Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

i just got this yesterday All right everybody Welcome Uh the time is  now 7:30 p.m on Wednesday April 9th 2025 This   meeting is now called to order Uh please stand  uh for the pledge led by Commissioner Brown To the flag of the United States of America  and to the republic for which it stands   one nation under God indivisible  with liberty and justice for all Thank you All right Can we please have a roll call  Yes Commissioner Vashani is excused Commissioner   Austin here Brown present Rose here Sheffller here  Chief here Chair here Thank you All right Um next   on the agenda we don't have any minutes to approve  for this meeting So we will likely uh revisit the   March 12th meeting uh minutes next meeting So  we'll move along to the next item on the agenda   which is the public input portion of tonight's  meeting Uh so at this time uh citizens who wish   to discuss any items that are not on the agenda  may speak to the commission And just as a reminder   uh the commission can't discuss or vote on items  that are not on the agenda but we can use those to   inform uh what we put on the agenda for future  meetings Do we have any uh public input items tonight All right seeing none we  can move right along to our public   hearings for the night We have three  public hearing items on the agenda   Uh first up is PH1 which is an application  for a conditional use permit uh CUP

2025-00002 The subject property is 931  West Darty Road with Sichuan Garden   uh Lee Ping Lao as applicant Excuse me if I  mispronounced that Uh this is an application for   a a type 41 state alcohol and beverage control  license to serve beer and wine at an existing   restaurant Uh Sichuan Garden Um I believe we  have Brenda with a staff report but we might   have an IT issue that we need to resolve first  This one will be faster than last time Sit tight Okay thank you April That's looking good  Go ahead with the staff report Thank you   Chair Thank you so much And good evening to  you and the rest of the commission members   So as mentioned before our first item tonight  is a request for a conditional use permit for   a state alcohol beverage control license to  allow the incidental sale an on-site service   of beer and wine for on-site consumption at an  existing sit-down restaurant called Sichuan Garden The site is located at 931 West Dwarty Road  within a freestanding multi-tenant building   within the Monarch Shopping Center and is zoned  as neighborhood commercial Food service will be   offered throughout all hours of operation The  restaurant provides a wide range of Chinese qu   cuisine options including noodles and dumplings  various sides and non-alcoholic beverages State  

approval is also required for the sale  and consumption of alcohol on site This   includes that the restaurant have a fullervice  kitchen during operating hours and certification   be obtained by managers and servers through  ABC's responsible beverage service training program Staff conducted a site visit to the  restaurant and confirmed that the layout of   the business reflects an operating bonafide eating  establishment Uh the image on the upper leftand   corner displays um a kitchen and the floor plan  shows a total of 13 tables and 64 chairs One of   these tables is located in a private dining  room that will be kept unlocked at all times So in addition to standard conditions  this project includes a specific condition   um and that is requiring that the private dining  room remain unlocked at all times as previously   mentioned and window signs to be placed so that  there is a clear and unobstructed view of the   interior And with that staff recommends approval  of the conditional use permit for incidental sale   and service of beer and wine for on-site  consumption at this location Uh thank you All right Thank you very much for  the staff report Any questions   from commissioners regarding the staff report Go ahead Commissioner Just one Is there a  problem with signage there now I thought   that was an unusual thing to uh No no  problem with signage at the moment Just  

a reminder It's a standard condition that  reminder viewable from the outside Okay Any other questions All right Uh so now this is the time and place  for public input uh regarding PH1 Uh will accept   testimony in the following order Uh the applicant  if they wish to speak uh persons in favor persons   with concerns uh and then the applicant will have  a chance to respond And uh just some reminders   uh just those wishing to speak please come to  the podium one at a time Just state your name   for the record Uh do we have anybody wishing  to speak Uh do we have the applicant I don't   believe so No Got it Okay So no applicant Do  we have any uh persons in wishing to speak in favor Any persons opposed wish to speak Then no need for a rebuttal Um any debate  or dialogue discussion other questions from the   commission Commissioner Austin No No Okay I'll  take a motion if there is one I can do that I'll   move that we approve conditional use permit CUP  2025- Z002 with the conditions as presented in   the staff report I'll second that We have a motion  and a second Can we please get a roll call vote   Yes Commissioner Austin Yes Brown Yes Rose Yes  Sheffller Yes Chief yes Chair yes All right Um no   appeal language No Uh yes This is a public hearing  and um just wanted to make sure the applicant and  

everyone in the audience knows that decisions  of the planning commission may be appealed to   the city council if filed in writing within 10  days of tonight's decision and an appeal fee   um does apply Thank you All right Thank you very  much Um that completes uh PH1 We will move on in   the agenda to our next item uh PH2 uh which is  an application for a conditional use permit CUP 2025-00003 Uh the subject property for this cup  is 245 West Foothill Boulevard uh with Kasa Kolina   Healthcare Eric Rodriguez is the applicant and  it's an application for a cup to establish a   new outpatient physical therapy center within  an existing commercial building And I believe   we have Brenda back for another staff report  That's right Thank you chair And hello again   So in connection to this request uh we  also will be looking at landscaping and   ADA accessibility that will be uh updated  at this site for the outpatient medical use   So the site is located at 245 West Foothill  Boulevard on the northwest corner of Acacia   Avenue and Foothill Boulevard and is zoned as  neighborhood commercial which requires a minor   conditional use permit for medical outpatient uses  Now the property is developed with a commercial   building that was previously used as office space  but has been vacant for approximately a year now   As mentioned before medical outpatient  uses generally require um approval of a   minor conditional use permit by the development  review committee However uh since the subject  

site is adjacent to the to residentially zoned  properties code requires a conditional use permit   be reviewed by the planning commission due  to the site's proximity to residential zones So Kasa Kolina Healthcare Center plans to open  an outpatient physical rehabilitation center   at the subject site where they will offer  physical occupational and speech pathology   services Their proposed hours of operation  are from Monday through Saturday from 7:00   a.m to 6:00 p.m with a capacity of 9 to 12  employees and a maximum of 18 patients per hour   All services will be provided  by appointment only and will not   involve overnight care emergency visits or  walk-in urgent treatments These operations   are designed to be low impact individualized  and compatible with adjacent residential uses Uh tenant improvements include a new break room   employee restroom therapy  gym and other non-medical modifications Now uh here we see some  pictures of how the site looks today So   currently the parking lot has 37 stalls  and this includes two ADA stalls that   are located by the drive aisles off of  Foothill Boulevard and Acacia Avenue The applicant is proposing to reconfigure the  parking lot by adding two more parking stalls   and increasing the amount of ADA stalls  from 2 to eight stalls that will be all   closely placed to the building A new path of  travel will also be placed for pedestrians  

to access from the sidewalk adjacent to  Foothill Boulevard And a new light post   will also be placed in the center of  the lot illuminating the ADA parking stalls Uh new landscaping will be provided  Uh this includes five Brisbane box trees and   drought tolerant shrubs that will help with  screening from the residential units that   are located to the to the north Currently the  site has seven palm trees located at the north   and south end corners of the site that will  be removed and replaced with new shrubs The   new landscaping including the Brisbane box  trees and shrubs will provide added screen   uh screening from the adjacent  residential properties to the north Now conditions have been placed to include that  all physical therapy activities and equipment be   conducted entirely within the enclosed building  Hours of operation shall be limited to Monday   through Saturday from 7:00 a.m to 6:00 p.m  and any changes proposed to these hours in   the future shall be approved by the DRC Aside  from this the solid block wall along the north   property line shall be maintained as a buffer  between the commercial use and the neighboring residents And with that staff is recommen  recommending approval to the planning   commission Uh I am available for questions  and I believe our applicant is here in the   audience tonight too Thank you All right Thank  you very much for the report Questions from commissioners Okay I have a couple Um just on  the landscaping the um if you could flip back  

