body,date,page,text,path
CityCouncil,2005-01-04,1,"MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY - -JANUARY 4, 2005 - -7:30 P.M.
Mayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 7:53 p.m.
ROLL CALL -
Present :
Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese and Mayor Johnson - 5.
Absent :
None.
AGENDA CHANGES
None.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
( 05-003 - ) Presentation on the basic requirements for an Indian
Tribe to operate a Casino in California.
The Assistant City Attorney provided a brief report on the basic
requirements to conduct tribal gaming.
Mayor Johnson stated that the purpose of the presentation was to
inform the public on the required process for the Koi Tribe to
obtain approval for a casino; stated that presentation tapes would
be available for public review and that the public should direct
questions to the City Attorney's office.
Michael Scholtes, Bay Isle Pointe Home Owners Association, stated
that he opposes the proposed casino.
Mayor Johnson requested staff to place a resolution opposing the
proposed casino on the next City Council agenda.
Rosemary Cambra, Mowekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay
Area, submitted a handout and cautioned the Council on taking a
stance against the proposed casino.
Councilmember Daysog stated that Council would need to exert
pressure and fight on behalf of the City.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to approve
Agreement between the Alameda Unified School District and the City
of Alameda [paragraph no. 05-010], the Resolution Authorizing Open
Market Purchase [paragraph no. 05-012], and the Ordinance Amending
the Alameda Municipal Code [paragraph no. 05-016] were removed from
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
1
January 4, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-04,2,"the Consent Calendar for discussion.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the
Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
(*05-004) - Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings
held on December 21, 2004. Approved.
(*05-005) Ratified bills in the amount of $4,037,089.03
(*05-006) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of
$127,102.65 to Stewart & Stevenson for Ferry Vessel Reduction
Gears, No. P.W. 10-04-15. Accepted.
(*05-007) Recommendation to terminate the Contract with J.W. Riley
& Son, Inc. for Alameda Point Multi Use Field, No. P.W. 12-02-18
and authorize project completion. Accepted.
(*05-008 - ) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of $45,000
to Maze and Associates for Financial Modeling Services. Accepted.
( *05-009) Recommendation to accept Annual Review of the Affordable
Housing Ordinance. Accepted.
(05-010) Recommendation to approve Agreement between the Alameda
Unified School District and the City of Alameda for Use and
Development of Real Property at the K-8 School and Park site in the
Bayport Residential Development Project.
Mayor Johnson stated that the Agreement facilitates the goal for
having the school and the park built near the Bayport residential
area.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether there is funding for the
Preschool and Tiny Tots at the Community Building, to which the
Recreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
(*05-011) - Recommendation to accept the Bayport Residential Interim
115Kv overhead power line improvements and authorize recording a
Notice of Completion. Accepted.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
2
January 4, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-04,3,"(05-012) - Resolution No. 13807, , ""Authorizing Open Market Purchase
from Allied Sweepers, Inc., Pursuant to Section 3-15 of the Alameda
City Charter, of Green Machine Sidewalk Cleaning Equipment. ""
Adopted.
Sherri Stieg, West Alameda Business Association (WABA) thanked the
Council for their efforts with the Webster Street project.
Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that she was happy to see the project
progressing; she would like to see the trees replaced as soon as
possible.
Councilmember deHaan stated that he is pleased with the progress;
requested periodic progress reports on the Streetscape Project.
Mayor Johnson stated schedule updates should continue to be
provided.
Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.
Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
( *05-013 - ) Resolution No. 13808, ""Approving Parcel Map No. 8401
(2340 and 2350 North Loop Road). "" Adopted.
(*05-014) Resolution No. 13809, ""Reappointing T. David Edwards as
Trustee of the Alameda County Mosquito Abatement District.
""
Adopted.
(05-015) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code by Amending Subsection 3-28.9 (Payment In-Lieu of Taxes -
PILOT) ; Adding a New Subsection 3-28.10 (Return on Investment in
Enterprise Funds) of Section 3-28 (Payment of Taxes) of Chapter III
(Finance and Taxation) and Adding a New Subsection 18-4.10
(Exemptions) of Section 18-4 (Sewer Service Charge) of Article I
(Sewers) of Chapter XVIII (Sewer and Water) . Introduced.
Councilmember Daysog stated that increasing the Return on
Investment (ROI) to 3% could cause some impacts; encouraged the
Council not to vote tonight and place the matter as an action item
for the next City Council meeting; $782,000 would be received from
Alameda Power & Telecom (AP&T) by staying at the original proposal
of 1% ROI; if the $782,000 is relayed back to the rate payer, the
monthly bill could be increased from $1.53 to $2.03.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
3
January 4, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-04,4,"Councilmember Daysog moved introduction of the ordinance with
direction that the matter be brought back to Council if there would
be any cause for rate increases.
Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
(*05-016 - ) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal
Code by Adding a New Section 3-91 (City of Alameda Community
Benefit Assessment Procedure Code) to Article VI (City of Alameda
Improvement Procedure Code) of Chapter III (Finance and Taxation)
.
Introduced.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(05-017) Recommendation to reappoint Mary Rudge as Alameda's Poet
Laureat.
The Recreation and Parks Director outlined the nomination process.
Lisa Piatetsky, Executive Director Alameda City Art Council, stated
that she looks forward to having Ms. Rudge continue as Alameda's
Poet Laureat.
Mary Rudge, Alameda, submitted a handout i outlined poet activities;
thanked the Council for acknowledging and encouraging poetry.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
4
January 4, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-04,5,"Nina Serrano, Alameda County Arts Commission, commended the Council
for having a Poet Laureat.
Mosetta Rose London, Alameda, thanked the Council for the
dedication of the O'Club to Al DeWitt and for placing her poem on a
plaque at the O 'Club; read a poem that she wrote.
Nanette Bradley Deetz, Alameda Island Poets, read a poem that she
wrote about Alameda.
Ken Peterson, Vice President, Alameda Island Poets, stated the
program has been a tremendous success for poetry and for the City.
Councilmember Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
(05-018 ) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Planning
Board's denial of Major Design Review DR04-0013 and Variances V04-
0005, V04-0015, V04-0016, V04-0017 to permit the construction of a
rear deck and garage addition that was completed without City
permits. The rear deck measures thirty inches in height from grade
to the top surface of the deck and is built up to the south (left
side) and west (rear) property lines. The garage addition is an
expansion of the existing single-family dwelling up to the north
(right side) and west (rear) property lines. The Applicant is
requesting four (4) Variances to permit the construction of the
work completed without permit including: 1) Variance to Alameda
Municipal Code (AMC) Subsection 30-5.7(c) (2) (6) to construct a rear
deck that measures thirty inches in height and is constructed up to
the south side and rear property line with zero setback, where a
minimum three foot setback is required for decks measuring twelve
to thirty inches in height; 2) Variance to AMC Subsection 30-
5. 7 (e) (1) to construct an unenclosed stair and landing up to the
south side property line with zero setback, where a minimum three
foot setback is required for unenclosed stairs and landings 3)
Variance to AMC Subsection 30-4.4(d) (7) to construct an attached
garage addition that extends the main dwelling up to the rear
property line with zero setback where a minimum twenty foot setback
is required for rear yards 4) Variance to AMC Subsection 30-
4. 4 (d) (6) to construct an attached garage addition that extends the
main dwelling up to the north side property line with zero setback
where a minimum five foot setback is required for side yards. The
site is located at 913 Oak Street within an R-4, Neighborhood
Residential Zoning District. Applicant/Appellant: Fred and Ursula
Hoggenboom and
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
5
January 4, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-04,6,"(05-018A) Resolution No. 13810, ""Upholding the Planning Board's
Denial of Major Design Review DR04-0013 and Variances, V04-005,
V04-0015, V04-0016, V04-0017 for the Structural Expansion of a
Single-Family Residence and Construction of Rear Deck at 913 Oak
Street. "" Adopted.
