you I'm going to go to the next page. I'm going to go to the next page. I'm going to go to the next page. I'm going to go to the next page. I'm going to go to the next page. I'm going to go to the next page. I'm going to go to the next page. I'm going to go to the Oakley redevelopment agency, Oakley Public Finance Authority. This meeting is called to order at 6.30 p.m. roll call. Councilmember Fuller. Councillor Fuller is here. Councilmember Meadows. Here. Councilmember Williams. Here. Vice Mayor Henderson. Here. And I am Mayor Shannon Shaw present. We are going to move on to item 1.2, which is the Pledge of Allegiance. It's just going to be led by Madison, Lenin, and Larissa Contreras. And just one second, we're going to have them come up. And I'm going to read a little bit about them. Madison takes horse riding lessons every week. She is in band and leadership. She loves animals and wants to be a vet or a teacher when she grows up. Larissa, better known as Bella, a beautiful girl with an old soul. Has tremendous love for music, dance. She loves animals and wants to be a vet or a teacher when she grows up. Larissa, better known as Bella, a beautiful girl with an old soul, has tremendous love for music, dance, and collecting trinkets. Her wittiness will make you laugh when your heart needs it the most. She is kind, respectful, and always very helpful to those around her. I pledge allegiance to the flag of United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God in the visible with liberty and justice for all. All right. Item 1.3 is going to be rescheduled to March 25th. This was the Contra Costa Library Commission update. So we will have that at our next meeting. And we do have a proclamation recognizing March as American Red Cross month. Unfortunately, the person that was receiving this is not here this evening, so we will go ahead and get that sent out. So item 1.4 is recognizing Oakley resident, Jaren, for winning the three-point shooting contest during the NBA All-Star game. We're going to have a short video. Keep shooting. Keep going. I'm going to be a little bit more serious. I'm going to be a little bit more serious. I'm going to be a little bit more serious. I'm going to be a little bit more serious. I'm going to be a little bit more serious. the Hey, go ahead, get jumping the money. Get jumping the money. Get jumping the money. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey opportunity. Is Jaren here in the audience with us today? All right, would you like to come up and... Well, that was pretty awesome. Tell us about it, how did it happen, how did you get there, and what have you done since? So I didn't know I was going into the game until the day before. My family surprised me with tickets, which was pretty cool. And we got to the stadium pretty early, went up to our seats, and we're just watching the shoot around. And one of Mr. Reese's team members walked up to me, asked me a few questions about my background and story and how I grew up. And he said, there's no guarantee, but would you want to come down to the court and compete to win something? And I was like, yes, of course. Yeah. And then they couldn't tell me much of the details of what I was going to do. So I didn't know what I was going down there to do. And then I didn't know until I walked out onto the court and saw Damien Littleer. But after that, we've been talking to them about getting the money and it's been a long process but we're getting there. A lot of people, it's cool seeing a lot of people recognize me and stuff and say congratulations which is always cool. But yeah. Do you have any plans with your winnings? Definitely take the responsible route save a lot of it put some towards college my next college that I go to and Not not like a I don't have something on mine that I'm gonna buy yet, so so thinking All right any other council members Councilmember Williams Well, we have a bunch of Mr. Beast fans in our house, so they were super excited. They could care less about basketball, but they certainly loved that. So I really think it's super cool that you got to do that. And I appreciate you representing Oakley and putting us on the map and good job. I think it was a great story to you about your dad getting you the tickets and stuff. So I love it and you know, congratulations and sounds like government with that lag in money, huh? Thank you Council member Meadows. This congratulations, that was cool. Cool seeing you do that. Thank you. Good job. Council member Fuller? I was a wrestler so good. Great. Wrestling and season and basketball season coincide. So I never got to do the hoops which is fortunate for the school. But I just wanted to comment, I see a proud dad, I think it's a dad right here with a, well somebody with a phone up. Grandpa is here. Just be advised that this is being recorded and I think if you were to talk to Mr. McMurray or Mrs. N'Varro at some time they could get you a cut of this particular one. Great speech. Thank you. Thank you. Vice Mayor Henderson. Just wanted to say congratulations. Great job of representing the City of Oakley while you're out there. So good job. Thank you. Yes, congratulations. I think it's great it would you mind if we come down and get a photo with you now that you're super famous. Yeah sure. Thank you. All right. We're going to move on to item 2, which is public comment. At this time, public comment will be heard on items not on the agenda. I do have public speaker cards submitted. If you would like to submit a public speaker card, please complete a blue speaker card located in the lobby and submit it to the city clerk. The time limit to speak is three minutes. The time limit is monitored by the timer located in front of the mayor's seat. When one minute remains on the timer it will be once as a reminder to complete your comments before your time expires. Please refrain from any applause cheering, booing, or other outbursts so that everyone may have the opportunity to be heard. Note that due to revisions of state law, the council may not engage in dialogue regarding comments. However staff may be directed to respond to persons making public comments. We did receive two comments submitted online for non-agenda items both indicated they did not wish to speak, We do have one speaker card but jadok. Good evening council members mayor and people of Oakley. I been in contact gentleman. There's a lot of things with the salmon I've been working with all over the place. I just got contacted by Chuck Hanson of Hanson Environmental who ran the Walnut Grove area, Sound Barrier, which I worked with them on, the Delta Smelt and the Salmon Smolts and as far as restoration going and keeping them from going into the LA pumps years ago. So that was a big deal that we worked environmentally on. I worked with him. He's very renowned, known and very lucky that I was able to reconnect with him, pardon me, was very gracious. He's working with Walnut Creek now on their salmon fishery over there in their creek. And he told me he said, I said, well, how about if we get an urban coalition? He said, I'll bring it up to Walnut Creek. They accepted. I says, I have to talk to my council about it. But they seem like we want to protect urban streaks, streams and creeks from all poaching and also to restore it because one thing that I do know is that only 99,000 salmon got up to the Sacramento this year. If you take Oakley and Brentwood together for the population, that's one salmon a year per household. You think that's an established amount that should just get by and go lower. We are part of the problem here, not protecting our fisheries, restoring the boundaries of it, and making sure that these streams can give their ultimate output. It's just one of these things that it's good hearing it from a biologist like him that he's on it now. And he's done stuff all over the world, Alaska, all over. And I highly respect, have seen his work and what he's done. And I feel very honored that he talked to me about it even. And we would like to get areas say in rich men, Oakley, Walnut Creek, different areas to get a coalition to get this stuff going. And I think it's the poaching problems a big deal like I said before all our fish got taken out with no spawn I just did a survey that day with UC Davis with nets and everything and we did some water samples no fry Well, no eggs got laid. They got taken out of our creek So we're continuing with more research on that with UC Davis as Well as probably connect with Hanson Environmental which like I said he's pretty worldwide now and it's just up to us to embrace it when it's been offered and I feel like it should be taken seriously and hopefully so thank you. We are going to close public comment on non-agenda items and move on to item three, which is council member comments. Please remember that council members have three minutes to speak, which will also be regulated by the timer. Council member Fuller. Yes. First, I want to acknowledge Chief Beards prompt response to the response time, four minutes, 18 seconds, which is great for the department. So I want to thank that he went and looked that up that night. So it's been a little bit. Thank you, and I know Mr. McMurray is working very hard on what I requested on the oak, so I'm waiting patiently on that too. So thank you. All right seeing no others we are going to move on to the consent calendar. Are there any I do not have any speaker cards submitted for the consent calendar. Are there any items the council would like to pull. 4.1. Move approval the remainder. I'll second. I have a motion in a second. All those in favour say aye. Aye. Those opposed. All right. I pass unanimously. Item 4.1 council member Fuller. Yes, because of the council policy, I do not think the minutes as reported, I do not I think are thorough enough so I will not approve these minutes. I'm approval of 4.1. Second. I have a motion and a second. All those in favour say aye. Aye. Opposed? No. Passes 4.1. All right. Item 5 is public hearings which we have none. All right item five is public hearings which we have none. Six regular calendar which we have none. Item seven is reports, 7.1 city manager report. Thank you Madam Mayor. Mr. Vice Mayor, members of the city council. Since we have a lot of people in the room, I thought it would be a good idea to bring attention to our first annual day of service that's coming up here on April 12th. It will be the staging area, it will be the rec center, the event will start at 8 a.m. It will last through 12 p.m. and there are five total community projects that people can sign up for through our rec program to participate in. So anything from planting trees to picking up trash to spreading some bark or cleaning marsh creeks. So there's a lot of different opportunities to volunteer in the community. Also, I would like to follow up on a request by a future agenda item request by then it was Mayor Williams and it was Vice Mayor Shaw who did the second and this was to allow staff some time to explore how