there the tree plan is there um there are  some mature trees that are on the site Are   those going to be preserved or are those going  to be removed and replaced besides the palms I   know you mentioned the palms are going to be  removed There are some trees that are being   retained Um if you give me just a moment Is  it those three green circles on the bottom Good question So the trees to remain are the kokas pomosa Oh I'm sorry excuse me I I misspoke  uh the eucalyptus trees that are located   to the south So yes the the three circles  and green off of West Foothill Boulevard So   those trees will remain Gotcha Thank you That  and that um I know the one of the conditions   uh talks about a tree retention plan Um is that  are those part of the tree retention plan The   Exactly Yes Okay Um yeah go ahead Commissioner  Austin I do have a question apologize regarding   um the the plant selection there I see some of  them specifically the purple fountain grass is   not necessarily a native plant It's a drought  resistant and since we just went through a   horrific fire season these are contributors  to to spread of wildfire if it's possible   to work with the applicant on putting some  appropriate um plant life in there that's  

more native than drought tolerant Yes  we can work with the applicant on that Do we have any other questions All  right seeing no other questions right   now we can move on to the um to the  public input portion of this hearing   Uh so a reminder uh if uh the applicant would  like to speak uh we'll take their testimony   then persons in favor persons opposed and a  chance for the uh um the applicant to respond   Um again just a reminder uh if you'd like  to speak please step up to the podium and   state your name for the record Any do we  have the would the applicant like to speak Um good evening council I my name is Eric  Rodriguez I'm with a day architects I'm here   uh with um most of the uh important people from  Kasakalina Um I just wanted to introduce ourselves   and let you know that we are here available  from the architectural design perspective   and of course from the facilities perspective to  answer any potential questions from yourselves or   anyone in the uh public gallery here So thank  you Thank you Any persons in favor wish to speak All right Seeing none any opposed All right No need to rebut any uh  questions or discussion from the commission Sorry let me close the public testimony portion  of the of the hearing and move on to commissioner questions Uh just uh maybe a question from  me uh on this Is Kasa Kolina an established  

business elsewhere and moving or is it a new new  business It is an established business They have   uh two centers one in Pomona and one in the  city of Isuza uh they operate a little bit   differently The centers each have I believe uh  they each have um hospitals and they operate on   a 24hour basis where this operation will be  uh different where it's just going to be uh   outpatient medical services Thank you And just  to clarify um there's no uh building expansion   that's part of this particular cup correct Or  plan Correct It's all interior and it's existing Any other questions All right If there's no  other discussion then um I'll take a motion I move that we approve CUP 2025-00003 with  conditions I'll second it All right Thank   you Commissioners Rose and Sheffller Um can I  get a roll call vote please Yes Commissioner   Austin yes Brown yes Rose yes Sheffller yes  Chief yes Chair Sthira yes All right Appeal   language please All right motion passes And  yes decisions of the planning commission may   be appealed to the city council if filed in  writing to the city clerk within 10 days of   tonight's decision and an appeal fee does  apply Thank you Very good Thank you Okay   Uh moving right along in the agenda we have one  more public hearing item tonight PH3 Uh it's a  

proposed ordinance number 2025-03 and associated  planning commission resolution number 2025-00001 uh from the city of Monrovia And this ordinance  recommends amendments to add inclusionary housing   requirements to the Monrovia Municipal  Code Uh I think we have Sherry up with   the staff report Yes Good evening chair and  members of the commission Thank you very much   Um we're here tonight to present to the commission  a proposed inclusionary housing ordinance Um this   ordinance has been in the making for several  months now And before we get into the nuts and   bolts of what this ordinance um contains and  it's what's proposing I just wanted to do some   background and a little discussion on why we're  here So as the planning commission may recall   um the city counsel I mean we adopted the city  adopted a six cycle housing element in 2022 and   that covers the years between 21 uh through 2029  And the m the purpose of this plan is to provide a   plan for current and future needs of all segments  of the city's population And it also includes uh   uh goals and actions um regarding housing Now the  primary purpose of the plan is to demonstrate that   the city has sufficient housing uh capacity to um  um to meet its regional housing needs assessment   Um part of part of the plan includes a housing  plan which is um long-term goals short-term   actions that are both land use tools um different  parameters of code uh revisions process changes to  

uh facilitate that housing production One of those  programs program 1.7 uh requires the city to study   the uh explore the idea of adopting a collusionary  housing ordinance the city doesn't have to adopt   an inclusionary housing ordinance Um the city  council though about 6 months ago started this um   intensive study and there's been several uh study  sessions and uh surveys and I think what came out   of that is um the idea for affordable housing was  very favorable and that is why we're here tonight   So before we get into the ordinance it's important  to understand what is an inclusionary housing   ordinance And so what the inclusionary housing  ordinance does in a nutshell is it requires a   percentage of a market rate development that's  being proposed to uh include a percentage of   their total units as affordable units Um  and it's one tool in our toolbox It's not   the only tool but it it's one tool to help  a city or local jurisdiction meet their RENA   requirement Um as the commission is aware the  city has already fulfilled a lot of different   uh actions to try to meet this requirement The  the inclusionary housing is the most direct   um implementable tool to get the housing  And these types of ordinances apply to   developments of a certain size um they  apply to either rental or for sale or   both And they're typically designed to  be city centric and that's because every   city is unique Every city has different  market conditions Every city has different priorities So in this slide we try to uh show and  illustrate what inclusionary housing looks like  

So we have one development that's all in orange  and this is a development without inclusionary   housing and then the development to the right of  that is an inclus a development with inclusionary   housing Now the shape and form look very identical  and it shows that the affordable housing units   are spread throughout the entire um building  They're not located in a separate building or   in a corner of the building And for the most  part the size are very comparable to the other units Um and so what is affordable housing  What does this mean So afford what I have   put on this slide is each county has their own  um established a affordable rental rates and   this table shows the affordable rental rates  that have been established for the year 2024   in LA County and the rates are based on  uh the size of the units So for example   um a household of two um that qualifies for  low income would have a maximum rental rate of $1,571 And that rental rate um is to qualify  for that rental rate you have to meet   um the moderate income category that's based  on LA County's um average median income And   typically that rental rate is is um not more  than an affordable housing cost for for any   individual shouldn't be more than it should  be you shouldn't be spending more than 30%   of your gross income on housing and it should  also include the cost of um utilities um etc

Now for the city of Monrovia this chart  represents our uh regional housing needs   assessment The commission has seen this before  The first column where it says RENA by income   level that's the city's target goal that  we're looking to accommodate by the year 2029   Um you can see we have a total of 16 uh  70 units and those units are spread out   by various income levels between very low  and above moderate Um and then the next   three columns show our attainment of meeting  those um that goal Um and it's based on units   approved in units entitled over a yearto-year  um span Um this chart is actually incorporates   uh the units that have been uh permitted issued  and constructed between the years 2021 through 2024 So as I mentioned before um the city  council began studying the idea of adopting   a collusionary housing ordinance back in  September of 2024 There's been three study   sessions and the proposed ordinance that's before  the commission tonight was um worked on very um   we had a comprehensive approach and team that put  this together The city staff worked alongside uh   Sage Crest Planning and Environmental and they're  here this evening We also have Kaiser Marsten   um who facilitated the fiscal analysis Um  and through this um intensive discussion   um the council and staff we uh you know directed  several studies and surveys to get input Um some  

of the studies include a community input study  Um we also did a survey of San Gabriel Valley   cities to try to understand what best practices  are throughout our region and what has worked   and what has not worked Um the council was  also very interested in getting developer input And so taking all that information  together with respect to the surveys and the   studies and the the discussion um the the staff  working closely with our our team of consultants   um really kind of identified very critical  implementing principles that kind of drove   the framework for this proposed ordinance The  first one is the goal was to make an ordinance   that was Monrovia centric and that was really  to satisfy the needs and market conditions of   Monrovia Um as I mentioned before every city has  different u market needs and conditions Um they   have different zoning laws that influence um the  cost of housing Um the another goal was to provide   an ordinance that was flexible and offered an  a range of alternative means of compliance to   the ordinance Um through our development input um  developer input surveys Um it was highlighted that   because there is a cost of providing affordable  housing a lot of the developers liked the idea of   uh tying the the threshold of of occlusionary  housing to state laws for easy easy to implement   and also they can also are incentivized by  the density bonus waiverss and concession   uh programs Um part of the the the framework  also included considering the city's   um community priorities specifically the general  plan land use vision and how it relates to  

neighborhood compatibility and the preservation  of historic resources Um and then the goal was to   ultimately produce affordable housing with minimal  impact on housing production and prices And then   lastly the goal was also to create an ordinance  that's legally compliant with state law and court rulings So the the key piece of putting together  this inclusionary housing ordinance was our fiscal   analysis And um later this evening if you have  questions we have our specialist the president   of KMA who's here um Miss Kathy Hed She's done  um probably a quarter of inclusionary housing   ordinances in California if it's a good ratio It's  close It's close Um and so um a little bit about   this inclusionary uh excuse me afford fiscal  analysis It's really essential to determine in   it was first essential to determine here in  the city of Monrovia um what the affordable   affordability gap is associated with the different  types of development that Monrovia is experiencing   And so when we say afford a affordability  gap essentially that's the difference in   between the market rate value and the cost of  producing and that affordable housing unit and   and the affordable affordability gap as you can  imagine changes in every city based on rental   rates Right Monrovia has higher rental rates than  some other cities in the San Gabriel Valley Um and   other cities in the San Gabriel Valley have higher  rates than ours So that affordability gap varies  