The Supervising Planner provided a presentation on the background
of the project.
Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the garage was a two-story
structure connected to the house, to which the Supervising Planner
responded in the affirmative.
Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the garage was intended to be
more than a one-car garage, to which the Supervising Planner
responded that the plans indicate a one-car garage with storage on
the left side.
Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether there was a proposal for the
upstairs portion of the garage, to which the Supervising Planner
responded the photographs show an attic with a couple of chairs and
table.
Vice Mayor Gilmore stated the garage doors are smaller than the
width of the driveway there is a vent pipe that comes down along
the side of the house and protrudes into the driveway which would
make it very difficult for a car to enter the garage.
The Supervising Planner stated many driveways are challenging in
terms of access.
Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that she is concerned with the intent of
using the garage for the proposed use.
The Supervising Planner stated that the Parking Ordinance requires
that garages be kept free of structures to accommodate a vehicle.
Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that the garage could abut the property
line if detached from the house; once the garage is attached to the
house, there are side and backyard setback issues.
The Supervising Planner stated the Code allows for garages to abut
both the side and rear property lines under certain circumstances
the front of the garage needs to be 75 feet from the front property
line and there needs to be a 5-foot separation between the main
house and the garage a detached garage could comply with the 75-
foot regulation; she is not sure about compliance with the 5-foot
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
6
January 4, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-04,7,"separation because there is a small addition at the rear of the
house which might result in less than a 5-foot separation; a
smaller detached garage might require a modest variance.
Mayor Johnson inquired what was the square footage of the garage,
to which the Supervising Planner responded approximately 300 square
feet.
Mayor Johnson inquired what was the square footage of a typical
garage, to which the Supervising Planner responded a one-car garage
would be approximately 200 square feet.
Mayor Johnson inquired why the garage was larger than a typical
garage, to which the Supervising Planner responded that the
residents wanted storage.
Mayor Johnson inquired when the original garage was demolished, to
which the Supervising Planner responded possibly a few years ago.
Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether there was a deck variance
involved.
The Supervising Planner responded that the deck required a variance
because it is 28 inches from the grade decks 12 inches from the
grade or less are allowed to encroach into yards decks between 12
and 30 inches require a -foot separation from the side and rear
property line; there is an opportunity to modify the deck by either
reducing the height, which would result in a deck that is not level
with the house, or by reducing the size of the deck to provide the
required set back.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether there was a height limit on backyard
fences, to which the Supervising Planner responded the limit is 6
feet for a solid fence and 8 feet for a fence with 2 feet of
lattice on top.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether there was an 11-foot fence in the
yard, to which the Supervising Planner responded that staff is not
clear who owns the fences that surround the property.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the fence issue would be pursued
regardless of tonight's decision, to which the Supervising Planner
responded in the affirmative.
Mayor Johnson opened the Public Hearing.
Proponents (In favor of appeal) : Fred Hogenboom, Alameda, and
Ursula Hogenboom, Alameda.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
7
January 4, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-04,8,"Opponents (Opposed to appeal) : Raymond A. Pacovsky, Sr., Alameda;
Raymond S. Pacovsky, Jr., Alameda, and Barbara Kerr, Alameda.
Mayor Johnson stated the initiation of construction without permits
makes the permitting process difficult; inquired whether the
Appellant informed the Planning Board that the structure was over
his property line.
The Appellant responded in the negative; stated that the structure
is well within the property line; the structure was moved 2 inches
inward from the original garage.
Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired how tall the spa was from the floor of
the deck to the top of the spa, to which the Appellant responded
three and a half feet at the most.
Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that the Planning staff recommended
dropping the deck approximately 12 inches; inquired whether the 12
inches would equate to two steps.
The Appellant stated that he would need to put in three steps to
lower the deck 12 inches.
Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether accommodating his wife was part
of the reason for having the deck the same level as the house.
The Appellant responded that his wife has had two back surgeries
and three hip replacements; stairs are difficult for her.
Vice Mayor Gilmore stated there is a two-foot hop to get into the
spa which appears to be more difficult to navigate than the stairs
out of the house.
Mayor Johnson stated that one of the reasons for deck height limits
is because high decks and spas are an intrusion into neighbors'
backyards inquired how the footprint of the original garage was
established.
The Supervising Planner responded that the Appellant submitted
plans in 1991 for foundation work at the front of the house which
indicate that there is a separation between the back of the house;
the then existing garage did not seem to be as close as the current
plans show.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Appellant put siding on the
neighbors' structures, to which the Appellant responded that he put
sheet metal up to prevent rotting.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
8
January 4, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-04,9,"Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Appellant asked the neighbors
before putting up the sheet metal, to which the Appellant responded
in the negative.
Mayor Johnson inquired what would happen if the variances are
denied, to which the Supervising Planner responded that two things
could happen; the Appellant could work with staff for a solution
that would allow a garage and deck that is either fully in
compliance or would require a more modest variance or the Appellant
could file a lawsuit against the City.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Appellant has paid fines, to
which the Supervising Planner responded investigative fees and fees
for working without the proper planning permits have been charged.
There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public
portion of the Hearing.
Councilmember Daysog moved adoption of the resolution upholding the
Planning Board's decision and denying the Appeal.
Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Matarrese stated there was only one
decision that the Planning Board could have made given the
circumstances; encouraged the owner to work with the Planning
Department to salvage the intent of the project within the
requirements of the Code.
Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that she assumes that the Appellants had
the best of intentions; the Code clearly specifies detached garage
and addition requirements; the project is attempting to be both an
addition to the house and a garage stated future owners could
convert the garage into a living space.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
(05-019) - Discussion regarding assistance for tenants at Harbor
Island Apartments.
Mayor Johnson stated that rent control issues are not on the agenda
tonight but that the public is free to speak under Oral
Communications
The Housing Authority Executive Director gave a brief presentation
regarding the assistance provided to the Harbor Island Apartment
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
9
January 4, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-04,10,"tenants.
Speakers John Sullivan, San Leandro, Mark Harney, Fifteen Asset
Management Group; Kathy Lautz, Apartment Owners' Association;
Lorraine Lilley, Harbor Island Tenant Association; Eve Bach, Arc
Ecology Tom Matthews, Renewed Hope; Steve Edrington, Renal Housing
Association; Delores Wells, Harbor Island Tenant Association
(submitted letter) ; Modessa Henderson, Harbor Island Tenant
Association; Mary Green-Parks, Alameda; Gen Fujioka, Asian Law
Caucus; Reginald James, Alameda; Michael Yoshii, Alamedal; and Bill
Smith, Alameda.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether there are a total of 17 units
currently occupied, to which Mr. Harney responded there are 17
units that are occupied by tenants with leases; there are 9 units
occupied by tenants who have stopped paying rent.
Mayor Johnson inquired whether relocation assistance would still be
available to the remaining tenants with leases, to which Mr. Harney
responded in the affirmative.
Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired how many Harbor Island Apartment
tenants remained in Alameda, to which Mr. Harney responded that he
was not certain; not all tenants provided forwarding information.