to make our public comments more accessible to the community. So what we've done, we've always had the comments printed out and accessible here at City Hall. We have a public review binder where you can look at the agenda and the public comments that are submitted through our online system. But what we've done is prior to the meeting at 5 p.m., we are going to post all public comments received for the City Council meeting. On the City website, it will be under the agenda and meetings section of the page. And as you scroll down on that page, as we're showing everyone now, as you get to the bottom before the agenda, there will be a link for each individual meeting. So that is how are displaying the comments and those are now accessible to the public at 5 p.m. at or around the same time the comments are made accessible to the city council. So we hope that finishes that item and then lastly I just draw attention to the business license update list for the month of February that has been added into the agenda packet and that concludes my report. Thank you. I have one question. Council Member Fuller. Yes, the public comments in fact a lot of the letters I read here, they wish that not be read or not be posted. Are we going to post those anyway? Well, they're entered into the record. So when someone has the option to choose how they want to submit their public comment, they can either select that they want the comment entered into the record, but they also want to speak at the city council meeting, or they can choose to not speak and just have the comment entered into the record. But they're all public records. So this is another way for us to ensure that the public has equal access to all the comments that have been submitted prior to 5 p.m. Well, my suggestion is, is that when you're putting this into place that you put that notice that, that every comment that receives, received within the city hall, will public comments on the webpage. It's for the safeguard of the angst of the audience more than anything else for the residents because we haven't quite done that before. So if you're going to publish them, say I'm going to publish them, but let people know that everything that's and in here will be published. Councillor Member Williams. Every public comment is published and accessible normally. Correct. Every public comment that we receive prior to today's change has been placed in the public review binder that is outside of the council chambers. Because that's why public comments happen so everybody has equal access to all the comments, right? Sure, everything submitted before 5 p.m. Anything submitted after 5 p.m. or submitted at the meeting through the blue card system that we use. Those comments are automatically entered into the record as part of this meeting as well. Okay. I just wanted to clarify. Council Member Kvuller. Yes. What can clarify entered into the record? They are part of the official record for this meeting, just like the minutes are part of the record. The agenda is part of the record and the handouts that are submitted during a meeting are part of the record. So anything that takes place in this room during the meeting itself is part of the official record. Yes, and I've requested those records. I've referred to a public records act, which is fine, request portal, and it's not available necessarily on the web page, but I think that what we are doing now is that we're bringing them up and putting them very straight across that everything that arrives here will appear on the front page of our web page regarding agenda under public comments and I think that's only fair for the audience to know that. Okay. All right. Thank you for that. We are going to move on to item 7.2 reports from Council Leason's and Regional Committees and Boards. Sorry. We're going to move on to 7.2 which is the City Council reports. Vice Mayor Henderson. That's our last meeting. I attended Diablo Water. Diablo Water is in the middle of doing a rate survey on costs and we should see some results of what they're looking to do for rates for next year as we get closer to May. Also on March 6, I attended the Contracoste County Habitat Conservatory. the conservative purchased 144 acres of land off of Rony Valley as mitigation land. That concludes my report. Council member Meadows. Last week I attended Contracosta Transportation Authority, planning committee meeting. That's all. Council Member Williams. I did. I did. On the last one, there was a lot that was happening, so sorry everybody. Tried out to transit. We welcomed several new board members. Brentwood, Pittsburgh, Antioch, now have full representation on that board again. There were some survey results that came out for a measure that I've talked about a couple of different times. There's potentially going to be a revenue measure. They pulled contract cost of residence and 53% of contract cost of county said they would be favorable to having a half-cent sales tax. But that's a long way from passing. It needs two-thirds to pass. So that was initial polling done through EMC research. I'm not sure how many people here saw the news about Brentwood having the longest commute in the country at 46 minutes. And so we had some discussions about working on a region on that jobs housing balance. March, nope, that's already passed. There is a bus bridge in Pittsburgh as they got new fair gates. So also attended the Cal City is a legislative dinner. Jesse Irrigain was one of the speakers, and he talked about some of his priorities, Modernization of the Brown Act, legislative legislation making hospitals not allowed to access immigration records. We also heard from Assembly Bauer-Con. She introduced wildfire legislation funds and making that easier to allocate. She's also on the AI task force, so she's introducing a whole slate of bills around AI protection for kids and workforce development. Liz Ortega is an assembly member. She's fighting for some hospital care. She's got a bunch of different insurance bills regarding denials. Senator Wahob was focused on housing insecurity and social services cuts and talking about how home ownership is the American dream. So she's got a lot of bills in order to promote that. She also is focusing on PG&E, which I know a lot of people will be happy, and she gave us the statistic that PG&E has raised rates six times in the last 12 months. And then we also had a lot of discussion about implementing Prop 36 and committing the budget to covering the enforcement of it, but there is no funding mechanism for that. Also went to the mayor's conference. We received a presentation from Ebricks, which I'm gonna let our mayor go over since she sits on that board. Really interesting though. And there's a couple of different things coming up. East Bay Regional Park districts are hosting wildflower tours. March 16th, it will be at Black Diamond, March 22nd. It will be at both Black Diamond and Big Break. They were talking about the revenue measures to address the deficits in transit. We heard from family justice center and there's some concerns about some of their federal grants. They currently have five federal grants and five state and county grants. So they are heavily reliant on those federal grants. Let's see. Their assembly member, Ferious, also spoke there and she introduced a bill that will require EDD and CDFA to conduct labor shortage assessments and provide a legal pathway to citizenship for agriculture and service industries if they can fall in if they comply with federal law. We heard about, we heard from Bart and they surveyed their riders and their satisfaction rate is the highest it's been at 73%. I know Mr. Chatek probably has info on this but this is a third year in a row where there will be no salmon season and SFP UC won a court case that will allow them to discharge raw sewage material into water sources. So just some things to look out for. Also attended the East Bay Leadership Council series. We had a discussion with A. G. Rob Bonta. He was talking about all the different things including housing. He was talking about immigration laws and saying that the federal government does have a right to enforce it, but it needs to be done legally. And that's what's California standing behind. There's a couple different task force that the AG has set up regarding hate crimes and retail theft. And also talking about AI, again, how it's a huge economic driver, potentially one of the greatest inventions of humankind, his quote, not mine. And he wants to capture the good parts and put guardrails in place to deal with the inevitable bad. Also attended a mental wellness webinar that was hosted by Brentwood and it was supported by Contra Costa Crisis Center, NAMI Family Justice Center. They gave resource info, and hopefully we'll have more of those webinars. It was really interesting that there were a lot of people on it. Also attended a Choison Aging and Network of Care Crab Feeds, and I think that's it. All right, I will try to be quick. On the 26th, I attended a meeting with the city manager and the police chief regarding some public safety items that we are working on. The 26th tried out to transit. Councilmember Williams has already reported on that. On the 27th, I went to the California League of Cities East Bay board meeting where we are just working on different things for local council members throughout the year and then we had the Cal City's East Bay dinner that council member Williams reported on. Unfortunately, Senator Kableden was not able to be at that. He was invited and confirmed but last minute he had to cancel but I have talked to his staff to see if we can get him here and Oakley to come talk to our residents maybe do a district day where residents and council can meet with him. I did attend the e-bricks meeting and a couple things to note on that is those agencies that are within the East Bay Regional Communication Systems Authority, can receive a discount on Motorola upgrades, but E-Bricks was able to negotiate a deeper discount, totaling 37.95% for all units that are upgraded, so I just wanted to let the PD know about that. They have added, we started a contract to put a new system system in Antioch and we did approve them to move forward with three sites on wheels, which then if any of the communication towers go down, those sites on wheels would be able to go to that location so there would be no interruption with first responder radios. We are working on updating the bylaws and $64 million in funding over the next 15 years for capital replacements. The antioxidation will be at Walton Lane and they are still working on plans for encryption, which is a big thing a lot of agencies are moving forward with. I also attended the choice in aging crab feed. Choice in aging is an amazing nonprofit that works with seniors to try to keep them aging in place and not in retirement homes. I judged the Oakley's Got Talent on March 1st with our own chief beard as well as Alexi Chukko and it was quite a talented bunch. It wasn't as hard this