This uh fiscal analysis also um after after  identifying the affordability gap it took and   looked at different types of prototypical projects  to understand how each project type uh changed and   um was affected by an affordable inclusionary  housing requirement So the the fiscal analysis   it actually recommends a project size in which to  trigger the ordinance It sets recommendations for   income and affordability standards um that can  be supported as well as a an inloo fee which is   an alternative means a compliance um um that is  that is the perfect balance and when when we're   trying to understand what is the perfect balance  how do you get to a sweet spot without tipping or   stifling development right um the one thing that  I've learned is a success uccessful ordinance is   is one that will impact developers and create  affordable housing units However not as much   as desired And I think Kathy Head Miss Kathy Hed  will tell you we know we're in a good shape when   we have both all housing advocates upset with  us and we have all developers upset with us So um now I want to just kind of walk you through  the contents of the ordinance Um the crux of it   is the applicability the affordable housing  requirements the exemptions and the alternative   means of compliance Um applicability So  um the the ordinance is recommending that   um the inclusionary housing requirement apply to  new housing projects with five or more units in  

first a target area And these target areas have  been defined as Station Square uh Transit Village   uh West Huntington Drive corridor and South Myrtle  Avenue And that's the Oldtown Extension District   Now the first reason why the city staff looked at  these areas is because these are the areas already   um where the city's experiencing its housing  growth These were areas that were planned over   30 years ago that are close to transit to  support high density walkable communities   um uh close to uh jobs and and services These  areas also make up predominantly all of the city's   reena housing opportunity sites So we capture  we capture our reena requirements in in these areas Um another reason why these  areas were recommended is um is they   also protect against unintended consequences  resulting from the use of the density bonus   And to explain that um is when when a project has  an affordable housing requirement that's set at   five units or five or more units That's the point  at which the density bonus now kicks in and offers   um a density increase as an incentive And it  also allows developers to start taking advantage   of waiverss of and concessions of development  standards So if if um you had a project um and you   needed uh a reduced setback or increased height  through the use of the density bonus you can   um this you can ask a developer could ask for  that and the city has to provide that if there's  

um an offer of affordable housing that meets  the state density bonus thresholds Um and then   another key reason um is for these targeted  areas is that these areas um really allow   housing development to capitalize on the city's  um existing infrastructure and proximity to transit Okay Outside of these target areas  we do have another net to try to capture   more affordable housing And that first um net is  the ordinance recommends that not only does it   um capture this existing housing cycles uh  arena requirement or um housing opportunity   sites inventory but it also automatically  captures any future sites So when we start   we're already halfway in through this cycle So  when staff starts looking at where we're going to   be capturing future units to meet our future arena  um the ordinance will already capture those sites   Um staff has also incorporated a provision that  any project that's outside of those areas that   is proposing a general plan amendment  for more density or a zone change for   a residential use land use that the site be  automatically triggered into the inclusionary   housing requirement And then last but not  least um there are several state laws that   have um facilitate by residential housing  on non-residential sites So we've threw in   another kind of net to capture any byite housing  project that would occur on a non-residential site Okay And so now if a project um hits the  threshold and is required to incorporate afford  

affordable housing these are the thresholds So  if the project is an ownership project such as   like a condominium project um the the recommend  the recommended uh requirement of affordability   based on the fiscal analysis that was conducted  is 10% at moderate income For rental we have three   different tiers The first tier is if you're doing  20 or fewer units it's 6% low income From 21 to 49   units uh it recommends 10% low income And then  anything over 50% excuse me 50 units we have a   recommended 15% low income Now you may be thinking  or asking to yourself why are we going after low   income units Why are we going after moderate  income units And the reason is is that those   are the the two areas in our arena where we really  need some heavy lifting Um there are already a lot   of state and federal funding incentives to large  developers to secure very low um income And so   this the moderate and the low it's like this  is another way for us to try to attract these units As for exemptions um this ordinance would  not apply to the addition of ADUs ADUs cannot be   deed restricted Um SB9 units these are units  that are proposed in uh or or it could be a   subdivision in a single family home The maximum  number of units in an SP9 development is four So   that already would not in um uh be applicable  Emergency shelters um again this is temporary   housing not permanent housing Assisted living  facilities are not your traditional housing  

development and transitional supportive housing  um already have a lot of affordability and   uh the different types of housing So and in  lui um so the state uh that the laws regarding   um inclusionary housing basically say that the  program has to also include an alternative means   of compliance Um one of the first alternative  means of compliance that's most frequently used   is the in uh the inloo fee It's very popular  amongst all the cities who have inclusionary   housing ordinances and um the developers  also like it Um and what it doesn't have to   be applicable to all all types of projects And so  what um Monrovia's ordinance is recommending it's   that it be allowed for all ownership projects  And by doing that um the ownership there's no   um when the home sale if if there was a home  that sells there's no loss of of return on   your investment It's just easier and cleaner  to have it to have it to pay the inloo fee   um for rental projects between um five and 20  units or less those uh would all have the option   to do the inluffy and those are smaller projects  that um based on their size it doesn't really make   sense uh it helps uh reduce the burden on the  smaller scaled size projects and our enlu fee   um program also is recommending that um the  calculation be based on a per square foot and   that fee as you can see is different between an  ownership and a rental unit Okay so we're we're  

getting close to the end I just wanted to give  you some sample calculations of how this invol   fee would apply So here's the first scenario  You have a vacant property in which a developer   proposes to build a 5-unit apartment complex Each  unit's about 1,500 square ft So because this is   an owner ownership no excuse me apartment complex  we're using the $24.50 50 cents per square foot   So five units times the total square footage  times the square per square foot fee you get $183,750 and that would be the  inclusionary and Lou fee for this   particular project Scenario number two we  have an existing property that's developed   with three existing units Um and the  developer wants to add two new units   So a a new housing development has is  now at the five hits the five but the   per square foot fee is actually based on  the net new number of units So we have two   unit units times the size of the unit times the  the fee Um in this scenario the uh fee would be $73,500 And last but not least scenario  three the developer proposes to build a   new 50 unit townhouse development  These are four cell units and you   can see for this particular scenario  the total fee is a little over $2 million With respect to other uh types of  alternative means of compliance this ordinance   proposes uh allows developers to build those  units offsite but within the city of Monrovia   It also has a provision that would allow for the  conversion of existing market rate units Now with   um it's important to note that um the city may  or may not get credit with the conversion of  

market rate units HCD has um several questions  and analysis that we would have to go through   to see if we would qualify or not And it's  it's not a a black and white methodology Um   but nevertheless converting a unit an existing  unit to an affordable unit is still a a gain for   the city Um so right now um the city has already  finalized uh the ordinance that's being presented   to the commission We're eager to receive your  feedback This is the planning commission's   uh public hearing process It's and the commission  would be making an advisory uh recommendation   to the city council Um after tonight um if this  goes through the next the city council would meet   uh in May at the end of May May 20th So with  that I conclude the staff report and I'm happy to   answer any questions you may have Thank you Sher  A lot went into that Um okay So questions from the   commission Commissioner Rose two questions Um  is there anything in this ordinance I couldn't   find anything um that speaks to rates going up  on these affordable units because we can start   out affordable and not end up affordable So I  don't know that that's legal that we can put any   restrictions on that these homes remain affordable  Yes So with state law what would happen is if   um a housing developer was required to produce  the affordable housing unit there would be an   agreement that's recorded It's going to be deed  restricted against the property and there'll  

be a monitoring program and um that requires  the affordability for um for a rental for 55   years That's so for rentals Correct For ownership  it's for 45 years Okay So um so these new our new   things that are going up those will be protected  Um we can only protect the ones that are deed   restricted through the ordinance Right Right Right  Not the I know the regular ones The market rate   Yeah Market rate can do whatever Correct Got it  Okay Because that was a that's my concern What's   the use of having it affordable if it's not going  to remain affordable The other thing um about   these inloo fees My question is if a developer um  and maybe I'm not understanding it correctly but   if a if a developer chooses to pay the inloo fees  am I understanding that they can pay inlue fees   instead of creating affordable units Um yes Uh  but maybe so the way that the ENLU fee program has   been designed the smaller scale products forget  that can pay the ENL fee Anything greater than I   think it was 20 has to build it into the project  has to uh create the affordable unit and maintain   it for 55 years within their project So there's no  inloo fee option So there's no inloo that's where   for over 20 units Okay So they can't opt to pay  the enloo fee and get all the benefits of building   an eight-story building and not having affordable  units Correct Okay That was my big concern I want   to see those units put in there if they're going  to get the benefits Okay Thank you Commissioner  