Councilmember deHaan requested information on the number of Section
8
tenants that remained in Alameda.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that Council wants to know what the
immediate issues are in dealing with individuals who are still
occupying units at the Harbor Island Apartments and what assistance
can be provided; inquired whether there are housing assistance
opportunities for the remaining tenants through Community
Development programs or Sentinel Fair Housing.
The Community Development Manager responded that the Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program contracts with Sentinel Fair
Housing and the Red Cross; Sentinel Fair Housing has been involved
with a number of the tenants; CDBG funds are also being used to
produce new affordable housing units through the Substantial
Rehabilitation Program; several of the units would be available to
applicants who previously resided at the Harbor Island Apartments
security deposit assistance programs have been funded in the past
which allowed Housing Authority tenants to borrow money from the
revolving loan fund and repay over time; the fund was depleted as a
result of earlier Section 8 problems; another funding cycle would
become available in July.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
10
January 4, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-04,11,"Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether there was a way to work
with the Apartment Owners' Association to help the remaining
tenants.
The Community Development Manager responded there could be some
coordination for specific interventions that may help the tenants
the cash to provide deposits is a longer-term consideration and
might be more difficult without reprogramming of funds.
Mayor Johnson requested staff to review loan possibilities.
The City Manager stated that he would work with staff to find
solutions.
Councilmember Matarrese stated aggressive action is needed to help
the remaining tenants.
Councilmember Daysog stated that most families would like to remain
at the Harbor Island Apartments but the courts have ruled otherwise
and they must move; the City needs to see what can be done to
facilitate the situation in a manner that dignifies the tenants.
the Council needs to pursue the best policy that prevents the
Harbor Island Apartment situation from happening again.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
(05-020 - ) Michael John Torrey, Alameda, stated that the Webster
Street construction has posed a danger to bus passengers at the bus
stops.
The Assistant City Manager stated that the construction work has
been delayed because of the rain; stated he would discuss the
situation with the Public Works Director.
(05-021) Reginald James, Alameda, encouraged the reappointment of
Mary Rudge as Alameda's Poet Laureat; stated that he was concerned
about a sign stating that there may be a possible reproductive
harmful environment at the Harbor Island Apartments ; stated that
there should be another meeting of the Harbor Island Task Force.
(05-022) Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed earthquakes.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(05-023) Councilmember Matarrese welcomed Interim City Manager,
Bill Norton.
Mayor Johnson welcomed the Interim City Manager to his first
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
11
January 4, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-04,12,"Council Meeting.
ADJOURNMEN'T
(05-024) - There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned
the Regular City Council meeting at 11:15 in a moment of silence
and sympathy for the tsunami victims in Southeast Asia.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
12
January 4, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-04,13,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY - -JANUARY 4, 2005- - -6:30 P.M.
Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:30 p.m.
Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5.
Absent :
None.
The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:
(05-001) Public Employment; Title: City Manager.
(05-002) Public Employee Performance Evaluation; Title: City
Attorney.
Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened
and Mayor Johnson announced that the Council discussed Public
Employment and recruitment of the new City Manager, and Public
Employee Performance Evaluation of the City Attorney.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the
Special Meeting at 7:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
January 4, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf
CivilServiceBoard,2005-01-05,1,"CITY
or
TERBAL
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
CIVIL SERVICE BOARD OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 5, 2005
1.
Meeting called to order at 5:15 p.m.
2.
ROLL CALL: Members NakMin Oddie, Michael Robles-Wong, William J. Smith, and Executive
Secretary Karen Willis. A welcome was extended to new member Michael Rich.
ABSENT:
Member Roberto Rocha.
STAFF PRESENT: Marsha Merrick, Executive Assistant, Human Resources.
3.
MINUTES:
The minutes of the Regular Meeting of October 6, 2004, were discussed briefly by Member
Smith, who then moved to accept, seconded by Member Oddie and carried by a 3-0 vote. Member Rich
abstained, as he was not present at the October 2004 meeting.
4.
CONSENT CALENDAR: Member Rich asked that wording be clarified in the Video Production Artist job
specification. Staff, without further need of approval by the Board, will make a minor change. Member
Oddie made a motion to accept the Consent Calendar as presented, along with the wording change on the
job specification. The motion was seconded by Member Smith and carried by a 4-0 vote.
SUMMARY REPORT FOR EXAMINATION ELIGIBLE LISTS AND CLASSIFICATIONS FOR THE
MONTHS OF OCTOBER, NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER 2004:
4-A
ELIGIBLE LISTS ESTABLISHED:
DATE ESTABLISHED
Administrative Services Coordinator
12/07/04
Assistant Line Superintendent
11/17/04
Associate Civil Engineer - Plan Check Review Engineer
12/09/04
CATV Line Technician (Cable Technician III)
11/17/04
City Engineer
12/02/04
Data Technician
11/18/04
Electrical Helper
11/20/04
Engineering and Planning Manager (Utility Services Manager)
10/26/04
Executive Assistant
10/22/04
Financial Services Supervisor
11/09/04
Firefighter/Paramedic
12/21/04
Journey Lineworker
10/08/04
Line Working Supervisor
11/09/04
Operations Manager
10/26/04
Police Officer - Lateral
10/21/04
Police Officer - Lateral
12/01/04
Police Technician II - Dispatcher
11/04/04
Police Technician Il - Dispatcher
12/22/04
Program Specialist I - Alternative Modes
11/03/04
Risk Manager
10/13/04
Utility Analyst
12/16/04
Video Production Artist
12/07/04
""Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service""",CivilServiceBoard/2005-01-05.pdf
CivilServiceBoard,2005-01-05,2,"City of Alameda
Page 2
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Civil Service Board
Wednesday, January 5, 2005
4-B
ELIGIBLE LISTS EXTENDED:
DATE ESTABLISHED
Fire Apparatus Operator (Promotional)
10/01/03
Intermediate Clerk
04/12/04
Office Assistant
10/17/03
Police Captain (Promotional)
12/08/03
Program Specialist I - Solid Waste/Recycling Services
11/03/03
Public Works Maintenance Foreperson (Promotional)
11/19/03
Public Works Superintendent
11/26/03
Senior Fleet Mechanic
12/10/03
4-C
ELIGIBLE LISTS EXPIREDICANCELLED:
DATE ESTABLISHED
Administrative Management Analyst - Environmental
10/25/02
Administrative Services Manager
04/29/04
Apprentice Lineworker
06/24/04
Associate Civil Engineer - Project Manager
11/26/02
Construction Inspection & Survey Supervisor
11/21/02
Customer Service Representative
05/20/04
Engineering Supervisor
04/16/04
Lineworking Supervisor
11/21/02
Plans Examiner
06/28/04
Police Officer - Recruit
12/16/03
Program Specialist I - Alternative Modes
12/29/02
Public Works Maintenance Worker I
11/19/03
4-D
LIST OF SPECIFICATIONS:
Video Production Artist
5.
ACTIVITY REPORT:
The report for the period of September 1, 2004 through November 30, 2004 was reviewed.
6.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
Reggie James, long-time West-End resident, was present and spoke about his life experiences
in Alameda.
7.
CIVIL SERVICE BOARD COMMUNICATIONS (COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARD)
Member Robles-Wong suggested that we add language to the Civil Service Rules under
Article VII. Section 1 Establishment of Lists to include National Guard members in our
definition of candidates with active military service who are eligible for an award of
veteran preference points in our examination scoring process. Language will be revised
by staff and presented at the April 2005 Civil Service meeting for approval by the Board.