year. I got a little practice last year so I will do it again if asked. Had a virtual meeting with county staff for their H3 housing, homeless, health housing and homelessness and their core team and they did provide some very specific information to Oakley. I printed one out for each of the council members if they're interested in seeing the numbers. Core outreach had 112 individual contacts with Oakley residents and there's a pretty good report on that. If anyone's interested, I do have the data. Let's see. Mayor's conference in Lafayette where Ebricks was the presenter, so we've already covered that. While it's not Oakley, I did go to the Costco Grand Opening. It's pretty exciting. My husband was there since 3.45 in the morning because he's pretty dedicated. I was not. The East County Little League opening day, I was able to judge the banner competition, and there were some great homemade banners. So that was a lot of fun. Network of Care Crab Feed, another nonprofit. This nonprofit supports families when their child or family members in the hospital and you're there not thinking about anything and they provide meals to the family that's just their supporting their loved ones. and also attended the mental health forum from Brentwood. Many good speakers, they're gonna try to have another one in the summer open to all residents, not just in Brentwood. Unfortunately they had to go all virtual for the meeting last night. And then I've had a lot of meetings, emails and phone calls with residents regarding an agenda item coming up. So I will end there and we will move on to 7.2B, which is request for future agenda items. Anybody have any requests? All right. Seeing none, we are moving right along to item 8.1. 40 Mercedes Lane preliminary general plan amendment. Work session to discuss the merits of a potential project to amend the general plan land use designation of approximately 5.7 acre site from commercial to residential high. And before I bring up Mr. Cortes, I did just want to remind everybody I see a lot of people here. I think this is great communication. Public participation is awesome. just please remember we do have a lot of speakers. So if we applaud, booing, all the things we want to make sure everybody's comfortable to speak. So. communication, public participation is awesome. Just please remember, we do have a lot of speakers, so if we applaud, booing, all the things, we wanna make sure everybody's comfortable to speak. So thank you. Sorry, I had to check. Thank you, thank you. Good evening, Madam Mayor, Vice Mayor and Council members. The next item on tonight's agenda is a preliminary general plan amendment work session to discuss a potential amendment of the general plan land use designation of an approximately 5.7 acre site from commercial to residential high for the property located at 40 E. Mercedes Lane. A preliminary work session offers a chance for feedback and community involvement because this is a work session. City staff has not conducted a typical review of conceptual plans. The purpose of this session is to simply get feedback on whether there is support for the change in land use in the land use designation. The goal of this session is for the proponent to receive feedback from the city council and their potential proposal. And additionally receive feedback from the public. So, I think that's the end of the session. I think that's the end of the session. So, I think that's the end of the session. So, I think that's the end of the session. So, I think that's the end of the session. and additionally receive feedback from the City Council and their and their potential proposal. And additionally receive feedback from the from the public. Tonight before the City Council, we do not have a formal development application on a review. A formal vote will not be taken in support or against the preliminary general plan amendment and a decision will not be made here tonight. So why do we have two work sessions when a preliminary general plan amendment application is submitted, two work sessions will be held. One work session is for the Planning Commission, which was held on February 4th, and one work session is for the City Council. The City Council receives a summary of the Planning Commission work session and any feedback provided by them to the proponent. The City Council work session is always held while a preliminary general plan amendment is not a formal application. Holding work sessions with both bodies is an alignment with the Planning Commission's official role as an advisory commission to the City Council on land use related legislative actions. So what is land use versus zoning? A PGPA work session serves to discuss the merits of a potential land use designation amendment to the general plan. Land used to scribes the designated use of the land, for example residential or commercial, as depicted in the general plan. Land use describes the designated use of the land, for example residential or commercial, as depicted in the general plan, while zoning refers to the regulations and laws that determine how the land can can be used and developed. Zoning codes are set up as rules that regulate what can and can be done on a particular property. They're established and enforced at the city level in California. You can find zoning codes for virtually any city. And they're municipal code. The zoning code gives developers landowners and builders a set of specific rules for what can and can be done or what can and can be developed on a property as well as the regulations that it has to comply with. There is no reason application associated with the PGPA application. The property is located at Forty Mercedes Lane and is bounded by a mix of uses including a school, commercial, residential, and vacant commercial. That way. This way. Alright. Thank you. The site is south of Laurel between O'Hara Avenue to the east and Mercedes Lane to the west. The 5.7 acre site is, oh nice, skip to the 5.7 acre site is predominantly flat and undeveloped with the exception of a residence to the southwest and the Southwest corner of the site. Here we see the site overlaid with the land use designation and surrounding designations. As mentioned before, tonight before you is a work session request and a quick summary, like I said, a preliminary work session offers a chance for feedback and community involvement because this is a work session on a conceptual idea and not a formal development application staff has not conducted a typical review and analysis of the conceptual plans. The purpose of this work session is to discuss the merits of and provide the proponent feedback on the conceptual idea behind the PGPA application. This item is a request to discuss the merits of a potential project to amend the General Plan Landview designation of the project site from commercial to residential high for the purposes of applying for the entitlements to subdivide the property for residential development. A conceptual plan is requested when a project team submits a preliminary general plan amendment. Conceptual plans help to visualize how a project under the proposed designation may look. The plan here shows 58 single-family lots. A potential proposal would not be for affordable, deed-restricted units, rather market rate and for sale duplex units. At the February 4th, 2025 plan commission meeting, a work session on this item was held before the planning commission. The role of the planning commission was to receive the staff report from staff, public testimony from the applicant, the public, and any interested parties. The commission's role was to provide feedback on the preliminary proposal which would then be passed onto onto the City Council. The commission generally expressed that they did not see a particular community benefit from amending the general plan designation from commercial to residential on this parcel. 11 residents provided in-person public comment opposing the proposal and voiced their concerns about their way of life, safety, and potential traffic impacts that the proposal would create. Staff also received 24 emails, slash written comments from the public in opposition to the proposal. Staff assessment. A change to the RH designation would allow for a maximum gross density of 16.7 dwelling units per acre potentially accommodating up to 95 dwelling units. Requested City Council feedback. As I mentioned before this is an advisory hearing only there is no process to approve a project through this work session. The City Council is requested to provide feedback to the applicant on the preliminary general plan amendment. Examples of such feedback may include but not limited to comments on the preliminary land use designation proposed, thoughts on the conceptual plan attached to the staff report, and whether there is interest in considering an application for the requested project. And for your reference, please see the exhibit of the existing and proposed designations for reference during deliberations. Additionally the applicant team has provided staff with home design, potential home designs for the proposal. Thank you. All right. Do we have any questions for staff? Council member Williams. I have a lot. I'm sorry. Okay. So a couple things you said. I'm potentially one of them may require the applicant to even though I'm sure he hasn't penciled anything. So you mentioned there's no affordable component listed anywhere. Do we have any indication that these will be anything less than 600,000 at this point in time? I mean, just in general, do you think that there's an affordable component to it at all? First, I'm home to fire. Sorry, yeah. Do I go ahead and give the applicant a chance to speak? And then we can ask questions. I'll say questions to him, but you, for anybody who wants to hear, he said, first time home buyer is most likely. But my other question is, and I know this is going to be a tedious list, can you give us the commercial uses that would be allowed? And this is a two-parter, because I want them just by right. So the council would only be able to approve design of the building, and then also any uses that would require a CUP for this site. Certainly. So the general plan designation is commercial. The commercial designation provides for neighborhood, community and regional serving retail and service uses, limited to office uses, restaurants, service stations, highway oriented and visitor serving commercial, lodging, auto serving and heavy commercial commercial uses public and semi public uses, gathering facilities and other compatible uses. So one part is that land use designation, but we also have, as I mentioned earlier zoning. This property is located within the RB zoning district, which does have a wide array of permitted uses. And as the land used designation kind of points out, it's a wide array including office spaces, auto parts stores, card shops. Don't see those many very often anymore. Banks, bicycle shops, barber shops, the list goes on. You know, it offers for dance studios, retail