Chief Yes One question regarding inlue fees Who  do those fees get paid to and is it all upfront   Hm Well those fees would be taken in through  the city and um I we we don't so we haven't   established our implementation policy program  yet Um most fees are paid at the at the by CFO So   once the building's built um the developer has to  pay those fees in prior to CFO We can have Kathy   Head weigh in on that if she wants to Are they  normally at CFO Um but then we would manage those   through a a housing trust fund here at the city  So it varies from city to city Hi I'm Kathy Head   I'm president of Kaiser Marston It varies from  city to city Um sometimes you see it at the end   um before a CFO is issued Sometimes you see it  split up between at the beginning of construction   or the middle of construction CFO Typically you'll  see a phased project where it'll be paid by phases   but it's fine any of those ways That's your policy  decision Most of our fees are all paid at CFO So   so that fee goes into the affordable housing trust  fund and that money is intended to be used by the   city to increase affordable housing supply Is  that correct That's correct So then um uh what   is is that going to be done in a timely manner or  or does that money uh sit there for an extended   period of time Yeah Well there's uh reporting  there's yearly reporting requirements Um there   there would be yearly reporting requirements on  what our fees that we're charging on And at the   end of five years if we haven't used the money  we need to also report that and show that we are   going to use it Um it's not just constructing a  unit The city has a lot of options to take that  

money It could be a firsttime home buyer program  It could be put into a housing rehab program   It could allow to facilitate the conversion of  existing market rate units to affordable units   Um so I I I I see a lot of good potential to  use it It may take some time to accumulate it   How does that plan uh you said the plan is not  finalized How does that what's the path to that   plan coming into existence Is that something the  city council weighs in on Yes So the the fees that   are shown here in this uh proposed ordinance would  have to be adopted by council by resolution and   then either with that uh resolution or separately  trailing little behind it we would bring back an   implementation uh plan that would identify  the nuts and bolts of managing the program Commissioner Brown I have a couple  questions Do we have an estimate on   how much we think we're going  to get from these inloo fees Let's bring up our specialist Hello again I'm  still Kathy Head My guess is now looking at   it your apartment projects are likely not to be  small They're I expect there to be very few small   apartment projects So there should be no inloo  fees generated or very little minimal inloo fees   ownership housing and and something that I mean  there was a lot covered in the presentation but   one thing that's important is the reason we're  suggesting in l fees be allowed to be paid for all   ownership projects is because the affordability  gaps are so big between your market rate prices   and the affordable price that if you develop them  one you can't develop that many units and two you   have lottery winners you know you know when you  get these units so to take those fees and use   them towards all the projects that that were just  mentioned is a more efficient way to go That's a  

long way of saying I have no idea how much the  fees will be Um I don't expect that you'll see   most of your ownership housing will be infill  small infill So it'll take some time to generate   a significant amount of capital and that's why  programs like first-time home buyer or rehab etc   are probably your best use of the fees Okay And I  was just in Arcadia last week and I said exactly   the same thing Mhm Um could we talk a little bit  more about that Um just maybe an example uh if we   have say a small you know a bungalow court of five  units uh it's an ownership project so it would be   uh eligible for the inloo fee Uh so if if  the developer wanted to sell those units at   market rate they could develop those five that  five unit bungalow court hypothetically and   uh then just pay the inloo fee and then sell  them at market rate Is that correct Yes that's   how that works That's how that works Okay Yeah  Go Commissioner Brown Um so another alternative   is that developers instead of the inloop fee can  develop affordable housing on an alternate site   Correct What are what are the par like what  are our parameters on that so that we don't   unintentionally create areas now that are all you  know instead of it being nicely dispersed the way   you showed it on that model we're creating areas  with high concentration so what are we doing about   that so there are parameters in the ordinance  that basically a developer can't come in and say   uh I want to build my project Don't worry I'm  going to put my affordable housing units on   this lot over here The first thing is we don't  have a lot of this lot We don't have a lot of   extra land in Monrovia Um we put that alternative  means of compliance in there um in case maybe the  

city has a site where we want to incorporate  affordable housing The the purpose though is   that they would ha they would have to have a plan  and a permit done to build before they could even   do their project Um there would be a review  process in place to make sure it made sense Commissioner Austin Sure Um this might go to  Kathy but I'll direct it back to you Sherry   the um per square foot fee does that a  permanent thing or is that adjusted due to   inflation or like a county government coming  up and saying this is what affordable is now   So we are going to be looking at that fee on  an annual basis for adjustment purposes Okay   I think this ordinance is one that would be  scrutinized every year um and monitored every   year especially not just the fees but to make  sure we're it's working right And um evaluating   areas where maybe we want to expand towards or  make other adjustments on density to gain more   affordable housing Back to you again Sher um the  level of comfort about the thresholds So I know   that I listened to Kathy's three presentations  of the city council seems to be quite equipped   to to make these judgments because what was the  thing 15% of zero is still zero Saying that all day thresholds at a good rate just to say that is   a BIA comment that I stole just  to attribute it appropriately   So our thresholds are are a comfortable level that  we can see success Yes And I think the other thing  

that we didn't mention but Kathy Head has has  trained me now in the last 6 months is that there   are significant laws in in you know making sure  the ordinance is not confiscatory and it doesn't   uh take away the fair and reasonable return  on investment that a developer has And there's   been state law There's been court cases that  say that but there's no recipe that tells us   how to make sure that it's not confiscatory or  it's going to deprive a developer Right That's   the crux of this fiscal analysis And I think um  Kaiser Martian's analysis is very conservative   and it's a very balanced approach Um and so  sta staff recommends it One last question and   this is to Kathy The study was started two years  ago Is it still germanine or applicable in 2025   financial terms We're closing in on it being  stale I I I would suggest adopting soon Okay Uh one of the things you said Sherry is we would  scrutinize this ordinance and see whether or not   it's successful likely on an annual basis How do  we figure out if it's successful or not versus   and you know on the flip side how do we figure out  if it's not being successful and what does success   mean Well I think um your planning team has  dialogue every single day with developers across   the counter Um and we also um will be evaluating  are we capturing are are is it is it deterring   development when people come in to the counter and  they say I want to do a project I don't think this   day and age that a large developer is going  to walk away because of what's being proposed  