Member Smith commented on his review of the oral board questions for Police, Fire and
Planning Department positions. The outcome was favorable, although he felt that rating
dimensions for these positions could be expanded to include determination of a
candidate's ability to interact effectively with the public.
Member Smith read from the City Charter Article XIII Civil Service Board Sec. 13-1 to
better define the Board's role in making recommendations to the City Council for
changes in the Civil Service System policies. After much discussion, Chair Robles-
Wong suggested that a member of the City Attorney's office be invited to the April 2005
meeting to more clearly define the Board's role in making such recommendations to the
City Council. The Board welcomed this suggestion, and Executive Secretary Willis will
be following up with the City Attorney's office.
""Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service""",CivilServiceBoard/2005-01-05.pdf
CivilServiceBoard,2005-01-05,3,"City of Alameda
Page 3
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Civil Service Board
Wednesday, January 5, 2005
8.
CIVIL SERVICE BOARD COMMUNICATIONS (COMMUNICATIONS FROM STAFF)
None
9.
ADJOURNMENT:
A motion was made by Chair Robles-Wong that the meeting be adjourned in memory of
Member Rocha's mother who had passed away over the New Years' weekend. Member Smith
seconded and the motion was carried by a 4-0 vote. There being no further business to come
before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 6:38 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Karen Willis
Human Resources Director &
Executive Secretary of the Civil Service Board
""Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service""",CivilServiceBoard/2005-01-05.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-05,1,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL,
COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION, AND
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING
WEDNESDAY - - - JANUARY 5, 2005
-
-
-
5:31
P.M.
Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 6:05 p.m.
Roll Call -
Present :
Councilmembers / Commissioners / Authority
Members Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5.
Absent :
None.
The Special Joint Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to
consider :
(05-025CC/05-001CIC Conference with Real Property Negotiators;
Property : Alameda Naval Air Station, Fleet Industrial Supply
Center; Negotiating Parties City of Alameda, Community Improvement
Commission, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, Alameda
Point Collaborative; Under Negotiations Price and terms.
Following the Closed session, the Special Meeting was reconvened
and Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that the Council/Commission/
Authority gave direction to follow the negotiating approach
recommended by the real property negotiator.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned
the Special Meeting at 7:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
Secretary, Community Improvement
Commission
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Joint Meeting
Alameda City Council, Community
Improvement Commission and Alameda
Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
January 5, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-05.pdf
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority,2005-01-05,1,"APPROVED
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
2-A
Wednesday, January 5, 2005
The meeting convened at 5:46 p.m. with Mayor Johnson presiding.
1.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Beverly Johnson, Mayor, City of Alameda
Tony Daysog, Boardmember, City of Alameda
Doug DeHaan, Boardmember, City of Alameda
Frank Matarrese, Boardmember, City of Alameda
Marie Gilmore, Boardmember, City of Alameda
Absent:
None.
2.
CONSENT CALENDAR
2-A.
Recommendation to approve an amendment to Consultant Agreement with LFR, Inc. For
environmental consulting services at Alameda Point in the amount of $175,130 for a total
agreement amount of $249,000.
2-B.
Recommendation to authorize the Executive Director to execute sublease(s) at Alameda
Point.
Member Matarrese motioned for approval of the Consent Calendar items. The motion was
seconded by Member Gilmore and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes - 5; Noes - 0;
Abstentions - 0.
3.
PRESENTATION
3-A.
Presentation/update on Alameda Point Navy Negotiations and Land Use Planning.
None.
4.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
None.
1
Y:\Comdev\Base Reuse& Redevp\ARRA\MINUTES\2005\01-05-05 Regular. ARRA minutes.doc",AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-01-05.pdf
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority,2005-01-05,2,"5.
ORAL REPORTS
5-A. Oral report from APAC.
Chair Lee Perez noted that they did not hold a business meeting during December, although a
very nice social gathering was held. He noted that there was no discussion, and that the next
meeting would be held on January 19, 2005. He noted that they would decide how to carry out
the ARRA's wishes at that time.
Member DeHaan noted that while he was not part of the decision made at the last ARRA
meeting, he supported that decision. He was concerned that the process took much longer than
anyone could have anticipated, and that when he was Chair of EDC, he ensured that they were up
to speed on Alameda Point issues. He recalled several team members (Al Clooney and Dan
Meyers) who had passed away during this process.
Mayor Johnson noted that she and Member Daysog had been members of the BRAG as well.
Chair Perez noted that three active former BRAG members sat on the City Council, and that
hoped that their dedication would reach Sacramento and Washington, D.C. He noted that it had
been an honor to serve in this capacity, and acknowledged that change was necessary.
5-B. Oral report from Member Matarrese, RAB representative.
There was no report.
6.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
None.
7.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
Member Matarrese recalled previous discussions to bring the redevelopment of the Point to the
mainstream consciousness of Alameda. He noted that the very light turnout at the ARRA
meetings did not meet that goal. He requested that the regular meeting time be changed to 7:30
p.m. in order to encourage more community participation. He noted that the closed session could
be held before the regular meeting.
Mayor Johnson suggested agendizing that item for the next meeting, and noted that a 7:00 start
time could be tried. A special meeting would be held on Thursday, January 20, 2005, at 7:30 p.m.
Member DeHaan requested an update on the Consultant Agreement to be placed on the next
agenda.
Chair Perez did not anticipate that there would be any further amendments to current consultant
contracts. He added that they could make an updated budget presentation at the next regular
meeting. They had anticipated some changes to the consultant contracts, and that they did not
2
Y:\Comdev\Base Reuse& Redevp\ARRA\MINUTES\2005\01-05-05 Regular. ARRA minutes.doc",AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-01-05.pdf
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority,2005-01-05,3,"impact their contingency or any other line items contained in the ARRA-led predevelopment
budget.
8.
ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION OF THE ARRA TO CONSIDER
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR:
8-A. Property:
Alameda Naval Air Station
Negotiating parties:
ARRA, Navy, and Alameda Point Community Partners
Under negotiation:
Price and Terms
Announcement of Action Taken in Closed Session: The ARRA received a briefing
from the Real Property Negotiator; no action was taken.
9. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Johnson adjourned the open session meeting at 6:11 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Irma Frankel
ARRA Secretary
3
Y:\Comdev\Base Reuse& Redevp\ARRA\MINUTES\2005\01-05-05 Regular. ARRA minutes.doc",AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-01-05.pdf
HistoricalAdvisoryBoard,2005-01-06,1,"MINUTES OF HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD
REGULAR MEETING OF THURSDAY, JANUARY 6, 2005
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL
2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 7:00 PM
Vice Chair McPherson called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. Secretary Altschuler called
the roll.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Board Members McPherson, Anderson, Lynch, & Tilos
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Board member Miller arrived at 7:20 p.m.
STAFF PRESENT:
Secretary Altschuler, Elizabeth Johnson, Development Services
Department, Recording Secretary Debbie Gremminger.
AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSIONS:
Staff is requesting Item #2 be continued to a future meeting.
Approval of minutes and Election of Officers will move to the end of the Agenda when full
Board is present.
MINUTES:
Moved to the end of the Agenda. (see Agenda Changes and Discussions).
ELECTION OF OFFICERS:
Moved to the end of the Agenda (see Agenda Changes and Discussions).
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: (Discussion only)
None.