markets, supply stores, things of that sort. And we can continue further retail opportunity, news jewelry, locksmiths, nurseries, paint stores. So as you see from the list, it's a wide mix of what's outright permitted. If you'd like, I can continue to the use permit. Yeah, that would be great, Thank you. There are also uses that require a conditional use permit. Those uses include animal grooming services, automotive repair, drive the restaurants, educational facilities, animal hospitals, gasoline service stations, health clubs, hotels, tells liquor stores, mixed use, parking facilities, recreational facilities, assembly uses. So those are uses that you would potentially see come before you. Okay, perfect. And then, okay. And, you know, I know many of us up here have lamented before, but we don't really have a way to say business A, you come here, right? I mean, we don't really have a way to, any of those permitted uses can come here. And do we change the traffic impact impact based on what type of business it is? I'm sorry, can you repeat that last one? The traffic impact, does it change? Like when we're doing a traffic study, I mean, we don't need to do that for, we wouldn't need to do that for anything. That's already an approved use. But say one of CUP's, what's the traffic impact that we anticipate? So, as part of any application, we look at any potential impacts including those traffic related ones. So, even if it was a permitted use, we may potentially want to see what traffic impacts there may be, especially with the overall development of a site. We're going to see what potential impacts that may bring, but that would be really for any project. We're going to analyze those things. Okay. And currently because it is zone commercial, we sort of have a general overview of what the expected traffic impacts are supposed to be for that along with those other developed commercial sites. Correct? Like we assume at max development for those commercial sites, we kind of assume a traffic flow sort of situation. In a sense, the general plan does kind of evaluate traffic as a whole throughout the city, you know, for potential development. So that is kind of in a sense outlined. Okay. I think I'm done with questions for now. Thank you. All right. Did the applicant want to come up and answer the question? I'm presenting things speak. You're good. All right, we're going to you. Okay, if you know that. If you do that, then if you're ready. Madam Mayor and members of the Council, thanks for letting me be here this evening. My name is Matt Bynke with Black Hawk representing a Harold Properties tonight. be here this evening. My name is Matt Bynke with Blackhawk representing O'Harell Properties tonight. Again, it's a workshop. It's our first pass through this in Oakley. And the concept here, frankly, was the overall goal was really to dial it back from what we dealt with across the street in the old plaza. So I appreciate the questions from Councilmember Williams because this is a less impact of use. It's not an opinion. It's a fact. And so if we're just starting from that baseline, that's what we were trying to accomplish. And getting over some of the commercial concerns and the impacts that those create, et cetera, et cetera. That's really where this comes from. We did something similar in Brentwood, something similar in Antioch. There's other examples. Other folks have done out in all three east county, for actually four or five east county jurisdictions, that is a little bit higher density, but I would not call this high density. The issue with the high density we fell over because we removed the existing house which added the four units I think that pushed us into the next bucket of, I guess, the density zoning. We're not looking to up it if we were, we would have proposed something bigger and the only way to go more is three story, which we have no interest in doing. So the examples we did in Brentwood would courtyard type product, share driveway, difference here, you don't have that. It's an attached duet and those are really just the simple differences. it is to answer your question on the affordability. It isn't deed restricted, but it is first time home buyer just by way of the square footages and the type of product it would be the lower, if not the lowest priced in the area area or in the city based on comparable and competitive communities. And the goal with the last one that we did was really geared towards not only first time home buyers, but also teachers and nurses and fire and police officers and young folks in their, not entry level of their their career but again first time home buyer. And I know there's obviously a lot of comments coming forward and I heard this at the Planning Commission and I totally get it but again if everyone's gonna come up here and talk about the impacts and the traffic and all that. It's coming. I mean, this is an infill site. It is what it is. We didn't set the rules. The only reason we're looking to change it is because it does reduce the impacts. And I realize that's people's concerns. It's also across the street from the school. So I know some of the uses are also going to be controversial with that school. We've already dealt with that too. But if the community wants it to remain commercial, we are perfectly happy leaving it the way it is. This was simply an alternative, and I already shared what the goal is. And so I understand there's going to be a long list of folks coming up here to talk, and I just thought it would appropriate to do it now instead of at the end to lay out some ground rules and not ground rules, but some ground parameters, if you will, of what our intentions are. So. All right. Thank you so much. Thank you. I appreciate it. Thank you. All right. So we are going to get into the public comment and I would like to invite up Nadine. Hello and thank you. As a property owner and concern resident I strongly oppose this project. The proposed rezoning is a direct assault on long-term stability and character of Oakley and I urge the City Council to reject it as recommended by 100% of the planning commission members and senior planner Jose Cortez. This rezoning conflicts with Oakley's general plan and existing zoning ordinances. It is regards the city's land use objectives and undermines Oakley's strategic growth goals. We've seen the impact of poorly planned and uncontrolled residential projects and surrounding cities. are now dealing with a fallout and Oakley cannot afford to follow the same reckless path. A senior planner, State and his staff report, allowing for up to 95 dwelling units on this site would create significant pressure for similar high density rezoning on surrounding lots. As development progresses and land use designations change to facilitate that development, pressure increases on nearby vacant properties to develop or request similar or high density amendments. This pattern of density increases through land use amendments may result in undesirable development pattern where each new amendment creates adjacent parcels that may seek higher density. It's crucial to consider the broader implications of such amendments on surrounding properties on their potential to set precedence for other areas potentially leading to more amendment requests. This was a warning to the City Council. Also he stated the Commission generally expressed that they did not see a particular community benefit permending the general designation from commercial to residential on this partial. Oakley has become a dumping ground for low-value businesses like gas stations, car washes, and storage units. Our town is more than just a pass-through or truck stop. Approving this project is not only a betrayal of residents, it's a failure of leadership and a failure of vision. The negative impacts on property values are undeniable. Economically, keeping the commercial zoning in place on this lot only allows the developer to still achieve profitability, but it provides sustainable study revenue for the city through business taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, and other commercial related fees. Keeping it commercial would continuously feed into ... achieve profitability, but would provide sustainable study revenue for the city through business taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, and other commercial related fees. Keeping it commercial would continuously feed into the city's coffers, benefiting the city budget and providing much in the local public services and commercial businesses for our underserved community. It would support local economy and generate jobs for residents further increasing the tax space. This would encourage even more long-term investment in our city and Oakley would benefit more by fostering thriving businesses. This is where real-long economic growth lies. The City Council, please remember you have a duty to protect the interests of the community and not interest of a developer who doesn't live here. You serve and work for the resident who elected you. The residents of Oakley are also catching on and learned from history. City Council has lost the trust of the community. The community is aware of connections between the developer and some members of this council. The residents have noticed the city has from history. City Council has lost the trust of the community. The community is aware of connections between the developer and some members of this council. The residents have noticed the city has a history of operating without transparency. Our neighbors received blank letters, for instance, on this regarding this meeting. Those are going since that City Council is not presenting the will of the people, and if you two stick nor the residents, community will respond. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. We have a lot of speakers tonight so I want to try to get through all of them. I understand everyone is very passionate about this and I do not want to take that away from you guys. So if we can maybe refrain until the end for all the applause, I would appreciate that. I just want to get through all of these. I do have a lot. I am going to go to one that was submitted online that said they indicated they wish to speak. Can Tillcock? Hello mayor. Hello mayor. Hello mayor and city council members. My name is Ken Tilcock. I'm a 35 year resident of Oakley. When I first heard about the 40 Mercedes lane project and proposed rezoning from commercial to high density housing, my initial thought was how does this make sense for this piece of land and benefit the citizens of Oakley? And after careful consideration, I came to the conclusion that it neither makes sense for or benefits to people of Oakley. I believe that it only really benefits a few people involved in building of this project. Mainly the land owner for the land owner and developer for obvious reasons. One of the many reasons I strongly disagree with rezoning this property is that that Laurel Road is now in the main corridor between West Oakley to East Oakley, which is a fantastic opportunity for retail or other commercial ventures. It is a high visibility corner parcel, kitty corner to the new Safeway, kitty corner to the new Safeway. Just so you know, I think the Safeway Shopping Center is a perfect fit for that piece of land. Also, there are very few spots left on Laurel Road to build something that would improve our city and enrich our everyday lives. Housing does nothing for that corner but causes a multitude of problems such as safety traffic, overcrowding, less jobs for residents, and for me just to look and feel of our city. I've heard it said that people like me won't be happy with whatever is built on that corner, but that couldn't be farther from the truth. I have many, many commercial ideas about what could be built on that parcel. Way too many to list here that would enhance our city and make Oakley a destination city rather than a drive-through city. I've also heard it said that, well, people need a place to live and I couldn't agree more, but I strongly disagree that this is the right spot for this project. We need commercial. I hazard to guess that an overwhelming majority of the people here this evening are against rezoning and this project and that very few are for it. So for me, we the people have spoken. So I hope you the City Council and Mayor have heard us, we the people of Oakley, loud and clear, and that you will work in our best interests and make Oakley better rather than worse by voting no on rezoning and this project. Thanks for listening and for your time. Thank you. All right. Up next we have Brad Nix. Greetings. Mayor, councilmembers. I certainly hope that all of you took the time to watch the planning Commission meeting. I certainly hope you took the time in particular to listen to each of the Planning Commission members' responses at the end of the hearing, because you should have heard very loudly and clearly what's wrong with this going forward. Now my first comment in addition to what I said the last time comes down to this. Why are we here so quickly? February 4th to March 11th, the exact same proposal with Bener, barely a comment as to what occurred to that prior meeting, how strong the feelings were. It sure seems like an end run around what the public tried to get across to the planning commission, which should be your body hearing public comment for you. So did you listen? Did you watch it? I'd like some nodding heads on that one. What's a little worse and makes me a little more angry is that these people back here, 40 Mercedes Lane, in the 300-foot zone, so many of them, and I don't know yet how many of them because you called this meeting too quick to figure out. A number of them are received blank embelluz with no meeting notice. Do you realize how bad that makes the city government looks to the city of Oakley or to the residents here? It's insane. It's a very bad look for the city but nevertheless the applicant has a has a right apparently to push ahead, and that's what we're seeing. So, guess what? The residents that are concerned are here and are ready to speak again, and they're going to be more of them if you go further. A lot more. There's only not as many this time, simply because we got rushed, but there will be more. more comments. We have a crying need for commercial land in the city of Oakley. We needed for revenue, we needed to provide services. Last time I checked we were somewhere around 10% of the per capita money that won a creek and other large affluent cities had. Commercial is what it takes to serve equal that gap or to fill that gap and provide money for services This was prime land for commercial by the original city council in the original general plan and all the reasons for it remain Finally, it is certainly developed now is not the time to take away the very limited commercial land we have It's needed Secondarily, this is an incredibly bad project for that land. I heard the applicants talk about, gee, the traffic impacts. Well, there's a lot of commercial that would fit in very nicely there. Safe, for example, medical offices, accounting offices, a lot of things that would fit in very nicely. What doesn't fit in nicely is little kids running out under the street because they're in crowded housing with no place to play, no backyards, right on a busy street, the intersection of two busy streets. That's a horrendous traffic impact. Not to mention the impact on the people trying to go to the school, take the kids over to that elementary school. Your time has expired, thank you so much. Just say no. Thank you. All right. We are going to move on to Bud Chattac. Good evening once again. This is a subject that needs to be addressed as far as this goes, yes, commercial would be a better way to go. There's already just massive amounts of traffic on that road. It's backed up all the way to Empire already. What is that going to do? It's still going to bottleneck when you get down to the other end with no relief. You got Ex-Mountalaine's period. But the thing that gets me is that we went through this end-around game before, to where it was quick whack and McDonald's and it got pushed through last minute. When supposedly we had a court date a few days later. And with this court date, the people would have had a chance, but it got pushed through last minute when supposedly we had a court date a few days later. And with this court date, the people would have had a chance, but it got smashed and basically with threats. Well, I'm going to get what I want anyway. And I feel like that's what we're seeing tonight also. It's kind of eerie to me. It's like watching the same horror flick all over again. I just don't feel it's a good fit with the amount of traffic on there. The kids, seeing the kids walk in every day the way I do and people just not stopping. It's just, I just think it's a really bad fit. The congestion in the area is going to be horrible. I do feel that like the previous speaker brought up, it would have been better to have various, you know, businesses of that sort that he mentioned earlier. It just makes a lot more sense for us to grow and have the needs met of the community. I also just feel that it just, it's just more and more and I'm I to get what I want. I feel like we're running into this. We ran into this before. The last time it was voted down by the previous, you know, people that were council members in mayor. It was a three to two vote came up last minute. It got passed with new membership, all of a sudden. So it was like, wow, this is like, this is what, this is how it's gonna be going, I guess. So to me, it's just not a really good fit for the city. I do feel especially with Safeway there. It's gonna be busy already, but that's something in the works, since I worked with Safeway, that's been in the works for 30 some years, as far as buying property, switching hands and whatnot, from Safeway to Albertsons to then again, other companies. So that's here, it's gonna happen, it's being built, and that will help our community that way as far as certain needs. But there should be more needs like that, put on that corner, I believe. And I do not believe that we should just basically let someone come in here, tell you and the city what they're gonna do. And that's basically what I'm hearing and I've lived through it once. Thank you. All right what they're going to do. And that's basically what I'm hearing and I've lived through it once. Thank you. All right, we're going to move on to Donna Chatech. And oh, there she is. Madam Mayor, City Council Members. I first want to start with, I appreciate George Fuller and Anisa. They ask questions. They look at these issues. We've been here before. Mr. Meadows, Mr. Henderson, Ms. Shaw. When the CUP came up for review for the McDonald's and the Quick Quack, you did not listen to the residents. You did not listen and you don't listen. You pander to developers. We're all here because of that. You, I've been through this. I've lived here for 32 years. I've been through the planning commission. I've been through everything. You don't listen to what the people tell you what they want. We keep saying we want less traffic. We don't want more gas stations. We don't want more fast food restaurants. Cyprus is a mess. The roads are not being developed, but yet you still do it. I've been here and I've seen the blame. I've been here for 20 years and seen the blame. You all put the blame on the previous City Council members. It's their fault. They didn't plan for the roads. They didn't do it. Now we have a new situation. And I was here when Mr. Binky was here and he walked in and he waved a lawsuit that night and he said, oh, this is it. And the three of you voted for him to build a quick quack car wash and McDonald's. We all said no to that but you did it anyway because you were afraid that there would be a lawsuit when Derek Cole the city attorney at the time said that that probably wouldn't happen because the next day it was supposed to go in front of a judge. But the three of you voted for that. So now we hear again talking about Laurel and Ohera and all these people are telling you they don't want this development to happen. So now it's up to you five people who get to vote. You all get to vote on this. How are you going to vote? We'll have to wait and see what each of you vote, but you clearly do not listen to the people that you are representing. All of us would not be here today if you listen to us. And that is the fact of the matter. You got big corporations that come in, McDonald's, and Quickquack. They have tons of money. You think Donna Chattac has tons of money? I don't have tons of money. Thank you for your time. Thank you so much. I'm going to move on. I'm going to move on to Erick. Erick. Erick. Sorry. Some of these cards are hard to read, guys. Please bear with me. Thank you, guys, for taking the time to listen to everybody. I know it can be a little difficult sitting there taking the parade of everyone's opinions and comments on this subject. So I applaud you guys for your patience in listening to what everyone has to say. I was actually one of the speakers here on February 4th that was talking about this and I kind of laughed to myself as I walked in because one of the things that I even made a comment on was the vision of Oakley. We have a little comment up there that talks about the vision of Oakley playing in your backyard. Now I was like, you guys might want to change that because none of these houses have backyards. I thought that was a little funny that it still hasn't been changed. But regardless of that, I also heard that we were talking about the commute and Brentwood being absolutely horrible. You don't need to worry about that because Oakley is going to take that pretty soon with these houses. So don't have to worry about that. At the end of the day, we can't be sitting here going, okay, well, what's best for this community? What's best for the people here in Oakley? I mean, I've been here pretty much my entire life since 