Um are we are we seeing areas of the city where  maybe we should have thought about expanding the   inclusionary housing ordinance Um there every  every year we do an annual general plan report   It's a housing progress report to the state and  we will be doing a review also within that within   that process We'll we'll hopefully see the the  the zeros turn into numbers real whole numbers Go ahead One last thing but hopefully um regarding  the affordability index that's calculated annually   by LA County Yes So that would adjust those  correct up or down on those rates going forward   Correct And some new numbers will be coming out  very shortly So that would go up and down Correct   Commissioner Chief are there examples where  this ordinance has been successful in Southern   California And are they using the same type of  numbers that we're looking at You know what I'm   going to have Miss Kathy Hed respond to that Thank  you Or or Mr David Blumenthal from Sage Crest   who conducted our San Gable Valley city survey  Thank you Mr Chair members commissioner David   Blumthone principal with sage press planning  and environmental Um the short answer is yes   There's there's a lot of uh cities out there that  have done very successful inclusionary ordinances   There are some cities out there that have done  um not successful ordinances and um have um put   them on hold since since they've implemented  it The um surveys we show um have shown pretty   much all the well most of the ordinances are  very successful Now the numbers need to be   tailored per city because um the numbers that  Kathy puts together are actually uh based on  

the city's act income levels and the city's sales  rates and property values that go in and that can   vary between you and Arcadia and Bradbury are all  different um numbers and that's why it's critical   that we had um Kathy prepare that fiscal analysis  um to make sure this is tailored towards Monrovia   Thank you So just expanding on that um I think one  of the comments in the staff report talked about   some of the other ordinances in the St Gabriel  Valley Um and you know how much affordable housing   was actually built versus how much the inloo fee  was utilized Um I think the comment was like South   Pasadena has has built a lot of affordable  housing Was it Alhamra tend to just have   developers use the inloo fee um what drives those  things Uh is it just different rates different   uh provisions uh in their ordinance Tell us some  more about that I I think um a little bit of that   and a little bit of the local development climate  I think um Pasadena is going to develop a lot of   affordable housing whether or not they have an  affordable inclusionary ordinance They just tend   to build they're just one of the cities that um  the way the city was developed is um conducive   to a lot of um high density projects and a lot of  affordable units So um you see that um and then um   you see the opposite again where some cities where  it's it's the ordinance that drives those because   otherwise they wouldn't see anything at all Uh so  given all of that experience from the other cities   that have come before us in the St in Gabriel  Valley How do you expect to see this ordinance   utilized um and instantiated in Monrovia Like what  do you think will happen Um putting my uh bringing   out the crystal ball on that one putting the magic  cap on Um you know I I think this has been very   tailored um to meet the city's needs There there  has been a lot more research on what we typically  

do um for these types of ordinances You know  getting community input getting developer input   input That's that's very rare for these these  ordinances Um so I think we're we're find hope   hopefully found the very sweet spot for you Um as  Kath said there's a way for us to really predict   the number of units you're going to see out of  this Um but we we feel that this is um a very   um well-written ordinance that will be successful  for you and taking a look at it on an annual basis   will definitely help you uh tailor it a little bit  more Okay Yeah And it's also fair to say that a   lot of cities are in the same at the same place  where we are right now Um some of the cities in   the study were were had just approved or adopted  their ordinance Um so I think time will tell   um you know all the planning directors work  together closely with the COG and we talk and we   share stories and ideas um and you know we we we  will continue to have a discussion of what's not   only working and not working here in Monrovia but  keep our we always keep our ears like what else   can we do if it's not working or are good you  know what Monrovia is actually knows how to do   this jump in for a No I don't think I just wanted  to say a couple things because I'm chatty Uh and   because I worked on a lot of these ordinances in  the surrounding communities Um your ordinance one   of the reasons I think it will work is because  when you did your housing element you created   the areas in which you expected the housing to be  built and the train obviously has a significant   influence on the apartment development And I think  clearly that is where apartment development will   be focused with a little bit coming into town  but mainly by the train And so that's I think   what guides yours I just finished Arcadia and  Arcadia what theirs what guides theirs is in  

their housing element they created they reszoned  and when they resoneed they reszoned for the   downtown mixeduse area primarily to provide  additional density and in return then for   that reasonzoning said oh and by the way we're  going to make you do affordable housing and so   there's that Pasadena which I worked on in 2001  and then they actually redid it in the early 20s   um not with me Um what they experienced as David  said is a lot of density bonus projects And so   those were going to provide affordable housing one  way or the other And so that's part of the reason   they changed their ordinance was to add another  increment of affordability because they weren't   really getting anything from their inclusionary  ordinance that they weren't getting from density   bonus And then Pomona which I finished probably a  couple years ago now that one is actually seeing   more ownership development you know subdivision  type development and is going to be generating a   fair amount of inloo fees Oh and South Pasadena  is just getting going too So anyway that's what   I have to say about that Thank you Um one more  Um following my hypothetical bungalow court uh   example uh if we have uh that five unit bungalow  court that gets built um uh but the inluff fee   is not paid So it's uh it's those are affordable  units uh ownership units and then someone wants   to sell one of those later um it's deed restricted  at that point they can only sell it for a certain   value What what happens there And part of this  is getting at the return on investment typically   that you see in property ownership in this area  right And this is another reason that I suggest in   Luffy for ownership housing because if you allow  like the density bonus which some developers are  

starting to use for ownership it didn't used to  be as common is the way that statute is written on   the first sale it goes to market and then the city  gets repaid the original affordability gap plus   um an equity share But then what happens is you've  got the density but no longer the affordable unit   So in my opinion my professional opinion  for a density bonus project or and then   adding inclusionary into it which gives you  more um authority than the density bonus is   if you then impose the long-term affordability  restriction then you keep it in the inventory   for a long time but now your homeowners who own  it aren't really getting any significant equity   appreciation from owning the home And and then so  that also over a long term creates a disincentive   to keep the unit up right That's why I and  then given the large affordability gap which   I already mentioned I just say take the Enluffy  and use it for rental Yeah So you're saying that   my my example is basically a unicorn You're  not going to see that I'd be very surprised   unless somebody's selling it to their sister  Okay Okay Um more questions I have more Um Uh Oh Uh Just Oh here Here you go Thank you Um sorry  Just one on the specific um assisted living   uh facilities were exempt Um did we consider any  other types of um like I saw some definitions   about uh like rehab facilities or retirement uh  communities or or anything like that Um what went  

into the decision to um limit the exemption  to assisted living facilities rather than you   know a wider swath I mean we're the ordinance is  really focusing on your traditional housing units   Assisted living for example is um it's it's  end of life housing or close to end of life   housing and there's medical components to it  It's not your traditional housing Um so like   a 55 plus community would be subject to this  Yes Was there any consideration in exempting   those No they they also get benefit from the  density bonus as well Senior housing does Oh   yeah Um you reminded me of my other line of  questioning on on density bonus So currently   we don't have a a density bonus ordinance  Correct That is correct What's the plan So   shortly we wanted to get this uh moving  and grooving on the inclusionary housing   Um our team is has already been working on  a density bonus Um we just needed a little   bit more time before we did liftoff The  state's law is already in in place So we   would still be f we're still following the state  standards with even without an ordinance Right Okay Um other questions All right So this is a  public hearing Uh now that we've uh momentarily   exhausted our fountain of questions we can move  on to the public input portion of this hearing   Um so again just a reminder uh if you have public  input please uh step up to the podium and state   your name Uh we will take uh persons in favor  and persons opposed uh and then uh we'll have   a chance for the the city staff to respond  Um so do we have anybody wishing to speak  

in favor of the inclusionary housing ordinance  and associated planning commission resolution   Go ahead Please approach the podium  and just tell us your name and go ahead City Council ladies and gentlemen my name is Dr  Short is Dr K My last name is Karam Manuguian   is very long I own the property on Myrtle and  Maple It's approximately 100,000 square footage   And I would like to know what's the input for  density and affordable As Sherry mentioned the   density is not been decided yet I would like  to know on this property how is it mixeduse   Can they do mixuse on that property and height  That's important also And of course affordable   housing is going to be bonus as many as number of  units is going to be Usually I build it in Glendel   uh there on San Fernando corridor uh it was  150 unit per acre of course there was 15% of   affordable housing there uh I don't know how is  going to be here because my property in your plans   and I'm interested to know in the future more and  I don't know with whom I going to work planner  

or anything I would like to bring my architect  and see Okay Uh I think we uh might be able to   uh get a couple answers uh for some of the  questions that you asked Another issue here I   own all the block from the Myrtle to Ivy except uh  norththeast corner which is 8,000 square footage   and I am after it about 5 years they are not  interested to sell the property even I pay them   more than market value Is that going to stop me to  do my project And I would like to say why if they   don't want to sell it I can't force them I don't  know if city can involve that Uh I I am asking but   uh I don't want to stop the project because you  would like me to do the project Okay Uh is that   the completion of your Thank you Yeah Awesome  Thank you very much uh for your comments I   think we can answer a couple of those things and  I believe uh some of them are gerine to the public   hearing tonight Uh and some of them may be best  uh dealt with directly uh with the city staff   offline Um but uh let's go through and collect  other public testimony uh and we'll gather the   questions up and try to respond to them at the  end All right Uh any other persons in favor This   is what Good evening My name is Tom Scill I own  the property adjacent across the street from Dr   K Um my I guess it's I am in favor of the project  However I do have a question as it relates to is   there any provision within the ordinance to either  allow or prohibit a developer from expanding and  