ACTION ITEMS: (Discussion/Action)
1.
Adoption of 2005 Historical Advisory Board Calendar.
M/S to adopt the 2005 Historical Advisory Board Calendar. Anderson/Lynch 4-0-1..
Ayes: 4;
Noes:
0;
Absent:
1 (Miller); Motion carries.
ACTION ITEMS: (Discussion/Action)
2.
Certificate of Approval CA04-0013- Helena Liang - 1104 Oak Street. The applicant
requests a Certificate of Approval for an unauthorized demolition of a one-story residential
structure built prior to 1942. A two-story residence in the same style was approved by Design
Minutes of January 6, 2005
Regular Historical Advisory Board Meeting
1",HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-01-06.pdf
HistoricalAdvisoryBoard,2005-01-06,2,"Review (DR04-0003). The site is located within the R-5, General Residence District. (continued
from 9-9-04) Applicant & staff request a continuance to future meeting.
M/S (Anderson/Tilos) to continue this item to a future meeting. 4-0-1.
Ayes:
4;
Noes:
0;
Absent:
1
(Miller); Motion carries.
Boardmember Miller arrived.
3.
Alameda Point Update. Presentation of the ongoing planning process for Alameda Point.
Elizabeth Johnson, Development Services Department, summarized the information provided in
the staff report. Ms. Johnson indicated that there had been two community workshops and that
there will be three more. Staff will give the Board regular up-dates of the planning process after
each Community Workshop. The next workshop will be held on March 3, 2005 which will be
hosted by the Planning Board. Staff would also like the Board to consider co-hosting one of the
remaining Community Workshops with the Alameda Point Advisory Committee.
Melissa Gaudreau and Chris VerPlanck from Page and Turnbull gave a presentation giving a
brief history of the site, and outlined the Historcal District at NAS. Mr. Plank stated that the
buildings and structures within Alameda Point reflect three distinct periods of development: Pre-
war, War and Post-war. Most of the Pre-war buildings were constructed during 1940-1941 of
reinforced concrete in a styling typical of commercial and industrial design from the 1930's.
This style is known as ""Moderne"".
A comprehensive inventory of pre-1946 buildings and structures was done in 1992 by S.B.
Woodbridge, which focused on determining whether any buildings at Alameda Point qualified
for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The report concluded that while
no individual building qualified for listing in the NRHP, an area in the Civic Core sub-area
appeared to qualify for listing as a historic district. The identified area includes 87 buildings and
structures that contribute to the area's historic significance, 35 non-contributing major buildings
and many temporary or minor buildings, which do not contribute to the Historical District.
Vice-Chair McPherson opened the floor for public comment.
Birgitt Evans, AAPS, stated that AAPS is very interested in the 86 buildings. She encourages
the Board to become involved in the planning process. She is also concerned why the Tower
Bldg was not included in the 86 buildings.
Richard Rutter, 2329 Santa Clara Ave., informed the Board that he once lived on the base and is
also surprised that the Tower Bldg. is not included. He felt that Bldg. 400 was also worth taking
another look at. He wants the Board to be cautious when approving buildings for demolition.
Vice-Chair McPherson closed public comment.
Elizabeth Johnson stated that at the time that the inventory was done, there was an addition to the
Control Tower that has since been removed.
Minutes of January 6, 2005
Regular Historical Advisory Board Meeting
2",HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-01-06.pdf
HistoricalAdvisoryBoard,2005-01-06,3,"Ms. Altschuler asked the Board if they would be interested in hosting a community workshop?
There will be more opportunities in the future for the Board to give their comments. This will
be a standing agenda item, so staff can give the Board updates and also allow the public to have
access to the Board if they have any questions. The next community workshop is scheduled for
March 3, 2005. Staff will reschedule the Regular March meeting so the Board may attend the
workshop.
Staff will provide the Board with a copy of the Historical Architectural Resources Inventory for
NAS, and the Guide to Preserving the Character of the Naval Air Station Alameda Historic
District.
MINUTES
Minutes of the Special Meeting of October 28, 2004. (continued from 12-02-04).
M/S (Tilos/Anderson) to approve minutes as corrected; 3-0-2.
Ayes: 3;
Noes:
0;
Absent:
2
(Lynch, Miller);
Motion carries.
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of December 2, 2004.
M/S (Tilos/Miller) to approve minutes as corrected; 3-0-2.
Ayes: 3;
Noes:
0;
Abstain: 2 (Anderson,Lynch); Motion carries
ELECTION OF OFFICERS:
M/S (Lynch/Anderson) to nominate Vice-Chair McPherson as Chair. 5-0-0.
Ayes: 5; Noes: 0; Absent: 0.; Motion carries.
M/S (Lynch/Miller) to nominate Boardmember Anderson as Vice-Chair. 5-0-0.
Ayes:
5;
Noes:
0;
Absent:
0.;
Motion carries.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
Rosemary McNally asked why Item 2, 1104 Oak was continued. She also thanked the Board and
Staff for all of their hard work on this item. Ms. Altschuler advised that staff was continuing to
work with property owner to resolve issues.
Boardmember Tilos will be on vacation until March 17, 2005.
STAFF COMMUNICATION:
Ms. Altschuler informed the Board that the Planning & Building Director has resigned. Staff is
not certain when that position will be filled but will update the Board as needed. Ms. Altschuler
Minutes of January 6, 2005
Regular Historical Advisory Board Meeting
3",HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-01-06.pdf
HistoricalAdvisoryBoard,2005-01-06,4,"also stated that she would be training another member of staff to take over her position as
Secretary.
ADJOURNMENT:
Meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted by:
Judith Altschuler, Secretary
Historical Advisory Board
G:\PLANNING\HAB\AGENMIN\Agemin.04\12-2-04 MIN.doc
Minutes of January 6, 2005
Regular Historical Advisory Board Meeting
4",HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-01-06.pdf
SocialServiceHumanRelationsBoard,2005-01-06,1,"Social Service Human Relations Board
Minutes of the Special Meeting - Thursday, January 6, 2005
1. CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL - 6:33 p.m. Vice President Chen called the meeting to order. Also
present were members Wasko, Flores-Witt, Bonta, Currie, and Hollinger Jackson, President Franz was
absent. Staff present was Beaver and Brown.
4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - Taken out of order to permit Annalisa Moore, AUSD, Woodchip
Program coordinator an opportunity to address the Board regarding housing and community
development needs. She thanked the Board and staff for the support. The Woodchip / RISE program
was able to continue and increased in attendance from 120 to 396 students as a result of CDBG funding
that sustained the Program during a ""dry spell"". This program provides a safe place for students and
parents, and promotes a sense of feeling good and doing better. Daisy, a student in RISE for the past 2
years stated she was disrespectful at first then realized it was a better place and feels great about where
she is and how this program has helped her with bringing her grades up. Shaaquile, a student in RISE
since 4th grade, (she is now in 7th grade) stated the program has not only helped her, but also her parents.
They are able to help with homework and her Dad is now the President of Chipman PTA.
Ms. Moore reported that the Woodchip Afterschool Program recently received a federal ""21st Century""
grant in the amount of $400,000 annually through 2009-2010. Thanks to this funding they will not have
closed in March. There are waitlists at all three schools sites. With the extra funding they could expand
if they had another instructor, which could in turn serve more students. Grades served are 1st through
8th. the program operates Monday through Fridays 3-6 p.m. They collaborate with several other
programs and handle many referrals that filter through.