1996. I grew up seeing the small town of Oakley become a city of Oakley. And I can tell you that one of the most heartbreaking things for me growing up in this city is to see Oakley, the city of farmland and all this great stuff turned into gas stations and storage units. That was heartbreaking to see and then to see a fast food chain that's not even remotely healthy be put next to an elementary school is also a little disturbing because that's not putting the children's health and thought into any consideration. With this new housing, we got to consider at the end of the day whose pockets are we really trying to fill, are we trying to fill developers and the owner who are already pretty wealthy, just fill their pockets more, or are we trying to enrich our community? Traffic alone, you're gonna hear that all day and night, but one thing we haven't considered to even talked about is that with these lower income housings of which they still haven't said how much they'll cost, they just said first time buyers, which I thought was funny. The other problem with this is it's gonna make all this rounding home values go down, and all of their bills go up for water electricity. Are we considering the fire departments police departments in the schools? I mean last time was here we were referred to as these people which was definitely an interesting statement. They actually said that the school was the problem because it would impact their building, not the other way around. They said the school was the problem. So let's consider that when we're making decisions on this project on whether or not it serves the community that lives here best already, or if it serves a few people's pockets that are already pretty full. That's all I have to say, thank you. Thank you so much. I Kim Colley Good evening everyone So I'm here tonight to let everyone know that I'm 100% totally against this project on Forty Mercedes. This is not going to be good. I'm not gonna even announce traffic and all this other stuff because Mr. Binky don't wanna hear all that, but it's too bad, so sad. He's gonna hear what everybody has to say. It's not his waving, we're gonna get this, we're gonna get that. a couple hundred couple of hundred thousand for you, here's 10 for you. Now we're not doing that. We the people I have been here since 1987, 38 years. I've lived in Laurel Gardens going on 29. I am opposed to this project. It is not going to work for many reasons. Emergency. Getting through there. If there's a problem with the residents that live over there. Let alone the school. The school is a huge problem. And you all say that's not full school. That's school. Have you had any of you guys ever sat there at school time? It is ridiculous. You cannot get through. So whether you're picking up a kid or you're just trying to drive home, you gotta go up to a hair, go back around to getting it even through there. So just let everyone know that this project is horrible. So thank you. That's it. Thank you so much. I'm. I'm. Ron Colley. Thank you. And Ron Colley, 38-year resident of Oakley. And I want to thank Blackhawk for showing interest in Oakley. Stick around, but not here on this corner. And it's funny that Blackhawk is getting into first-time home buyers. That's interesting interesting. Must be pretty nice. I started commuting back in 1987 because I needed a place to live. I put up with it because that's what I could afford. And Oakley was a nice town. It's starting to sound like there's some really big concerns developing. I think everybody that's already spoke has said most of what I've said. The one thing I'd like to bring to everybody's attention up here on this map. If there's an accident on Laurel heading to O'Hara, where's everybody going? They're gonna turn down Mercedes. They going to go right through this new housing development. Where all these kids are about 300 people in there? No, not good. And then I think what we should be spending our time on is figuring out a better way to have the flow for the parents for Laurel school there. Does anybody even stop to look at that lately? And like everybody else has said, Eric said earlier, bad commute, it's going to get real bad. If you have a commercial there, you have options, more options of getting in and out of there rather than going through somebody's front yard, they're going to cut right through this new development. They're going to cut down into the lower gardens, right down through all these houses when there's an accident there. Not in favor. Thank you very much for considering the corner, but no thank you. You said with we the people speak and you would seek elsewhere. Well we're speaking. I think that we're done talking pretty much. We should be. That's what he said. If we say no, he's not interested. We're not interested. And you guys don't even know the fire that has been developed behind the scenes because of this issue. Brutal and then blank papers come on. What happened here? What happened? If I've produced blank papers at my work, I wouldn't have a job. Somebody needs to get it together. Thank you. Thank you so much for your comments. Applause Andrea Brown. All right. Good evening. My name is Andrea Brown. I oppose this high density housing up to 94 homes. We would like to keep this area zone for commercial as it is already approved for. My main concern is safety. More cars and more people equals more traffic and crime. I currently work for the school district and cannot get on to Laurel in the mornings in a timely manner and I live on Mercedes. I must go around to O'Hara and many times that is congested. I would love to see a family or community oriented business on this corner. We have a enough gas station storage units and car washes on Laurel and surrounding areas. I know this is redundant, but sounds like you guys are looking at how many people are here. So if the council has their minds made up and does not plan on listening to the people of Oakley at least do not put an entrance on Mercedes due to the elementary school on the corner and so that the residents can leave within five minutes. That's all I really have. At the last meeting I was here, I did mention, you know, I'm a new resident to Oakley. I've lived here now, maybe this Christmas is four years and so my highlight of the last short memo I had was that I was in my home for almost 20 years in Anniacs. So the only reason I moved from there was to get my daughter to a better school. I thought that the schools were a little bit better. I can't afford to move out of this county, but I just thought Oakley was a nice place to live. When I was looking to buy a home, I honestly wouldn't have looked at that street if there was big buildings there. My prior job, you know, I'm not gonna like mention and stereotype, but it is known that the more McDonald's, the more gas stations, the more liquor stores, more of those things, I had a a choice and where to to move and so I would not have chose Mercedes Lane if I had seen those buildings and I was here prior to the McDonald's in the Quick Quack. I just would have chosen another neighborhood. I hope to stay here 20 plus years and and have my family. I still love the neighborhood and I hope that you guys do choose to keep it as it is commercial. So that it is safe for my family to grow. I mean, I have a 10-year-old, so I'm not going to grow anymore than that younger one. But I just, we have grandkids coming now and I would like them to be able to get to our street and leave in a timely manner should there be an emergency. So I do oppose this and I hope you consider that. Thank you. Thank you so much. Chris Sean Ross. Good evening Mayor Shaw and City Council members. I'm here today in opposition to rezoning the 40 Mercedes Lane lot from commercial to residential. Commercial is more compatible with the nearby zoning and it is more appropriate with our community needs. The council may fear the developer will use the state density bonus law to bully their way into forcing an undesirable project of overcrowded housing down our throats, but that law does not apply because this location does not make the most sense. While there's a surplus of moderate and market rate housing already in the works throughout Oakley, we currently have 47,251 people were estimated to grow to 75,000 or 80,000 in size. There are plenty of available lots that the developer and landowner could use if they wanted to build more housing and they should be more creative to attract better businesses to this particular location. They purchased the property knowing the risk of developing commercial and bought the land as commercial retail business use. Now that the risk hasn't paid off, they're in a hurry to rezone it and claim that it's undevelopable for commercial use. Safe way and other retail shops are going in on the Laurel and O'Hare Corner Lot, and they should help attract other businesses to come into this location. Jobs are needed in our community. Highway Forest congested enough, we could use transportation improvements, and the city can also benefit from the tax revenue. The developer should look at San Ramon, considering in his backyard, for guidance who has a good jobs housing balance, and the Marin City Council members should also explore other viable businesses for this location, instead of telling its residents to pull their money together and start a co-op on social media. Furthermore, it is extremely ironic that the landowner Ron Nunn is even proposing this project. When he was interviewed last year in Brentwood, he stated in a YouTube video, and I quote, Brentwood is a nice place to live. Brentwood has still been able to hang on to farms and development and maintain character. If you want to let that go and develop it, then you will have a town like Antioch and Concert. There is no town charm anymore. End quote. Why doesn't he apply a similar outlook to Oakley and allow Oakley to keep its small town charm and keep this location commercial? Oakley residents deserve to have a nice community with a city council that listens to them and designs the city with smart development in mind. If that can't happen right away then maybe we should pause, pass a moratorium on growth until we can address compliance issues with our general plan. We are already playing very expensive special assessments for limited resources and services and we should not just give developers a free hand to destroy our city's development goals. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next we have Sean Ross. I live in District 3. I live about two blocks from the proposed project. I vote and I highly disapprove of the rezoning of Fort E.es Lane from commercial to high density residential. As it is, there aren't enough businesses in Oakley to meet our needs. My family, like most of our neighbors, have to go to surrounding cities for entertainment and to buy goods and services. We spend most of our money in Brentwood in a lesser-degree ananiac, because Oakley just doesn't have enough commercial. Wouldn't be great if we created jobs here for people who live here, instead of creating housing and adding more people by having to travel elsewhere to work. Forti Mershadees Lane is located pretty much in the center of town and ideally located off of the Laurel exit. This location makes the most sense for where to put a commercial district. It will be readily accessible to everybody in the city. I believe the developer is being totally disingenuous with their concept of what this project could look like. 58 single family units, I doubt it. If you rezone this parcel, the application for the project won't even slightly resemble what they're trying with their proposing here tonight. Without a doubt, they will lean into the state's density bonus law and apply for a project of 95 units, which is the maximum number the planning of the city, the mayor of the city of the city, the mayor of the city, the mayor of the city, the mayor of the city, the mayor of the city, the mayor of the city, the mayor of the city, the mayor of the city, the mayor of the city, the mayor of the city, the mayor of the city, the mayor of the city, the mayor of the city, the mayor of the city, Donald's debacle, Mr. Banky repeatedly said the businesses didn't want to come to Oakley. And all we could get was that McDonald's in a quick quack. Chipotle was offered as a suggestion, and Mr. Banky said, Chipotle had no interest in coming here. Yet the developer right across the street, the one currently bringing us the Safeway, is also bringing us to Chipotle, Wingsop Starbucks, and Enalesville, on. I suggested Mr. Binky and Mr. None aren't skilled enough to find commercial businesses to occupy this parcel, perhaps they should just sell the land to another developer who can. I'm Mr. Beaky and Mr. Nunn aren't skilled enough to find commercial businesses to occupy this parcel. Perhaps they should just sell the land to another developer who can. I want you to look around this room. All but actually had written down here a handful, but I've been keeping score. 35 people in opposition from city staff. 10 before me in opposition of rezoning. One person in favor rezoning Mr. Binky. So your constituents, the people that vote for you are in this room and they're telling you what we don't want. We don't want us to be rezoned. We don't want residential there. We need commercial properties. And that about covers it. Thank you. Thank you so much. All right. Next we have Mark Sutter. Good evening, council members and Mayor Shaw. I've actually kind of done away with some of this since the points have already been made. But thank you for allowing to hear my request. Actually more of a plea to please keep this property zoned as it is currently. I've been a resident of this community for 30 years right near this property in question. The property zoning and use plan was designated as part of a plan, which doesn't need to change unless a mistake was made or something isn't working. And I'm unaware of anything that isn't working with the plan that was made a long time ago. I actually took a minute to look this property up on Zillow to see its history and found that it was for closed on in December of 2011 and the current owner purchased his property in April of 2012 for $450,000. That's an extremely low price for 5.7 acres of commercial zone property with a three-bedroom, two and a half-bath home on the property. The property owner can make a lot of money by developing this commercial property that provides jobs and services for our residents rather than overcrowding an area right next to an elementary school. You know, the developer and landowner's request to build high-density, complex amounts to extreme greed in my opinion and sends a message to my neighbors and myself that they only care about making as much money as possible rather than still making a lot of money develop being the property for its intended use. As our council members, we have voted for you to look out for our best interests and I beg you to please hear the concerns of the citizens who feel strongly enough to take their time to be here and send their public comments to keep this property zoned as is. Please do the right thing. If this means Oakley needs to spend some money on attorney's fees, then please know that this tax paying Oakley residents gives you the blessing to spend as much money as needed to keep this property zoning intact. All right, so that was the last speaker card that I have. So I'm going to bring this back to the council for discussion. Councilmember Williams. Okay, I just want to address a couple things first of all. Super happy. Everybody is here. It's really nice. I wish this was every meeting. But it's not. And so there's a couple things that got talked about here that I think it's important to address so that you all know and understand a couple different things. So there's been a lot of conversation about school pick up. That is my complaint all the time, and it's not just Laurel. It's every single school, and I had three kids who went to Laurel. I've got various kids who go to different schools now throughout school pick up and drop offline has not been redone by the school for 30 plus years. Since it was invented, That was where Ermin since it was established. That was where it went. So the school held two different workshops, the school district, because they're in control of their cues. It's not the city. We don't even get, I even asked the school district, did you consult any of our traffic impact? They don't, they're under no responsibility to do that, so they don't. But I have to say that I was the only parent who was there. Everybody else was teachers. And they were talking about their inside fixes. And I said, you would have a fast win with the city if we just figured out a different way to do these pickup lines. It would make residents live so much better. So I think it's important that we know that there's been opportunities to make comments on that and there hasn't been a lot of comments on that. So that's kind of a bummer. The other thing that I think is really important to know, first I do want to say that I am really never in support of losing commercial to residential. We have a jobs to housing imbalance. Do I think that this property has the potential to remedy some of that maybe, but do I also know the applications that are coming in and have some fears that some of this traffic stuff is going to get exacerbated by some of those uses? I do. I have fears about that because I tried for two and a half years to get a zoning ordinance that would limit the saturation of gas stations, car washes, storage units, and fast food. And guess what portion I couldn't get agreement on? Fast food. So the possibility of there being a fast food drive through here, it's high. It's possible. So those are the things that make me very nervous. I do also think that it is important that we correct a little bit of the language because we're coming hard and we all know I did not vote for the McDonald's but we're coming hard for the developer. He did the right thing in this project. He presented it as a work session. There's no vote. He heard the feedback from the last one and if traffic is the main concern, we have to have the discussion. We have to have the discussion which is why he brought the work session. So's no vote to be had about this. So I just think those are important things to get out there. A couple other things because I was very upset about the blank notices. But again, the fact that this is a work session, there's much different noticing requirements and the city didn't have to do that noticing at all. They did it as a courtesy and it bit them. So maybe we won't do those as a courtesy anymore because it was a mistake. So I do think it's important to not always hear the malicious intent. I think we need commercial and I very much worry about if this gets allowed to be residential then what happens to the vineyard property? And I do think that Safeway is going to spur a lot of things and we haven't seen what these corners can do. And so for me, it's obviously, it's not, I don't want this here, but I don't want it here, we can not for the same reasons that everybody else doesn't want here. I don't want to lose that commercial because I think we haven't even seen what those corners can do. And, you know, we've got some uses that we don't all love, but you can argue that those uses are also now finally getting us some other ones. So I think it is important to call out the things that are we're right about this and you know we need first time home buyer homes. Do we need it right there? Not at the loss of commercial. We need first time home buyer homes. Councillor Maboo. Councillor Maboo, I'm going to be one second please. You guys all got to speak without any comments. I would really appreciate it if you let the council have their comments now. No, the council gets to deliberate and have conversation. So please be considerate and let the council say what needs to be said. Thank you. As I said, we need first time home buyer homes just not at the loss of commercial land. So before we're starting to get upset in the audience, we should listen to the things. We're advocating for you. We're advocating for you. We need first time home buyers. We need homes here. Currently today, not on this lot. I'm talking about in Oakley, in general, all of us came here who purchased a home because we had to because this is where we could afford. I'm going to just, you guys, I don't want to have to ask anybody to leave. I really appreciate everybody that's come to speak. Please let the council comment. We can't have back and forth. I do want you all to know. We heard everything that you had to say. Some of us will, you know, be, well, we have a closed session after, so we won't necessarily be available right after this meeting, but you can reach out. But I do want to please respect the rules and let the council comment. Thank you. Another thing that I want to bring up is that I came on to council because I was a small business owner, and I was so tired of all the different things that I was seeing here. And we all are going to compare ourselves to Brentwood. Brentwood goes through the exact same thing. They're going through the exact same comments, you know, Annie Ox doing something right now and I heard about another habit, another this, another this. Unfortunately, those are the people who are able to get funding. Those are the people who have large pockets to fund these things. My tiny, tiny restaurant cost $350,000 to fit it. That is not something that a bunch of small businesses can do. So we just have to understand that there's risk with all of this. And I just hope that keeping it commercial is I believe many people want. I just hope that that's going to give you the outcome that you still also want. That's the part of it that is really hard for me. Because when everybody is saying traffic and graffiti and trash, those are all things that come with commercial. So it just makes me really nervous