our road show and the themes and the staff responses are summarized here and covered in more detail in your board letter. Some questioned why the two homes were proposed as landmarks instead of designating the San Lorenzo Village as a historic district. So first, any historic resource is subject to strict architectural regulations. Designating a district also requires approval from 51% of property owners within the historic district. And previous attempts to establish a district here have been unsuccessful, in part because of this high bar for approval and increased regulations. Another concern was about the financial and policy implications of Mills Act contracts. So for context, the Mills Act is a voluntary program that offers property tax relief to owners who commit to preserving historic properties for 10 years. The tax savings are determined by the assessor's office and can range from 30 to 60% annually. Mill's Act applications are actually pretty rare for us. There's only one active contract in the unincorporated county and just for reference, Oakland has about 93 mills-at contracts. A significant increase in mills-atk applications would require further analysis to clearly understand all of the full implications. And finally, there were concerns that landmarking homes associated with Bohannon may celebrate a problematic history of racial exclusion. So San Lorenzo Village was developed during a time when redlining and racially restrictive covenants for widespread. So at the request of the unincorporated services committee, staff has added language to the resolution acknowledging this discriminatory history and this is included as an attachment to the board letter. In addition, staff for Steve's strong community support, including from 10 speakers at the Unincorporated Services Committee, and 11 letters of support which are included in your packets. Next slide. So I'll end by asking that your board take public testimony today and adopt an un-cottified ordinance to place these two properties on the County Register as landmarks Next slide Thank you supervisors. That's the end of my presentation. I'm here to answer any questions that you may have The homeowner and manual is also here to help answer any questions Thank you for that presentation. Are there any comments or questions? Supervisor Miley. Thank you Madam Chair. When this was at the Transportation and Planning Committee, I asked if the staff could think about how we might designate this if you've been able to give any further thought to that? Not, we haven't spoken about it in depth. However, there is presidents for adding plaques to sidewalks, for example. So it is something that we can continue to look into. Oh, yeah, please do. I just want to appreciate the Emmanuel for advancing this. Hopefully he's going to speak. And um... do. I just want to appreciate the Emmanuel for advancing this. Hopefully he's going to speak. And I just wanted to say that we, the Santa Corporate Services, we did recognize the concern with Bohannon. But the consensus was, you know, this was the norm during that time, you know, racial covenants. So we are not praising racial covenants, but we just want to make sure that that's something that's indicated as kind of something that took place back in those days. And I didn't mention that the auditor presently has a Redaction project, the county auditor where racial covenants, they're no longer legally enforceable, but they can be redacted. So I just want to constantly continue to get that word out. That's something that can be done Thank you and I will turn it over to the property owner Mr. Manu Robinson if he has any comments as is the tradition of planning meeting you get more time Good morning supervisors Daniel Robinson, Homeowner and third-generation Salaranzo villager. I just want to say it's been a joy to bring these two properties to Spotlight, the history of the Salaranzo village, and also recognize the Salaranzo village as a state historical district. Sometimes we don't realize what's in our own backyards until we do the in-depth analysis. And so it's been a pleasure restoring both properties over the years. And I'm excited about this before you this morning. Thank you. I don't have any questions. This was discussed at length at the unincorporated services committee meeting that Supervisor Miley and I are part of and Then issues that were raised is reflected in the staff report We're not actually condoning but we want it an acknowledgement of the full history, both the good, which is that this is a historic district. Some of the bad, which is some of the racial covenants, which precluded the selling of the property to a person of color, and also some of the ugly parts of moving forward with this. But this is in my district in San Lorenzo. I am supportive of moving this forward and placing this on the registry. Are there any other questions or comments? Any public comments on this item? Okay. Supervisor Fortune out of ask. Thank you, Supervisor Chair, Tam, I do appreciate both you, Chair, Tam, as well as Supervisor Miley in the committee raising the issue of the racial covenants and addressing it. It might also just be helpful for the public record to share how diverse San Lorenzo is. I don't know if you're interested in making a comment in that regard and it may be too late to add something to this ordinance but I do think it is worth noting how diverse the community is. Mr. Robinson, join in comment. I'd like to speak a little bit to your comments. Being a third generation, San Lorenzo villager, it's a privilege that my family has been in the area since the 1960s. My grandparents moved there of Portuguese descent. My parents were fortunate to purchase their first home in 1982. And at that time, they were a mixed race couple purchasing my mom was a Portuguese descent. My father is a Filipino descent. And I stand before you today as a mixed race person who originally would not have been able to purchase in the community. I stand before you as an applicant and a homeowner, but I will tell you that being president of the San Lorenzo Village for close to 10 years now, we have a very diverse community. We are still a majority Latino