using an EIFD or the enhanced infrastructure  financing district to complete a project within   this area That would be it Now that I've served  up that fast ball Thank you All right Thank you Any other persons wishing to speak in favor All right Persons opposed Go ahead Please come up to the podium  and state your name and direct your testimony   to me and we'll go from there Hello Uh my name  is Janelle Douglas and I actually live in the   epicenter of where all these buildings are going  up and I've owned my property I live in a condo   on Genanoa and I've owned that property for about  18 years and since I've been on that street the   crime rates have increased Um my fiance just  got had his tailgate stolen There's all kinds   of stuff going on in that street A bunch of  homeless people are walking around on that   street So my concern is these these apartment  complexes that are going up all around me and   engulfing me I I thought I saw numbers a few  slides back by 2029 there was going to be 519   um units that Monrovia had to come up with Did  I read that right There's like between now and   2029 the number jumped significantly Yeah  I can I can clarify One of the first slides   It's a regional housing needs assessment  It's what the state says we should be able   to accommodate within the city in that period of  the housing applicability of the housing element   So my question is where are those people going  to go and are they going to go in the apartments  

around my condo That's my question if if that's  the only area that the city is building that's   my concern because I'm already contending  with a lot on my street And I have one more   question How do you define extremely low income  I think that was on the the table Uh very low A   very low income So what types of people are very  low income Yeah I think we saw it's all income   based Uh and it was on the table from earlier in  the presentation Maybe we can just bring that up Would those be people that  are currently homeless now Not necessarily Okay Sure Okay These are  the rental rates but um so ba basically   the average median income for LA County is  $98,200 and the um to qualify for very low   um it's 50 it's it I think it's is  that 50% of the med area median income Okay Yeah Um I have another slide that I can  bring up maybe in a little bit later that shows   the whole the income the income Yeah let's income  Okay let's let give me a chance and we'll bring   that up It's in the staff report We can bring it  up Yep And then what was the number um by 2029   that that the city had to had to house because  it jumped significantly That was the arena We   can bring up the arena table as well Oh okay I  think Erin it might be a good idea for Sherry  

or city staff to explain how that arena numbers  work Yes And they're not necessarily at end and   end product There's a goal Correct Yeah Let's  we'll come back to that Okay Uh those are my   questions Thank you I think we've captured  those we can show some of those tables and   talk about a couple of these topics uh in our in  our dialogue going forward Okay Would you like me   to comment now or should we wait You It's up to  you Let's just see if there's any uh anyone else   opposed before we delve into answering some of  these questions or or discussing some of these topics All right I don't see anyone else So yeah   um this is the income levels Yes Can you please  one more gentleman Oh we have another person   opposed Please state your name My name is  Paul Groard And a couple questions I have is   um one you're talking about putting a housing  right on the corner of Permos to Maple Okay I   have a building right diagonally across them  but you don't don't want automotive shops in   their housing So how's that going to affect me if  you put in that You put in housing and I have a   building I lease out that's an auto shop I used  to run the auto shop at one time Yet the city's   been against that for quite a while because of  noise restrictions or seeing cars being worked   on So how's that going to affect me if they  put or my tenant if they put those in there   And then if they do housing right up there to um  the primrose are you going to go across the street   later and do those houses and do mine which is  near Pep Boys which a lot of Pep Boys is empty Okay U is that the conclusion of your of your  comments Yeah I don't think we can comment on   specific projects or or specific properties  necessarily Um but you don't want you don't  

want automotive near housing And yet you're  proposing putting automotive near housing   I mean housing near automotive You're proposing  doing that which the city's been against They've   had problems with some auto shops They're saying  residents complain uh residential places complain   They don't want to see the cars being worked  on They don't want noise other things and yet   you're proposing to do that to a property that  I have So why would you propose something when   the city's been against it I think we  can capture your concerns as a matter   of public record and are you likely to move on  further to go further west and then push me out   I think uh we can also talk about uh revisit  the applicable areas that we're talking about   for this particular Another question is what if  somebody doesn't want to sell their property What   if you get developers buying up one somebody  says no I'm not selling Can we stay there I think we've captured uh  a couple general questions   here Okay Thank you Thank you for your testimony All right Um Sherry if you want to Yes start Oh  we have another person Oh yes Please go ahead   Hi Um I own the property at 1550 South Myrtle  Avenue which is Pomona and South Myrtle And   um they put the stop sign there I mean the signal  there a while back because of the accidents And my   when I came to council meeting before the large  unit was um built next to the Chevron station   which is still under construction I came to the  city council meeting and I asked them I said do   you realize that when you come off the 210 freeway  at Myrtle you come off and you're at the lane to   turn left Let's say but people who live in those  units have to scoot all the way over to the signal  

to turn right to get to their units And I said  "Is there any plan to revise the off-ramp at two   at the Myrtle and the 210 freeway because the  traffic is horrific I'm out there every day and   um I get off the freeway at Myrtle and it's just  hard to deal with the traffic and I and I know   that the construction is going on at the building  so a lot of that's blocked off to through traffic   right now But once it's opened up you've got the  through traffic coming on and the people getting   off the 210 freeway at Myrtle It's it's horrific  And I can imagine if you're going to be putting   more housing in at the um 210 South to Dwarty  and there's residential in there Um if you're   going to put uh fivetory buildings sevenstory  buildings where are all those people going to park   Um can the infrastructure of the schools first  first responders can they handle all the influx   of new people coming in and the traffic The  traffic on Myrtle and the 210 is horrible So   thank you for your questions and comments Thank  you All right Another person opposed Please state   your name Uh Kevin Le Neither opposed or in  favor Uh just a question on the slides that   were presented Uh the third example you mentioned  20 units or less um that would be required for the   inloo fee but did I see it mention 50 units that  you offered that uh calculation for some close to   $2 million in fees That's one question And then  is the density bonus as well as the inloo fee  

um the developers tools as you mentioned  one or the other or can you do both Were you able to capture that question I'm   not sure I understood the first part  of it If if you don't I think it was   a clarification on the applicability  of the inloo fee Okay You offer three scenarios scenarios [Music] The $2 million  Okay So that that slide was actually   um you're right It would and Luffy wouldn't  have you That's a good catch Luffy would not   uh qualify there I think this scenario  was probably caught caught through our   study session slides Okay when we were still  discussing does apply because it's ownership Oh   it's ownership There you go Thank you Kathy Good  catch For sale units That's why she's here guys Oh for sale Yeah for sale units Uh so inloo fee   applies for all of those items or for all  all ownership projects Yeah like I said Okay Any other p uh persons  wishing to provide public input All right let's get into some  of these things Let's talk about   uh income levels I think first So this this slide up here shows um how one could  qualify for an affordable housing unit So the the   each county has affordable um area median income  The area median income for Los Angeles County is