that there's going to be some surprises for the people who live there. So I just, I have some concern about that. So I just wanted that to be said, I am not in support of losing commercial to residential in a main commercial corridor. I just would like everybody to be cautious in that, you know, there's risks to this as well. So that was kind of all. Councilmember Meadows. I support commercial. We've had one project come before us that we voted to change zoning from commercial to residential. It was a poor, poor commercial site. No ingress or egress on that site. The this corner here in my opinion is probably the most important intersection in Oakley. I've always looked at all four corners as commercial. So my preference is to keep it commercial. Bites Mayor Henderson. So this piece of property was actually zone commercial and Laurel and O'Hare was seen to be a main artery. Prior to even incorporation, so over 25 years ago. So this property definitely should stay commercial. But what we're here tonight is to provide input on the conceptual projects as before us. And there really hasn't been any input to that. And I just think there's a few things that need to be pointed out in there. I'm not in favor of the private streets coming off the corridor because that turns into a nightmare for public safety. They don't have law enforcement authority on those private streets. It turns into a problem with parking, garbage pickup, fire service. So there's a problem in there. And again, access off a Mercedes and O'Hara, I think if you were going to do a project like this, there would need to be a third access. If nothing else for emergency services to be able to get into something like that. The other problem with this kind of a complex, it's tight as it would be. Again, when you start looking at parking, the average house has at least two cars. And if you have somebody over, are you going to have overflow parking and then go into the neighborhoods. You're going to be overflow parking then go into the neighborhoods, down Mercedes. Again, where are these people going to be able to function and the thing like this? So, as you look at this project, if you were to try to bring this forward, after hearing the community, those would be definitely areas that need to be looked at before you bring it back. Thank you. Councillor Member Fuller. Yes. Thank you for being here. It is a basic government right to petition, people to petition their government. And tonight you've demonstrated that this is our town and you're going to petition it. And I have encouraged this and I say that you need to keep watching closely. Because what I've seen up here is a different, is a dynamic that the developer will come in and they will have three votes. And the way you're going to stop that is a referendum or a form of initiative. And at this stage, this is where we need to be. The fact that you have come here and presented yourself, people are aware. During this, leader has been born, Miss Abad. I hope I'm pronouncing that right, back. She has single and randomly put this together. It's a great leader and emerging in the community and I appreciate all that she's done in terms of this. Mr. Nexus here. I don't know how many are aware of it but Brad Nexus was one of the original mayors here. He actually helped write the general plan and approve it. And he said that it should be commercial and guess what? About 20 years later, about 20 years later, he's up here. It's just still be commercial. And as right, I agree. It should remain commercial. Again, we need to provide the direction. We need to show where we wanted to go. That this is where the community now is ours. And we need to continue to develop it the way it is. I am very bothered that we're having a series of developers come in, I need you to do this for me. I need you to do that for me. We have Cedarwood over here, this looking that's going from low residential, low density, very low density residential, the medium residential, and everybody's up here at us wanting us to change it, and we've done it too much. So in this sense, I encourage you to go forward. Right now, I know, just if Mr. Banky owns the property and comes back and presents a viable alternative and he knows that there's Cannot be put in any more gas stations around there because safely will have a gas station and there'll be a gas station across the street So we've brought that under control. So we want to have four corners of gas stations at the location We have some ideas and we're willing to look. But I've heard, well, you know, if a person owns a property, they should do it. But that doesn't, anybody can then go to the tenderloin with a piece of property, pick up about 30, 40 people and bring them back here to Oakley and give them 10th, send it all up. Because that's their property and they say that's the way I want to use it. Well actually in the city council and the city we can actually have a word in that. And we need to provide direction. We don't want to disenfranchise anybody, but we live here, this is where we need to go. Irvine did very well. Irvine has done very well in their development and without very little acrimony that has occurred there. So I would like us to continue to be somewhere along that line that we have everybody involved, everybody there and we hear not necessarily just we hear at the ballot box, we hear at the referendum when things are not going the way that they should. And the council is what I've heard is you're not listening, then you should make us listen. And that referendum is a horrendous amount of work and very much time consuming, but this is our community and we need to maintain that. Thank you. Okay, hold on one more. Sorry there's five of us guys I get to I get to have something to. A couple clarifying things. One of the public speakers made a comment that Cypress is not being developed that is so being developed right now you guys that is so happening I just wanted to clarify that You know like others have said there are certain businesses that are Allowed here without coming back to the council. So I appreciate council member Williams asking for that entire list. This is not a low income project. Hopefully the comment about trust, now that we are publishing all of our public comments online, hopefully that's a step in the right direction. I just were always trying to figure out a way to make sure that the residents know that we are getting their feedback. I just wanted to comment on that. Part of the process is, and like it was stated in the staff report too, because some there were some comments about two work sessions. That is the process. There are some things that go to the planning commission and they are the deciding, and there are some things that only come to the council. But in this situation, there is a work session for the planning commission. They advise the council, and there's always a second work session for the council. So it isn't that they didn't listen. This is the council. So it isn't that they didn't listen, this is the process. And I just wanted to put those things out now as far as how I feel. I don't believe that this corner has shown its full potential on what commercial can be. We've got safe way coming. And that's, if you guys live there, you see it, it's happening fast. And we, this, I have access to some documents from before we were ever even incorporated. And this has always been zone commercial. Does that mean that something was, that was in place 25 years ago, doesn't change. Not always we have approved a change from residential to commercial just recently on Main Street. And we have denied applicants that have asked to change commercial to residential. So everything is looked at as an individual application. And I met with a lot of the residents residents I've talked to some of you I've met with you but I don't think that we've seen the potential for this commercial lot so I'm not in favor of it and I will say that no developer, city staff or anyone that wants to call me a minion is going to bully me into changing how I feel I decide every single application based on an individual proposal. It is not because I voted one way last time I'm going to vote this way this time. I look at every single site, I drive every single site, I talk to the residents, I do my due diligence and in my opinion as the rest of us have stated we think this should stay commercial. So I guess councilmember Williams has her button lit up so I just want to make sure that we can. Everybody is obviously very happy about this, but I think we need to have some sort of like resolution because I think what happens is a work session. Sometimes things come from sometimes things follow this. So I just want to, we heard in the public comment that they were surprised by this meeting. I did watch the... from sometimes things follow this. So I just want to, we heard in the public comment that they were surprised by this meeting. I did watch the Planning Commission, they gave the steps. I know we can't necessarily give the steps right now. At this point, it's up to the developer whether he wants to actually submit a formal application to change this. But if we could just close out those, what next steps would happen in this situation? Sure. The ball is kind of in the applicant's court right now. So, you know, if the applicant chooses to submit an application, we would take that application in. We would process that application like we would do any other application. It would go under, you know, analysis by our staff, by outside agencies. We're not a full service city, so we have separate water and sewer districts here. A separate fire district that serves us. All those folks are given the opportunity to provide comments on those applications that we receive. Typically, applications are subject to some kind of CEQA review, unless they're exempt from CEQA. That's a California Environmental Quality Act. And then ultimately, a project is scheduled for a hearing. A project like this with a general plan amendment and a rezone would go to the Planning Commission first for recommendation. There are advisory body for an application like this. And ultimately, the City Council would final decision-maker assuming an application would be submitted and got to that point. And then if a commercial application was submitted they would still have to go through some of those steps. Same process. I just wanted to clarify that does it mean it. Yes, so we've heard you guys, we've given as much direction as I think we can. So we are going to close item 8.1. We do have a closed session which is conference with labor negotiators pursuant to government code section 54957.6A. City designated representative Joshua Murray, city manager and Jerry Taheda with unrepresented employees, I'm not going to list them all. the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the meeting is adjourned. You are all welcome to join us at our next meeting. We have them the second and fourth Tuesday of the month. Thank you.