Good morning, everyone.

I would like to call to order the Board of Supervisors Planning Meeting for Thursday, December 11th.

I'll ask the clerk to please uh call the roll.

Supervisor Marquez present.

Supervisor Tam present.

Supervisor Miley.

Excused.

Supervisor for Tornado Bas excused.

President Halbert.

Present.

We have a quorum.

Would you all please rise if you can and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance?

Thank you.

I note we don't need to go into closed session.

Is that right?

Very good.

The second uh the first item actually before that even is approval of the minutes of the planning meeting for November 13th.

Is there a motion to do so?

I'll move to approve the minutes as presented in our packet.

I'll second.

Motion's been made and seconded.

Is there any public comment on this item?

Seeing none, I'll ask for roll call vote, please.

Supervisor Marquez.

Aye.

Supervisor Tam.

Aye.

Supervisor Miley, excuse.

Supervisor Fortunato Bas, excuse President Halbert.

Aye.

That item passes.

Our next item is the consent calendar.

Um an item to approve record of cost abatement and authorized assessment liens on properties in violation of abatement orders under the neighborhood preservation ordinance.

Is there a motion to approve this?

I'll move the consent calendar.

I'll second.

Motion's been made by Supervisor TAM seconded by Supervisor Marquez.

Is there any public comment on this item?

No, sir.

Seeing none, I'll call for roll call vote, please.

Supervisor Marquez.

Aye.

Supervisor Tam, aye.

Supervisor Miley, excuse, Supervisor Fortunato Bas, excuse President Halbert.

Aye.

That item passes.

Thank you very much.

The next item is item number four.

A second reading and adoption of an ordinance amending the San Lorenzo Village Center specific plan for the county of Alameda.

Is there a brief staff report?

Yes.

Briefly, your board approved the first reading on November 13, 2025.

This amendment to the specific plan would allow the Alameda County Fire Department to uh relocate a fire station within San Lorenzo.

Currently, fire stations are not a permitted use listed in the specific plan.

Also, any construction over a thousand square feet needs a site development review.

This amendment to the specific plan would permit a fire station, one fire station, and uh would allow for the construction of the fire station without the need for a site development review.

Very good.

I would note this is a second reading, so likely to sail through without much complication.

Supervisor Tam questions or comments?

No, Mr.

Chair.

I would like to move to waive the full second reading and adopt the ordinance amending the San Lorenzo Village Center specific plan.

Okay.

Motion's been made by Supervisor Tam, seconded by Supervisor Marquez.

Do we properly read this into the record?

Read the title and now that the motion is to wave and then take public comment.

An ordinance amending the San Lorenzo Village Center specific plan one to permit one publicly owned and operated fire station within sub area 5A and two to waive site development review for fire stations measuring less than 10,000 square feet in building and accessory building floor area less than 50 feet building height and less than 0.25 floor area ratio.

Supervisor Tim, would you care to restate your motion?

I continue to move to waive the full second reading and adopt the ordinance amending the San Lorenzo Village specific plan.

I'll second.

Motion's been made by Supervisor Tam seconded by Supervisor Marquez.

Is there any public comment on this item?

Seeing none, I'll ask for roll call vote.

Supervisor Marquez.

Aye.

Supervisor Tam.

Aye.

Supervisor Miley excuse.

Supervisor Fortunato Bas excuse President Haubert.

Aye.

That passed.

Congratulations to the fire department.

Our next item is a first reading and adoption of an amendment to the zoning ordinance sections.

All listed here on the noting that this is an ordinance change.

We'll make sure to have the meeting of it first.

I always forget to do that.

Mr.

Rodrigo, are you ready for this?

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

So uh this is uh a proposed ordinance change regarding accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units to comply with California state law, including recently enacted state ADU and JADU legislation.

The proposed action is uh consideration of the ordinance amendments to the ADU and JADU ordinance to bring Alameda County into compliance with state comments on recently adopted county ADU and JADU ordinances and to comply with recently updated state legislation that will take effect in 2026.

This would affect unincorporated countywide, all areas that allow for residential and mixed-use residential zoning.

This proposed amendment is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to SQL Guidelines Section 15282H and Public Resources Code Section 21080.17, which exempt the local adoption of ordinances regarding secondary units in a single family or multifamily residential zone to implement the government code.

And pursuant to section uh 15061B3, which specifies that CEQA applies only to any project with the potential to cause a significant impact on the environment.