$98,200 And when the state talks about the  provision of affordable housing affordable housing   is broken down into categories ranging from a  moderate to low to very low and to extremely low   And each of those categories are based on a  percentage of what the LA what the county's   area median income is So for example very low  would be 50% of 98,200 Am I getting this mix No   you're you're totally your logic is correct Okay  You're just wrong Okay No that's why you're here   No that's Yeah And actually we figured out what  the discrepancy was between our numbers too So   we're good there Um here's the story because  no one will ever understand or get this but   if you actually look at the lowinccome number  and compare it to the median you'll see the   low-inccome number is actually higher than the  median on that chart when it's supposed to be   80% But it isn't What happens is and this is a  state law statute that and and the the way the   state law statute works is the very lowincome  and the lowincome numbers that are applied for   the counties throughout the state are set by HUD  at the federal government And what they're doing   is they're stabilizing the section 8 assistance  program in highcost areas So the statutes all   still say 50% of median and 80% of median but  this year low income is 112% of the median So   you just got to accept it as true So basically  what this chart is correct but it isn't 50% or   80% And it's only used as Sher mentioned to  qualify folks to live in the units Then the  

rents just to make things more confusing are based  on the actual percentages So that's why the chart   is confusing But that's why I felt like I had  to say it Otherwise people are going to start   doing the math and think there was a typo Okay  I think that was a good clarification Stay close Um and by the way the the public uh input  portion uh the public hearing is closed uh   for the moment um we can reopen it if we need  to Um but uh let's continue Yeah So as you can   see from this chart you see the categories  of the income levels and I think that's   that's a key one of the key takeaways Okay  Um then we're going to go back quickly and I   um forgive me but I just I don't want to take  you through too many slides to this slide Okay Okay Yes Let's talk So every city and county  in the state of California um has this requirement   to have a housing element and that housing  element's purpose is to ensure that the city   or county is meeting a target requirement of uh  so that when they they so that as development is   occurring right we're we're the goal is to have  some of your development not all be above market   or or market rate housing The idea is to capture  each city's fair share of these income categories   Okay Now um the state first every every housing  cycle the state says releases a grand number and  

says the state of California needs uh to attain  to to have this goal of affordable housing Um and   it's it's a production goal to meet existing and  future need And then the each regional council of   government takes those and divides them up based  on their allocation from the state to the cities   So the state of California to to SCAG the Southern  California Association of Government is the one   that um passed through to the city of Monrovia We  became we had our reena uh requirement and this   is by income level And here you again you see the  income levels for very low low moderate and above   moderate and the total Now the city's not required  to construct those units through the housing   element policies and actions We're required to  show that we are not uh prohibiting development   from occurring so that they don't occur That  we have available zoning uh classifications to   accommodate housing densities that contribute to  affordable housing Um the state has said you know   their general number I don't even know if it's if  it's still valid today but a zoning designation of   30 or more units it h has a real more realistic um  uh that there's more possibility that a unit would   be affordable um going through um the housing  element process we also have to identify where   in the city we believe development is going to  occur and for the city of Monrovia Um when for   years for over 20 years before the gold line came  to the city of Monroia the city of Monrovia had  

planned that there would be higher density housing  around the city's station and this is Station   Square Um it higher density housing was planned  just south of Myrtle Avenue or Oldtown District   This is called Otown extension And then other  opportunities near uh this is on the west end of   the city that borders Arcadia and um so the cities  had already had built in a general plan density of   54 units per acre in those areas to capture higher  density projects um in order to uh tell the state   this is where we think the housing is we have  to demonstrate that this is where the housing   trends have been And so it it it over the last 15  years we have seen a lot of development in Station   Square We've seen uh the Fifth and Huntington uh  housing project go up And then in the South Myrtle   Avenue corridor that's where we have the Avalon  project we are not allowed to pick sites that are   um here at city hall for example where there's  no realistic uh you know possibility of having   housing here Um so with that table that's that's a  a goal Okay Over the years we would always produce   uh housing We we Monroia has always been a  strong housing producer Um but the state is   really looking at cities and counties now to make  sure that they're doing everything to produce   affordable housing Um the inclusionary housing  ordinance is not reszoning anyone's property So   the zones and general plan land use designations  that are in place today are remaining Simply what  

this ordinance is doing is there have been  several projects that have been developed   in Station Square but a lot of those units are  market rate units This ordinance would allow any   future development to capture a portion of those  future projects to include affordable housing   Um anyone who has is interested in potentially  developing their site with housing I um would we   our planning team would love to meet and discuss  the different property characteristics and   um you know with each any property owner We have  a full service planning division We're open Monday   through Thursday Come to the counter I can give  you our contact information following the meeting Um and I'm trying to see if there's anything else  Um another line of potential questioning is uh   presuming developers do come in and take advantage  of uh the increased density um possible in these   areas How does the city plan to deal with that  increase in density Yeah Are our infrastructure   and all the other um city services and parking and  traffic and whatnot set up to handle that Yeah Yes   Or that's part of the reason why the city is  anticip is is recommending or excuse me your   staff is recommending um allowing the inclusionary  or enforcing the inclusionary housing first and   foremost in the areas where the higher density has  been planned These areas have already experienced   a lot of infrastructure improvements prior to  the gold line um to support the higher density  

developments These are areas that are generally  generally um outside of uh having significant   impacts to lower density areas Um so they there  there are some areas where there still are single   family homes in there but but but for the majority  there there there are areas where we're not going   to have significant impacts to neighborhood  compatibility or any historic resources And   um those thoughts h were actually put into  the general plan land use vision 30 years ago Okay Were there other items that we missed There  was a question about an enhanced infrastructure   financing district Yes I don't that word does  not come up in the ordinance Um I I don't think   it applies to the ordinance but if Miss Kathy Head  wants to respond to that one No Okay Yeah I mean I   mean it's something the city would have to adopt  and it has an entire structure that the state has   set up to do It's a means of collecting it It it's  redevelopment 2.0 except it's not really Um well   it's it's supposed to be a means to then create  revenues where you can create infrastructure but   it would have nothing to do with this and there's  no affordability requirement associated with it   Yeah Okay Thank you Uh I guess no would have  done but well no that that was useful uh context   We are focusing this discussion on uh the you  know consideration of the inclusionary housing   ordinance uh and what we are going to say  as a commission to uh the city council when   they consider uh whether or not to adopt  it or to change it in some way Um okay  

uh given that uh I think we've addressed uh  most of the public comments Um I would like   to return to my fellow commissioners and uh open  this up for some more dialogue Sure Awesome I do   have a um I do have a question It's regarding  this is a tool Correct Do we use this as a tool   That is correct To grow housing um some being  inclusionary Um I think last time or or some   time back there was 2 million housing units or  more in the state that we're short of Then in   January we lost about 10,000 housing units So the  primary goal of this for the city council to adopt   is a tool for you guys to get good planning  and development Am I accurate in that Yes Um I have some some more some more questions Um  are there any applications in progress that would   be impacted by this ordinance Like how does that  work Potentially Potentially So if an application   is already in progress and this ordinance  gets passed then what's Yeah So if an if an   applicant has submitted an application that's  been deemed complete then they're not going to   be affected by this ordinance Okay uh but if the  application is not in yet or whatever and this   uh ordinance becomes part of the municipal  code then they would be subject to that right   Um okay so can we talk about the uh impact on uh  housing prices and rent of this ordinance What do   we expect that to be Will this drive up rents and  you know other not affordable but other rents and   housing prices I mean this by how much This is a  commonly asked question is is won't the developers  

just simply charge more rent or higher sales  prices to accommodate this requirement to which   I always flippantly reply because they stopped  at a price that they could have gotten more then   I mean I think that's a really important concept  is a developer establishes a threshold price they   think they can achieve and a profit that they  want to achieve Sometimes they achieve more   sometimes they achieve less That's the the  simplistic answer to this question is no I   don't believe it will impact what developers can  get for for property because we've set it up in   a manner that is conservatively based and does  not is not confiscatory and does not deprive a   property owner of a fair and reasonable return on  their investment That being said if you take it to   a macroeconomic level to the extent that you are  creating less supply if you set up a program that   isn't viable so you create less supply and prices  go up because the demand is higher than the supply   But I think that and and you're now surrounded by  communities with inclusionary housing so it's not   like you know they can just go anywhere to to  do their development So as long as you have a   program that's reasonable and has has been backed  up I don't think it will affect it I think that's   good to know Um given all of the uh ups and  downs we've especially seen in the economic   markets very recently Um one question that's in my  mind is you know how have cities with inclusionary   housing ordinances fared during the last uh few  or couple economic downturns say like in 2008   2009 like that time frame Super good question Um I  helped Claremont write their inclusionary housing   ordinance right before the Great Recession So 2007  we adopted we're right on the top of it And so   what happened is you the whole market crashed So  nothing was developed It not wasn't because there  