2. CONTIUNUED DISCUSSION REGARDING HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
NEEDS - Staff reviewed that most of the December meeting was hearing from community based
organizations regarding needs. Staff provided recent information regarding public service funding,
which has dropped approximately $54,000 from the current year. It was further explained what the
CDBG funds can and cannot be spent on, and where the remaining funds get spent. It was also reported
that the Request For Proposal process is going to be for a 1-year period, rather than the 2-year period
just ending. There was discussion on how the CDBG formula works in determining the amount we
receive and how if the overall federal funds stay the same we receive less because new Entitlement cities
come into the program.
The Board determined that focus areas would be addressed but not prioritized. Due to the funding
reduction the Board had determined that there is a greater need to increase the capacity of service
providers to deliver services efficiently and without duplicating these efforts. Emphasis for funding
should go toward strengthening Alameda's safety net, better access to affordable housing in Alameda,
empowering Alamedans to become self-sufficient and stable, and to support capacity building for
service providers.
Motion to request staff to draft a letter to reflect the consensus of this meeting. Two Members will
review and approve and/or edit the letter (Wasko, Currie). Member Currie was designated to represent
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Excellence",SocialServiceHumanRelationsBoard/2005-01-06.pdf
SocialServiceHumanRelationsBoard,2005-01-06,2,"Special Meeting Minutes from Thurs, January 6, 2005
Page 2
the Board at the January 18th City Council meeting with member Bonta as a back-up. M/S Wasko,
Currie and unanimous.
Member Hollinger Jackson was excused from the meeting at 8:00 p.m. due to a prior commitment.
3. BOARD / STAFF COMMUNICATIONS - None
4. ORAL COMMUNICATION - Taken out of Order (2)
5. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned by Vice President Chen at 8:45 p.m. M/S Bonta,
Currie and unanimous.
Respectfully submitted,
Carol Beaver
Secretary of the SSHRB
CB:sb
G:SSHRB\Packets\2005VJan05\SpecialMinutes0106.doc
F:SSHRB\Agenda & Minutes\200
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service",SocialServiceHumanRelationsBoard/2005-01-06.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,1,"Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting
Monday, January 10, 2005 - 7:00 p.m.
1.
CONVENE:
7:08 p.m.
2.
FLAG SALUTE:
Mr. Lynch
3.
ROLL CALL:
President Cunningham, Cook, Lynch, Kohlstrand,
McNamara and Piziali.
Board Member Mariani was not present for roll call, and arrived during Item 9-A.
Also present were Planning & Building Director Greg Fuz, Development Review
Manager Jerry Cormack, Deputy City Attorney Julie Harryman, Supervising Planner
Judith Altschuler, Planner II Dennis Brighton.
4.
MINUTES:
Minutes for the meeting of December 13, 2004.
Vice President Cook noted that page 14, paragraph 2, should be changed to read: ""She
noted that in past site visits to walled-off developments, that the-play yards were was
deserted, which she believed was unsafe for anyone who did use the area.""
Vice President Cook noted that page 14, paragraph 5, should be changed to read:
""
showers for use after swimming, and should open onto the pool area. She believed
that the multitude of angular pathways of the landscape plan seemed very frenetic to her.
She did not believe there was a sense of continuity and flow with respect to the
landscaping and circulation plan.""
Ms. Kohlstrand advised that page 12, paragraph 7, should be changed to read: ""She was
disappointed to see a wall along across-Appezzato Parkway.
""
Ms. Kohlstrand advised that pages 17-18 did not indicate the details of the discussion
about the reflectivity of the glass, and noted that she inquired as to whether the reflective
glass was required functionally for the project; the project sponsor indicated that it was
not required. In addition, the conditions of approval included a recommendation that
there would be no reflective glass on the building.
President Cunningham advised that on page 1, the roll call should indicate ""President
Cunningham,"" rather than President Piziali.
President Cunningham advised that page 15, paragraph 5, should be changed to reflect
that he urged the developer to respond to the comments made by the Planning Board in
an effort to clarify their position and stance on the critical elements for success of the
project. He believed that Allen Tai's letter communicated the Planning Department's
point of view.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 1
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,2,"M/S Cook/Kohlstrand and unanimous to approve the minutes for the meeting of
December 13, 2004, as amended.
AYES - 5 (Mariani absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 1 (Lynch)
5.
AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION:
President Cunningham advised that no speaker slips had been received for Item 9-C, and
proposed that it be moved to the Consent Calendar.
M/S Piziali/Cook and unanimous to remove Item 9-C from the Regular Agenda and to
place it on the Consent Calendar.
AYES - 6 (Mariani absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0
6.
ORAL COMMUNICATION:
None.
7.
Resolution and Commendation for Planning and Building Director Gregory L.
Fuz.
President Cunningham noted that Mr. Fuz had accepted a position as Development
Services Director for El Dorado County, and would be leaving the City of Alameda. He
read the following resolution and commendation into the record:
""Acknowledging Planning and Building Director Gregory L. Fuz for his
contributions to the City of Alameda, whereas Gregory L. Fuz accepted
the position of Planning and Building Director for the City of Alameda on
February 25, 2002, and
Whereas Gregory L. Fuz has accepted a position as the Development
Services Director of El Dorado County, and is leaving the employment of
the City of Alameda, and
Whereas, as Planning and Building Director, he assisted in the planning
process of numerous projects, including the completion of the General
Plan Amendment for Alameda Point, and initiation of the Master Planning
Process, the adoption and conditional certification of the 2001-2006
Housing Element, redevelopment of the Bridgeside and South Shore
shopping centers, adoption of new Citywide design guidelines and
development code amendments, and
Whereas he provided clear and complete advice to the Planning Board,
and
Now therefore be it resolved that the Planning Board of the City of
Alameda extends their thanks for his dedication to his work on behalf of
the City, his staff, and citizens of Alameda.""
President Cunningham added a personal note of thanks to Mr. Fuz for his work on behalf
of the City.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 2
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,3,"Mr. Fuz thanked the Board, and said that it was his pleasure to serve the community of
Alameda, and that it had been a wonderful experience. He thanked the members of the
community that he worked with. He thanked the Board for its dedication and
professionalism, and added that it was the best Board he had ever worked with in more
than 20 years in the field. He thanked the Planning and Building Department staff for
their help, expertise and professionalism, and for making his tenure pleasant and
successful.
Vice President Cook thanked Mr. Fuz and noted that she had looked forward to working
with him for a longer time. She noted that she would miss working with him, and added
that she admired his unflappable nature and his ability to maintain calm and a sense of
humor. She added that his analytical mind enabled him to accomplish so much during his
tenure.
Mr. Lynch looked forward to working with Mr. Fuz whenever the chance arose in El
Dorado County, and said that Alameda was a much better place for his work in the City.
He noted that Mr. Fuz set a positive tone for the City's professional representatives
Planning Board Minutes
Page 3
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,4,"8.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
8-A.
Adoption of 2005 Planning Board Calendar.
M/S Cook/McNamara and unanimous to adopt the 2005 Planning Board Calendar.
AYES - 6 (Mariani absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0
Planning Board Minutes
Page 4
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,5,"8-B. ZC04-0013: Christ Episcopal Church of Alameda - 1700 Santa Clara
Avenue (DB). A request has been received to construct a 38-niche columbarium
wall within the interior of the Christ Episcopal Church. Columbarium use is not
specifically listed as a regulated use within the R-5 (General Residential Zoning
District) where the church is located. This zoning determination for the
installation of a 38-niche columbarium within one interior wall of the church is
being referred to the Planning Board to review the staff recommendation that the
primary use remains the church use and the columbarium will be secondary to the
primary use.
