Alhambra City Council To Negotiate With the Developers Despite Concerns With “The Villages”

Lawn sign opposing “The Villages” development (Photo – Melissa Michelson)

Approximately 68 attendees, plus city staff, the Mayor and councilmembers were in virtual attendance of the Alhambra City Council on Feb. 4 as they discussed The Villages mega-development being proposed for Fremont and Mission.

By Melissa Michelson

It started off with 2 1/2 hours of public comment, many in the form of previously sent letters, each read aloud by a robo-reader. It included a cease-and-desist letter from West San Gabriel Valley Board of Realtors, asking the The Ratkovich Company to stop misrepresenting to the public that they support the project. Another out-of-the-ordinary letter came from newly-elected City Councilman Kevin de Leon. Kevin’s district neighbors Alhambra. He expressed cautious disapproval while respecting the will of his neighboring councilors.

The public comments on Feb. 4 lasted 6 hours for the City Council, and last year from July to November, over 300 comments took up five Planning Commission meetings.

After the developer’s representative gave a 5-minute rebuttal to the public’s comments, the City Council spent the rest of the four-hour meeting discussing. Not many questions were asked, and even fewer were answered.

Many concerns from the Council

Councilwoman Katherine Lee asked about the contamination and the city’s future legal responsibility should they be blamed; city lawyer said the parties that created the contamination would be liable. She asked if the city could do inside vapor testing once built; the city lawyer said that could be negotiated. She asked the developer why there weren’t any affordable housing units in the for-sale units. The answer was ‘to yield the most units’ and basically make the most money. Councilwoman Lee continues to have many major concerns, including the contamination, and the affordable units are only for rentals. 62% of our residents are rentals, compared to 54% in LA county, she said. Traffic is a big concern on Fremont and for nearby residential areas; the development is not appropriate for that site. She commended the planning commissioners for doing their research and she doesn’t have a reason to go against their recommendations to reject the development. She closed by saying she appreciated that the developer offered some green space, though.

Councilman Jeff Maloney said it’s not ready to be approved tonight. The development agreement therefore is key for potential negotiation with the developer. The people have valid concerns about this project, and it needs “significant additional discussions and attention” in the form of a sub-committee of the council.

Councilwoman Adele Andrade-Stadler was concerned about the Superfund designation of this site. Moving of soil, grading and clean up needs to happen first, she said. She said she’s concerned with the air quality and doing that now esp. during COVID19 is not something she wants to do.  The EIR would need to be re-done, therefore. She asked the developer whether a vapor intrusion barrier would be added, but that was never answered.   She also told the developers that she wants them to adhere to the city’s new Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, which she proposed last year. She shared the same concern as to why the for-sale units are not being included in the affordable housing set-aside, and said she wants a 15% set aside instead of the developer’s 10%. Other concerns were she expects they get an independent traffic analysis done because there are already major concerns about the traffic on Fremont, there’s a lack of walkability with the project, and it needs more green space. 

Councilman Ross Maza had met with the developer once already and also with a small group of concerned residents [the Coalition for Equitable Development at The Villages]. He believes turning this down would be detrimental to the future of Alhambra and because of the possible alternative of what can happen on that site and if the state becomes involved he said they might have to put 3,000 units there. He claimed he was not using scare tactics. He said he preferred to see Alhambra be tree-lined streets, with 1920s feel, but that’s “not an option,” according to Maza, who grew up in Alhambra. He said he wants to figure out how to resolve and improve the traffic in the area and has a vision to have electric cars one day; vapor barriers and affordable housing.

Mayor Sasha Rene Perez started off saying that she had reached out to 15,000 residents during her campaign, and she ran on increasing housing affordability in Alhambra.  “Our city hasn’t built any affordable housing from 2013-2021”, referring to low, “not moderate income.”  Despite the density bonus received in 2016, the development is still only offering 10% of the 839 units as affordable, she said sternly.

“Why haven’t you given 15% housing set aside,” she asked.

The Ratkovich Company consultant was frank: they made their “own business judgement” on what they want to do. But if the City wants to add more affordable housing, the developers have to add more density or offer fewer amenities like the open space concession, and that’s extremely expensive. In other words, it’s not financially viable.

The mayor said she wants to be “extremely cautious” about the toxic clean-up of the site and be sure to include vapor intrusion mitigation, if needed.  The amount of traffic is a big concern to her and she suggested having another city shuttle as beneficial. She also brought up having a Greener Alhambra, and would like to see this construction be 100% electric, which could even save on costs, she said.  And like the other council members, she said Alhambra needs green space in our park-poor community.

She closed by saying, “I’m not in support of this project as currently presented.”

Councilman Ross Maza’s ethics in question

Maza spent a significant portion of his comment on the fact that the public called on him to recuse himself from voting on this agenda item because he’s a realtor and it would violate Alhambra’s Code of Ethics Resolution. He said that his business model is different as he deals mainly with single-family homes. He closed by saying, “I have no interest in ever transacting anything in that project if it comes to fruition. Let it go on record.”

Alhambra City Council deliberates on negotiating with the developers

The Council proposed a negotiating committee to privately meet with the developer.  A two-person committee would be responsible for negotiating with the developer, ideally taking the Council’s concerns into account, letting the public comment on it, and then the Council would deliberate and vote.

Both Maloney and Maza pushed for a committee, but there were concerns with how that would work.

Lee was concerned about how the subcommittee would operate, since “the five of us aren’t even on the same page.”  She said that when starting negotiations, they should already have a density number as a jumping off point and take that into the negotiations first.

Stadler asked the city’s lawyer, Joseph Montes, whether having such a negotiating sub-committee is necessary or mandated. He didn’t answer the question directly.

According to City Manager Jessica Binnquist, a two-person sub-committee would take its ‘marching orders’ from this meeting and the City Council and work with the developers to “refine the agreement,” after which the public will be able to comment on that new agreement. The committee  could only have two councilmembers because more than that would violate Brown Act.

It seemed that the committee would comprise the two men on the Council, but then Andrade-Stadler said, “It’s my district so I’d like to be appointed to the sub-committee.” Eventually, Maza made the motion that he and Andrade-Stadler be the two on the committee.

The negotiating sub-committee will meet with the developer and draft an agreement for the March 22 City Council meeting.

The number of acceptable units was at no point mentioned during the meeting.