community in San Lorenzo, followed by Asian, according to our census. So the community has drastically changed from its inception in the 1940s and 50s. So I appreciate you bringing that up. As time is moving on and we meet more and more homeowners in the community. We're seeing blended families. And a lot of people in the community enjoy the different cultures and different heritage that we all celebrate together and that's reflected in our events. So. Um, Sioux vice important of us raises a good point. Could we add one of the way our asses clause reflect the current. Diversity within San Lorenzo right after we talk about the. The master planning and some of the. We've already shownants. And is that I didn't think that was a substantive change necessarily to the proposed ordinance and resolution. Good morning. Supervisors Melania Brian, deputy county council. That would be a non-substantive change that we could add in and have that included for a second reading. Okay, so you would include that and your your first reading today as an amendment and when we bring it back it could be included in the ordinance. Please do so. Surprise or a mark yes, no questions. Any other comments or public comments on this item hearing none because this is an ordinance will have the clerk's office read. The first reading. In ordinance adding the two properties located at 1 6 0 2 6 Pescile Del Campo APN 412 0 0 4 5 0 225 via Linaris APN 413008603400 in unincorporated San Lorenzo area to the Alameda County Register of Historic Resources pursuant to section 17.62.110 of the Alameda County zoning ordinance. I will move the way the full first reading as amended of the ordinance nominating the two properties for the historic registry. Motion and a second. Rolloco will please. Supervisor Marquez. Aye. Supervisor Miley. Aye. Supervisor Fortnato Bass. Aye. President Halbert. Aye. Supervisor Tam. Aye. Thank you. Motion carries. Item number five has continued to the next planning meeting. And we are now at public input on items that are not on today's agenda. Supervisor, we just for the record that the next board planning considered on that day. Thank you. Thank you. So item number five is continued to may eight. Do we have public speakers on items not on today's agenda? Oscar Vesquez. And then Oscar Mario Vesquez. My name is Oscar Vesquez and I reside in 937 East Lowe and Boulevard. My parents bought the house in 1979 when they bought the house. They bought the house. It was a small business. She had a beautiful lawn just to give a little context. Properties are completely concrete and we used the the whole house as a driveway and so basically I just want to bring to attention that they were in bullet record improvement from meekland to lengthen ways for the problem is I was told before that they they were gonna take Do the sidewalks and put a bike lane and all the telephone poles and utilities was gonna go underground And now that I look at the projects he started from Meklyn, that's now what's happening. They're going in deeply beyond the sidewalk and all the telephone poles are not going down. And so there's no uniform when it comes from his parent to Meklyn is a completely different, it's just completely different. It's supposed to be one lane. And I live where cars, where I live, they use the two lanes because it's really a problem. There's a lot of accidents. We don't like to park on the street at all because of that venue. But I just, when I was sent this letter and it's basically not to scale, There's no feet. There's nothing. So I feel like I've been misled. And basically, it's an in-north transparency and what's going on. And then when I took a look at it, detailed, because I used to be a real estate agent. I'm very retired. It seemed like they made the commercial property a resident only with only one driveway because there is no garage anymore. So basically, we got like three people, four people living, we can't even park in the front. If they do put a curve on there, only one driveway. So my concern, I try to talk to Amber Loaf for over two months, emails, phone. I went to the public works, talk to her, no answer. She's, you know, she's, me's, it's avoiding me. So I'm bringing these two attention. So I'm concerned about it. I put a revocation on the construction, leaving it to the sidewalk. And I'm president trying to talk to a lawyer bringing a lawsuit because this is just not right. We've been there too long and it's gonna, and by the way, you know, it's from each 15 to length on way, is a very heavily traffic that you know that the freeway has a, when you get cars that are broken down, they put that section on mission because there's no way, there's so much traffic. There's several business there in our, part of the walk in the in front of us. So it's a lot of small business going on there and they're just not bringing that to that attention. And I know we don't have a business there but you know when we do sell the property, I one time I was gonna be a barber because my mom was a beautician. So that's that's just just bring that to your attention. Please help help us. There's several other people trying to talk about that. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. And Sandy, can you help connect with him and follow up with the, I think, the public works project? It is public works project. OK, thank you. Any other comments? Hello, my name is also Oscar Vaskis. I'm his son, but I've been living there my entire life 28 years old now, so I'm born and bred in this community I'm just more incongruent with the plans because if you look at past Meeklin Avenue There's a The bike lane is drawn onto the street and now looks like the sidewalk is being encroached onto residences. I understand if there is need to further conduct the construction for space purposes. However, what I don't understand is that imminent domain and I understand what imminent domain is and that the government is able to purchase properties and sections. However, we have not been paid to that if they're gonna encroach onto our properties. It has not been done in our taxes. I pay those property taxes. I have not seen any changes in that. We have not given any money if