M/S Cook/McNamara and unanimous to approve a request to construct a 38-niche
columbarium wall within the interior of the Christ Episcopal Church. Columbarium use is
not specifically listed as a regulated use within the R-5 (General Residential Zoning
District) where the church is located. This zoning determination for the installation of a
38-niche columbarium within one interior wall of the church is being referred to the
Planning Board to review the staff recommendation that the primary use remains the
church use and the columbarium will be secondary to the primary use.
AYES - 6 (Mariani absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0
Planning Board Minutes
Page 5
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,6,"8-C.
Review and consider possible modifications of Section 30-15 of the Alameda
Municipal Code regulating Work Live Studios (JA). (Continued from the
meeting of December 13, 2004.) Staff is requesting a continuance to the
Planning Board meeting of January 24, 2005.
M/S Cook/McNamara and unanimous to continue this item to the Planning Board
meeting of January 24, 2005.
AYES - 6 (Mariani absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN -
0
Planning Board Minutes
Page 6
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,7,"8-D. ZA04-0002 - Zoning Text Amendment for Design Review Regulations
(JC/JA). Update the current Design Review practices by clarifying the previously
adopted Webster Street Design Review Guidelines.
M/S Cook/McNamara and unanimous to adopt Planning Board Resolution No. PB-05-01
to update the current Design Review practices by clarifying the previously adopted
Webster Street Design Review Guidelines.
AYES - 6 (Mariani absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0
Planning Board Minutes
Page 7
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,8,"9.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:
9-A. Study Session (JA/JL). GPA04-0004, DPA04-0002, IS04-0003, DR04-0114 -
Warmington Homes - 1270 Marina Village Parkway (Shipways Site)
(JA/JL). Applicant requests a General Plan Amendment to amend the General
Plan to designate the Shipways site as MU-7; a Development Plan Amendment to
amend the approved Development Plan for a 143,000 square foot office building
and permit the construction of 64 residential units with associated parking and
landscaping; an Initial Study to address the environmental effects; and a Design
Review for the project. The site is zoned M-X, Mixed-Use Planned Development
District.
Ms. Altschuler summarized this staff report, and noted that the design team would make a
PowerPoint presentation. She noted that no Board action would be taken, and that the
project would require a General Plan Amendment to redesignate the site an MU-7 (Mixed
Use) area. She added that an office use already existed on the site; staff requested the
addition of a residential component to the site, as well as an amendment to the
development plan. The current development plan approval was for a 143,000 square foot
office building; it would be changed from an office use to a residential use. An initial
study and a design review for a general configuration of the houses, landscaping and
parking areas would be done as well. The staff report requested that the discussion relate
to the site design, the parking plan, the pedestrian access through the site, public
amenities, amenities for the residence, the conceptual architectural style, and the fact that
there was a proposal for three-story dwellings, which is not unusual in this area. She
requested that the Board provide guidance to the applicant to bring back with the design
team, and to incorporate the Board's comments into the proposal. The proposal would be
brought before the Board at a later date for action.
The public hearing was opened.
Ms. Joan Lamphier, Lamphier Gregory, noted that she worked for the City on this
project, and has been a project planner on this site since 1983. She noted that the primary
question that Marina Village was concerned about was to get a reading from the Board as
to whether it would approve the change office use to a residential use on the site. She
noted that the Marina Village site had always been designated as a Mixed Use
development.
Mr. Don Parker, representing project owner, noted that his involvement in this project
started in 1979. He noted that the mile of shoreline had been developed with public
access and improvements; this would be the last remaining piece connecting the public
access with the overall public access running throughout the rest of the project. He
provided some history of the site development. He noted that the site was constrained by
the fact that it had an existing structure; they planned to leave most of the structure in
place. They also dedicated the public access around the perimeter of the site.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 8
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,9,"Mr. Kevin Levesque, Randall Planning and Design, displayed a PowerPoint presentation
of the site and described the site layout. He noted that there would be in-garage parking
and storage for the homeowners, with 55 parking stalls proposed in the garage, and 46
guest parking stalls on the podium. In addition, there would be 72 parking spots in the
unit garages. The parking ratio would be 2.7:1. He noted that 86% of the homes would be
on the water, with a small group in the center, clustered around the Rec Center and the
pool. He noted that at the front, the underground parking would eliminate the need for
garages on the podium deck, allowing the creation of a central pedestrian plaza running
from the front of the project at the pool, to the back of the project, where the public plaza
space would be created.
In response to an inquiry by Vice President Cook whether the amphitheatre area would be
publicly accessible, Mr. Levesque confirmed that it would be accessible at all times.
President Cunningham commented about the methodology of building a podium, which
would be a complex process, and inquired why the podium would be elevated to
accommodate the parking underneath. He noted that the parking on the other two sides
could be maximized, and noted that a second podium would probably need to be built. He
inquired whether an analysis had been performed to remove the current sloping
rampways to sink it back down to grade level.
Mr. Parker noted that President Cunningham's suggestion would involve a tremendous
amount of demolition. One of their concerns was that the existing Shipway offices were
next door, which they planned to keep occupied as office space. The demolition would be
very disruptive to the existing uses, and may render the project economically infeasible.
Vice President Cook noted in San Francisco, the existing piers were left intact and new so
that a new structures were proposed to could be built independent of the existing piers-it.
She noted that the cost of removing the old buildings were structures was high.
Mr. Parker noted that the podium would be approximately 9 feet over the flat area of the
site.
President Cunningham requested a physical model of the project, given the complexity of
the project elevations. He believed the treatment of the podium edge relative to the lower
level was a critical element.
Mr. Parker noted that they created planters along the base of the wall and around the
perimeter near the seating areas. They wished to avoid a large, blank wall in that area,
Vice President Cook noted that she was pleased that there would be residential uses on
this site, rather than another office use. She believed a mix of uses would create a more
active waterfront. She wanted to ensure a good relationship between the waterfront and
the public area, and to be sure that pedestrians felt safe by the waterfront.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 9
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,10,"Mr. Parker believed the separation worked well, because the entrance into the project was
in the middle of the Shipways, and the entrance to the public areas were on either end. He
noted that the layout was seamless in relation to the trails, and understood Vice President
Cook's concerns.
Vice President Cook liked the idea that much of the parking was hidden, either above or
below.
President Cunningham inquired whether the applicants had considered using vertical
circulation between Shipways 1 and 2, and 3 and 4. Mr. Parker replied that they had not
examined that option, and that they were focused on creating views onto the water. He
believed that idea made sense.
In response to Mr. Piziali's question about the flats, Mr. Parker replied that there would
be parking on the first floor, then a flat and a flat above it. The units on the large wings of
the project on either side had garages included in the plan.
Vice President Cook noted that the use of the podium was an urban landform, and noted
that high-rises in San Francisco brought the question of whether a blank face along the
street would be present. Mr. Parker noted that they used open metal along the façade, and
wished to avoid a blank wall.
Vice President Cook suggested the use of interpretive signage or public art to provide
more information for the public.
In response to an inquiry by Ms. McNamara for more detail on the amenities for the
residents, Mr. Parker replied that there would be a community building with a pool and a
whirlpool.
President Cunningham appreciated the conceptual drawings, and believed that a three-
dimensional model would enable the Board to better understand the intent of the
architecture.