So the county received on April 30th, 2025 a letter issued by the State Department of Housing Community Development stating that they reviewed our uh ADU and JADU ordinance, and per the California government code found that the ordinance needs some modifications to comply with state legislation.

And so they uh requested that we look into the ordinance and revise it as necessary to comply with state legislation.

So we have since drafted the updates to the county ordinance uh based on the state letter and anticipating the legislation that will be in effect in 2026.

So if we do not comply with state legislation, then we cannot enforce ADUs or JADUs except for compliance with health and safety uh regulations.

So as far as zoning regulations are concerned, we cannot enforce them until we are until our ordinance comes into compliance with state legislation.

It is uh noteworthy to mention that regardless of county compliance with state legislation, the county as well as every single jurisdiction within California cannot enforce any ADUs or JADUs existing prior to January 1st, 2020.

So this is part of state legislation already, regardless of whether or not a local jurisdiction's ordinances in compliance with state legislation.

Any ADU or JADU existing prior to January 1st, 2020, has to be permitted as long as it complies with health safety regulations, local health safety regulations, but otherwise, as to zoning purposes, it has to be permitted, even if there are multiple ADUs on a property.

Hey Rodrigo, could we take a quick breather?

Sure.

Oh you may proceed.

Okay.

So again, uh 2020 is the cutoff point whether or not we're in compliance regarding um enforcement of ADUs and JADUs.

So uh staff considers that the draft ordinance updates are in direct response to the state letter of April 2025 and in conformance with state legislative updates taking effect in 2026.

So we've actually taken this these ordinance updates to the planning commission and to your board so that we can be in compliance as soon as possible.

So at their December 1st, 2025 hearing, the planning commission voted for in favor, none opposed with three excused to recommend that the board adopt the ordinance and the sequel exemption.

We did receive public comment from the California Housing Defense Fund, which was dated the 9th of December, so just a couple days ago, stating that we should clarify a portion of our ordinance to make sure that we mention that uh state protected ADUs per section 66323 subdivision A, uh, do not require parking.

And so we've taken their letter into consideration.

We've made the following modifications in red underlined font stating that except for accessory dwelling units to be developed pursuant to government code section 66323, accessory dwelling units are required to provide one on-site parking space for each accessory dwelling unit, etc.

etc.

etc.

So with this one clarification, staff is recommending that your board adopt uh the first reading and the CEQA findings.

It is also noteworthy to state that to avoid confusion with state legislation.

Staff is recommending deleting references to the county's policy for secondary units in rural residential and agricultural areas from the county ordinance.

However, this policy is not being rescinded by the by your board by your board of supervisors and remains in full force and effect.

Again, I want to stress that the policy for secondary dwelling units in rural residential and agricultural areas has been continues to be and will continue to be in full force and effect.

So again, staff is recommending with the modification I uh stated earlier that your board conduct the first reading and adopt the CEQA exemption.

And we're available for questions.

Any questions?

Supervisor Marquez.

Um just thank you for what I see is a very quick turnaround on the modifications, given that we just got the letter in April.

So just thank you to staff for working on this diligently.

Um I feel like I know the answer, but just want to hear it from you.

Help me understand the distinction between ADU and junior ADU.

Is it the size?

I just want to be very clear.

Sure.

A junior ADU has a limitation of 500 square foot maximum, has to be located completely with the with an existing house.

Okay, so it could be like converting a garage.

Yes.

Okay, converting a garage, a patio.

Right.

Okay.

And then an ADU can be larger, up to 1200 square feet, and it can actually be attached or detached.

Got it.

That's very clear.

And then um are we tracking how many permits have been pulled in the county?

Um, and then it's one thing to pull permit.

I've pulled a permit before and didn't see the project through.

So are we also tracking um whether or not uh those units have come online?

Yes, we we have um we do track and we actually have to report to the state how many are um are submitted and how many are approved.

Unfortunately, I don't have that at the end.

If you could just email it, we report in April every year.

In April, and then it's part of our RENA numbers as well, correct?

Yes.

And within arena numbers, are we making that distinction of ADU and JADU?

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

A curious question can a J junior ADU be a detached garage that is less than 500 feet.

It's got to be part of the main building.

So if it's if it's part of the attached garage, yes, but if it's detached as part of the accessory garage, then no.

It could be an ADU and some different portion of the main house can be converted to a JADU.

Interesting.

Okay.

Um other questions, Supervisor Tam.

Uh, thank you, Chair Halbert.

Just a quick question on uh the reference that was deleted uh to our policy uh based on the comment letter from the housing defense fund.