imminent domain is in process. So that's street street, they're changing into a two lane street or I don't know what's happening. There's just not much transparency that's happening in the construction of our community and a multiple of our residences that are to my side and all the way down to the street that will go all the way to the train tracks are also very concerned. Many of them are elderly so they were not completely aware or we're not even reading most of it. And a lot of those residences are also concerned. Because if they take too much of our property, most of us have very little to no space anyway, already, to park or to just, it just becomes inhospitable if they take too much and make the sidewalk too large. We thought it was just going to be a beautification because the sidewalk has needed attention for the last 20 years or so. But I thought it was just going to be beautification, but it looks like there's going to be an expansion and that was not something that we were under the impression of. Thank you very much. Kathy, please unmute your phone. You have three minutes. Go ahead. Yes, I'm also talking about the Lewelling Boulevard project. I'm a homeowner on that street. And I was never invited to any meetings. I wasn't given any because maps on what they're doing. How I found out about it is I started getting spray paint on my paper stones and then I got a white line on my paper stones that says demo and it was like eight feet of my property. So I called down below, talked to her. She told me that Alameda County owned three feet of my property. So I went down to the permit department and got a map of my property and found out that that's not true. That all my paper stones belong to me. I got my property lines and the square footage. And so I'm just really upset because a lot of people that own those houses on that block, it's commercial property. And if you have a business and you want to start a business, you no longer can do that because they're taken away the front of our property. I talked to a lot of the neighbors as well and a lot of them did not know what they were doing. Majority them did not know what they're doing. They're just coming in. They're taking people's land and making a 10 foot sidewalk for walking and for a bike lane and they're encoaching it on people's property. Then those people are going to be responsible and liable for whoever falls and gets hurts on their property. A lot of them are senior citizens and the Fifth Amendment does state that if the government wants to take the property, there's a plan that they're supposed to follow and they're supposed to get paid compensation. And none of us agreed to have our property taken. I presently have talked to Amber Lowe many times. Now she's ignoring me and I told her to show me proof that you own the front of my property, show me proof that what you're doing is legal. You're taking our land and then the curbs are gonna be square. So if you have a business, you no longer can drive up into your driveway. I have five parking spots in front of my house, and you no longer can drive into it once they build this new sidewalk. And let me see what else. Oh, and then some of the people, there are a lot of them are elderly and they were told that it was imminent domain and that they could encode onto their property. And a lot of this stuff was misleading. It's not true what they're saying. And they're taking away our property in our land without our approval, without our permission, without having a meeting with us, or showing us what they're going to be doing to the curb. And I do not want a sidewalk on my property. Kelly, go ahead, you have three minutes. Thank you. Yeah. The both sides are right here, except of course the Public Works Agency, the county is more right. Yes, the county can take away your land. Yes, they do own the right way along the street. Yes, they can come in and build sidewalks on your property and basically slice off the front of your front yard. And yes, they can tell you how many driveways you're allowed to have. So you can only have the number of driveways that they choose to build on the front of your property. Right now, your whole front of the property is a driveway, right? Because you don't have a curb. So yeah, all that stuff is going to happen or can happen it's perfectly legal I think from what I've from what I've heard but you know the county knew that this was going to be happening and then you was going to happen and then you they were going to be doing it several years ago they knew a year or two or or three ago, and they sent people papers in envelopes, and nobody knows how to read that stuff, and nobody has lawyers to decode what it all means. And people are surprised when they find out that the county's going to be doing all this. It's shown you the kind of communication we get from the public works agency, and how they treat treat, you know, the people there's only about a few dozen or whatever there's only a certain number of people that they that they need to deal with and they keep it secret from moment until the last minute and then the only way they hear about it is through legal documents showing up in the mail that they don't know how to read and they don't understand. And then, yeah, the whole thing is it's a lack of communication from public works. Thanks. There are no more public comments. Thank you for your participation and we have a comment from Surveys or Miley. Yes, Madam Chair. Can we request public works? Because I'm trying to recall if there's been any public vetting of this, I know about the project. I just don't know if there's been any public veiling. I don't know if it went to the Eden Mac. I don't know if it's coming down in corporate services. I don't know if it came to transportation planning. Can we tell public works to bring this to either on the corporate services, the Eden Mac, but I want to have this publicly vetted. Yes, we can. Sandy, can you help me with that? Yes, I've notified Daniel of the public speakers and I can let him know in terms of bringing it to unaccompanied services. Thank you. Are there any other comments? Hearing none, the meeting is adjourned. Recording stopped.