was inclusionary it was because there was nothing  And so in 2012 Claremont went back and amended   their ordinance to reflect the then current  economic climate And then from 2012 to 2021   it's been a very successful program It was all  based their program until 2021 was all ownership   It didn't have a rental component There's reasons  for that there you the state didn't allow rental   inclusionary till 2017 after the Palmer decision  in 2009 So that was the reason So in 2020 they   came back and added rental in but their ordinance  has been very much ownership based Um so that one   is one in your general vicinity not particularly  market area but your general vicinity that just   recognized the situation other communities that  I work in left their inclusionary in place as it   sat and just recognized that development wasn't  going to happen So you know again hypothetically   if we were to enter a recessionary period would  the uh as we're recovering out of that uh would   a place with inclusionary housing have a slower  recovery So what I did this is I did this a number   of years ago because this is a good question  that comes up a lot is I looked at cities 10   years before they adopted inclusionary and 10  years after I looked at four cities and looked   at 10 years before and after They went up they  went down There was no discernable pattern to   what to when the inclusionary was adopted and what  happened to the supply and demand It's one factor   but you know interest rates and marketability  etc play a much more significant role than a   well ststructured ordinance That being said and  as David said as well in the current high interest   rate environment that we're in and the sort of  uncertain times that we're in it you know it may  

be a while before you see development of any kind  Yeah Should I just stand here Um I think that was   probably the end of my economic focused questions  Um any other Yeah So um just probably for city   staff um have we considered what alternatives  to inclusionary housing um that also have the   goal of increasing affordable housing uh have we  pursued You mentioned a couple of them Yeah So   um our team over the last three years we've done  some really targeted um municipal code amendments   Um the planning commission just recently looked  at the ADU um ordinance update Um that allows   for a lot more ADUs Now that ordinance is now in  effect Um couple years back we removed we reduced   the unit size requirement The city had a larger  unit size So by lowering that unit size that was   the goal was that more units could be produced on  site um if they met the density requirement in the   general plan The thought is that smaller  units are cheaper to build Um last year   um the city removed its conditional use permit  requirement for multifamily housing um that uh   took out any type of uncertainty in processing  a multif family development It also reduced the   time for approval and the cost the application  cost Um with that this uh staff also presented   and the planning commission looked at and council  approved objective design standards and those took  

out also all the subjectivity and design review  um you know making projects easy to zoning code   easy to follow and easy to implement Um there  are other things that are in our work plan that   um that are all included in the housing plan that  that uh your planning division is working very   hard on trying to get out the door So more tools  this is not this is not the last tool there there   are more that will be forthcoming Okay Um a couple  more specifics Um uh what happens when someone uh   who is living in one of these units and qualified  uh according to the income limits um then starts   making more money uh and doesn't qualify anymore  I'm sorry to make you get back up No it's okay I'm   not far Okay So on ownership housing it doesn't  matter So when they move in they could win the   lottery the next day and they're still qualified  to live in the unit until they choose to sell it   and then they have to sell it at affordable  price On rental then you'll set this up in   your procedures when you do it There are variety  of ways to do it The most straightforward way to   do it is when somebody becomes over income then  they either have to stay and pay the market rent   or they have to move and you have to then have  so they live in that unit the next available unit   of that type that comes up becomes the affordable  unit So rental unit people qualify and re-qualify   as Sher was mentioning the monitoring on ownership  you just want to make sure they live in the unit   Okay Um so you you you triggered my thought um  in uh another element of this ordinance says that   um the affordable units need to be similar to the  market price units but uh they could be slightly  

different size They could have different finishes  Um can you talk a little bit about that Are we   kind of setting up a two class Well go ahead David  So um not really Um from from the outside they're   they're absolutely going to look exactly the same  Um where the um difference is is is just to kind   of accommodate the um the higher cost of providing  that affordable unit So in the case of let's say   someone builds a luxury apartments they have  top-end appliances Sub-Zeros um in there um for   the affordable units they're not going to be able  to to afford to do a $10,000 um stove and oven   Instead they're going to do something a little bit  cheaper like an LG or Samsung or something like   that So that's where those different um materials  come in They may do carpet instead of tile   flooring Um but from the outside and the way the  ordinance is designed is this unit will look like   any other unit Um so we're not kind of ostracizing  the uh people that live in those units Okay And I   can add that they'll also have full access to all  the property amenities as well And how about uh   what's the expected cost like the administrative  burden to the city of running this program And uh   you know how do we that's under evaluation  Okay Okay Um All right Any other questions All right Um well given that um  I think we're ready to move on   to a motion I move to approve planning  commission resolution number 2025-00001 I'll second

All right we have a motion in a second Commissioner Austin yes Brown yes Rose uh  yes Sheffller yes She yes Chair yes All   right that motion carries Uh do we need appeal  language here No So um the next stop for this   ordinance will be the city council May 20th  Um and I do just want to thank you know a lot   of time with the entire planning division  has been involved with this along we've   spent many hours with David Blumenthal  and Kathy Hed Thank goodness for Kathy   Head She is the expert of all every every  inclusionary housing ordinance in California   Um and I I really you know want to say thank  you to my team um for everyone has touched   this So thank you Yeah this is a very complex uh  topic and I can see a lot of work went into it I   appreciate all your work all your explanations  all your communication and I also want to thank   the members of the public who came and and spoke  and and weighed in Uh your input is valued as well   Um okay Uh with that I think we can move on to  administrative reports which we have none of Uh   so next up um uh unless you need a drink of water  uh Sherry is the community development director   report All right Just looking for my agenda here  Let's see Okay Yeah here we go So the just two two   updates really The first uh big update is the um  Monrovia area partnership The annual neighborhood   conference is coming up It's just two weeks away  Um I have put flyers in front of each of the   commission We have extra flyers here if anyone's  interested in picking one up before they go This  

is a wonderful event for the community Um a lot of  uh relevant Germaine topics regarding fire safety   um how to how to get an ADU application through  the city's planning and building process Um I   really urge everyone to participate There may be  some tree giveaways some native tree giveaways So   um we're looking forward to seeing you there Um  and with respect to development updates um we   we have several that are still moving through the  process We um made a decision to renotice the 347   Highland project So that one is going through  another 30-day review the state clearing house   I do anticipate it will be some time before  that comes to the commission We'll staff will   be giving you an update So we'll give you a a  a good it will be coming So start reading Um   um so with that that concludes all my reports  Thank you Okay Any questions for Sherry I just   want to comment on uh on all the work for the last  year on this city staff Um our council colleagues   put the effort in I think it was well done Um and  I think it's a good tool and we we need to provide   you with tools to provide people with tools and  options and um you appreciate it Any other reports   I'd I'd like to offer my thanks as well It's been  a tremendous amount of work you've done and you've   done it really well So thank you Commissioner  Shefflin I've got a question for Sher and possibly   John two years ago I don't know who was going to  take it on Evergreen the project on Evergreen to  

the west of Primrose A slew of people came in They  were they were all concerned about the h selling   the housing for the project that was going through  there They went through and they took out half of   the housing I want to say there's one house still  left and people live in it I thought that was all   taken care of at that point and again it's been  two years or plus possibly Yeah So that project   is the Aoyo at Monrovia station project right Um  that project has had some financing issues and   um it's al the property is also owned by the  part there's a partnership as as part of the   the developer and they are working to assemble  and get that project off the ground Um they're   currently entitled They've been applying for uh  yearly extensions to keep their entitlements alive   They have one more year of I think they have they  just got their they have one more year I think   they have through March of 2027 on that project  So if they don't build it but our team is very   working closely with the developer to try to see  what we can do to to keep it up There have been   over the years some property maintenance issues If  if anyone sees um any property maintenance issues   call us and we can take care of that No my my  my my my question was I I thought everything was   already taken care of In other words there were  people in here that were afraid to have children   They were concerned They didn't know they're  coming or going and they they indicated that   everything was taken care of at that point Yeah  So that one remaining house is a rental house   Um but unfortunately the city has very little cap  ability to do anything to force the development  

Right We're we're doing our best to support the  developer So the end goal is development Thank you Any other reports or questions Um I'll just make a  comment about the map conference I've been to the   map conference uh for the last uh a few years It's  a great um opportunity to learn about the city   um and and learn about you know some interesting  topics there It's always fun uh and good good   chance to rub elbows with your your fellow  community members too So highly recommend people   check that out And there's free food too So that's  a that's a bonus All right Um given that I think   we uh have exhausted our agenda for this evening  Um hopefully not ourselves Um uh our next regular   meeting is scheduled for May 14th of 2025 and this  meeting is now adjourned at 9:23 p.m Thank you