Uh so the requirements that are in our policy that we only applies to the rural uh areas.

Is this something that um HDF is also concerned about?

Because they it sounds like uh examples around parking requirements and those would be exempted uh for state law, and that's not something that we have to worry about in uh the rural areas, is that correct?

Right.

So so there are two different issues.

The um policy for secondary units was actually a comment from the state um uh Department of Housing Community Development.

So the state said that it was very confusing in our language because in our ordinance, we had a reference in rural residential and agricultural zoning districts to secondary dwelling units and um and to our policy, and the policy is has been in existence since the 90s.

Separately, this uh nonprofit organization, the Alameda County um excuse me, the uh what are they the Cal HDF?

Um separately made comments about parking and um making sure that uh state protected ADUs are exempted from parking requirements.

So those are those are two different issues from two different entities.

Um and so to respond to the state, we're removing references to secondary dwelling units, even though we're keeping the policy, the policy is its own policy independently adopted by the board of supervisors separate from the ordinance, and that continues to exist and be enforced.

And separately, we've updated uh the ordinance to respond to to this nonprofit, the Cal HDF to make sure that uh state uh protected ADUs are not required parking, and that's true whether they're located in urban areas or rural areas, um, those uh state protected ADUs cannot be required parking, and so we've made that clear.

Okay, that's helpful.

Um obviously parking has been always an issue when it comes to um the requirements, especially in the planning parts of the unincorporated areas.

So appreciate that clarification.

Yes, and and um so per the state, if a unit if an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit, junior accessory dwelling units are already small enough, but if an if an ADU is small enough, we cannot require parking even if it's in an urbanized area that's already got uh congested street parking.

Thank you, uh Supervisor.

If I might just follow up on your uh in the presentation comments regarding um the policy being deleted from the ordinance, yet being still being effective and in play.

Um it will be of limited effect because it is being preempted by state law.

So to the extent there is any conflict, whether it's referenced in the ordinance or not referenced in the ordinance, we will not be able to enforce it.

Just for clarification.

Thank you.

Uh if there are no further questions, I'll entertain a motion to first read the title of the ordinance.

An ordinance amending sections 17.04.010, 17.06.030, 17.30.110, 17.52780, 17.54.225, and 17.160.100 and chapter 17.55 of the County of Alameda Zoning Ordinance to comply with state legislation regulating accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units.

Excuse me, just a point of clarification that it should be as amended.

If that's uh this board's motion, no, no, you can just say as amended.

As amended, thank you.

Thank you very much.

Uh so I will move to waive the full first reading and adopt the amendment to the zoning ordinance related to accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units as amended today.

I'll second.

I'll ask for a roll call vote.

Supervisor Marquez.

Aye.

Supervisor Tam, aye.

Supervisor Miley, Supervisor Fortunato Bas excused, President Howard.

Aye.

The next item is item six, approving the request from the Sonol Citizens Advisory Committee for the authority to spend funds of 204.62 cents to purchase a pivoting monitor or a television monitoring.

The pivoting mount for television monitoring.

I imagine there's a very brief staff report.

You just gave my staff report.

Is there a motion to approve?

Oh, is there a public comment on this item?

No speakers.

I'll move to approve the request from the SNOL Citizens Advisory Committee.

I'll second.

Supervisor Tam made the motion.

Supervisor Marquez seconded the motion.

Seeing no public comment, I'll ask for a roll call vote, please.

Supervisor Marquez.

Aye.

Supervisor Tam.

Aye.

Supervisor Miley.

Aye.

Supervisor Fortunato Bas excused.

President Howbert.

Aye.

That item passes unanimously.

They will be thrilled in Sonol.

The next two items, I believe we have a brief comment from staff.

I'm not sure the exact status, but I know that Director Lopez will write comments.

On item seven and eight.

Yes, that was uh that was continued uh to January 8th.

I believe that uh neither there was a continuance granted um by one of the board offices.

I can't remember actually which board office granted the uh continuance.

Um the uh that as far as we know that January 8th date is a good date.

Uh there is some conversations going on with the parties involved that they may not be available on January 8th, but at this point, we believe that they are.

It's they have a pending court date, and not trying to get too much into their schedule or to their business, but uh I think that that is um the best information that we have as of now.

Okay, very good.

Those items are continued with uh that we're at the item of public input, a chance for members of the public to weigh in on items not on today's agenda but within the purview of this body.

No speakers.

We have no speakers public comment.

We are then seeing no business before us left uh before us, we are adjourned.

Thank you.