Mr. Piziali agreed with President Cunningham's request for a three-dimensional model.
Ms. Kohlstrand concurred with Mr. Piziali's comments, and would like a better idea of
the orientation of the residential units, as well as the landscaping treatment and how the
podium wall would be softened. She also believed that a residential use was fine for this
site, but noted that it was a somewhat isolated location, and it was necessary to travel
through office sites and parking lots to get to the residential units. The relationship to the
street for cars and pedestrians was an important issue for her.
Vice President Cook would like a better understanding of the height of the proposed
project in relation to the Extended Stay America building to the west and the office
building to the east, as well as to the buildings located across the Estuary. She believed
the scale between the Oakland uses and the Alameda uses on the estuary should be
Planning Board Minutes
Page 10
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,11,"consistent. She wanted to ensure that the parking requirements were consistent, and
inquired where the public would park in order to use the public access area of the
amphitheatre.
Mr. Levesque responded that the office building parking lots on either side of the
Shipways were virtually vacant during the weekends. He added that reserved parking
stalls for the public were also located in the parking lots, and that quite a few spaces were
available in the office parking lots.
President Cunningham inquired whether any potential uses had been considered for the
bodies of water between the fingers. Mr. Levesque replied that they had not looked at the
ability to get access in that area yet. He noted that the concrete structure was essentially
one big block, and displayed the area on the screen. He noted that a retaining wall would
be built and filled in to provide the lawn area in front of the residential units.
Ms. McNamara noted that she did not see any railings, and inquired whether there were
any plans to install them along the waterfront. Mr. Parker confirmed there would be
safety railings installed along the entire perimeter.
Vice President Cook believed a site tour would be very helpful on this project.
In response to an inquiry by President Cunningham regarding the schedule for this
project, Mr. Parker replied that they would like to enter the housing market in its current
condition and that they hoped to meet a timely schedule. He noted that this was a
complex site to work with regarding cost and structural issues. He encouraged the Board
members to visit the site.
In response to an inquiry by Ms. Kohlstrand, Ms. Altschuler replied that there was
currently no requirement for guest parking in the Zoning Ordinance, and that there was a
requirement for two spaces for each unit. She added that the 0.7 parking ratio was slightly
larger than most projects the Board has approved over the last 15 years; the guest parking
ratio is normally 0.5.
Mr. Parker advised that they viewed the parking as being self-contained within the
project, and not dependent on using any of the office parking. The perception of the high
ratio came from the space provided by the garage.
The Board comments were noted. No action was taken. A public hearing will
be
scheduled for a future agenda.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 11
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,12,"9-B.
ZA04-0001-Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment/City-wide. Review and
revision of Section 30-6 of the Alameda Municipal Code (AMC), Sign
Regulations (JS/JA). The purpose of this amendment is to clarify current
regulations and establish internal consistency with various sections of the AMC
with the primary focus on regulations pertaining to Window Signs.
Mr. Cormack summarized the staff report.
The public hearing was opened.
Mr. Robb Ratto, Executive Director, PSBA, noted that they wanted the district to look as
attractive as possible during the revitalization process. PSBA did not want businesses
jamming their windows with posters obscuring the business, and which made the
storefronts look junky. He expressed concern about the proliferation of grand opening
signs, and the length of time that they are left up. He believed this ordinance would put
an end to that practice. He noted that PSBA and WABA were in agreement that a grand
opening would last 30 days, and that a permit would be necessary for that signage to
remain up. He supported the Planning Board's recommendation to the City Council to
enact this ordinance.
Ms. Sherry Stieg, WABA, supported the proposed ordinance, and noted that it was the
result of a lengthy collaboration between PSBA, WABA and the Planning & Building
Department.
The public hearing was closed for Board discussion.
In response to an inquiry by Mr. Piziali regarding enforcement, Mr. Cormack confirmed
that the Code Enforcement Division would be responsible. There was currently one full-
time Code Enforcement officer, and a planner working part-time in that capacity. He
noted that the Planning and Building Department made a commitment to PSBA and
WABA for increased enforcement along Park Street and Webster Street and the revised
ordinance would assist with that effort.
Mr. Piziali believed that the merchants would police themselves.
In response to an inquiry by Ms. McNamara regarding window signs, Mr. Cormack
replied that a business would be in conformance provided no more than 25% of the
window was covered by signage. The content would not be examined. He noted that
many windows had more than 25% coverage, and that the merchants in violation would
first receive a letter, and then the fine system would go into practice. He anticipated that
some businesses would not be happy with the new ordinance, however, with the
assistance of PSBA and WABA compliance could be achieved.
In response to an inquiry by President Cunningham, Ms. Altschuler, replied that the fee
for a sign permit was upward of $200. She noted that it was necessary to put language in
place to address some of the proliferation of the temporary window signs. She noted this
Planning Board Minutes
Page 12
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,13,"AYES - 7; NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0
Planning Board Minutes
Page 13
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,14,"9-C.
Use Permit, UP04-0012/Major Design Review, DR04-0099; Tasha Skinner,
Tetra Tech, Inc. For the Alameda Unified School District (Will C. Wood
Middle School), 420 Grand Street (DB). The applicant requests a Use Permit
and Major Design Review to install twelve cellular telecommunication antennae
(4-foot panel antennas) to be located around the top of the school building at the
top perimeter/parapet, plus the installation of a utility shed at the rear of the
building. A Use Permit is required by AMC, Section 30-4.1(b)(3) for approval of
above-ground utility installations for local service in an R-1 (Single-Family
Residential) Zoning District.
M/S Piziali/Cook and unanimous to remove Item 9-C from the Regular Agenda and to
place it on the Consent Calendar.
AYES - 6 (Mariani absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0
M/S Cook/McNamara and unanimous to adopt Planning Board Resolution No. PB-05-02
to approve a Use Permit and Major Design Review to install twelve cellular
telecommunication antennae (4-foot panel antennas) to be located around the top of the
school building at the top perimeter/parapet, plus the installation of a utility shed at the
rear of the building. A Use Permit is required by AMC, Section 30-4.1(b)(3) for approval
of above-ground utility installations for local service in an R-1 (Single-Family
Residential) Zoning District.
AYES - 7; NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0
Planning Board Minutes
Page 14
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,15,"9-D.
Design Review, DR04-0014: Linda Cortez, 1514 Pacific Avenue. Ms. Cortez
is appealing staff's denial of this Major Design Review application (DB). This
application requesting design review approval to raise the existing building one
foot, six inches (1'-6"") and relocate the building two feet (2'-0"") toward the south
(rear) property line to accommodate the elongation of the front stair. The proposal
to raise the building will create approximately 1,618 square feet of new living
space in the basement, resulting in a total completed conditioned floor area of
approximately 3,236 square feet. Staff denied this project because of the
following reasons: 1. The proposal to raise the building approximately one foot,
six inches exceeds the proportionality relative to the upper and lower floors (i.e.,
Golden Mean) by three feet, three inches (3'-3""); 2. The proposal will create an
undesirable massing of the building in relation to neighboring buildings which
appear to be of the same design; and 3. The proposal will elongate the front stair
and create an undesirable massing of the stair in relation to the building. The site
is located within an R-4, Neighborhood Residential Zoning District.
Mr. Brighton summarized the staff report, and noted that the appellants had not presented
any new information since the last hearing when the Board had provided general parking
direction on implementation of proportionality issue, (i.e. the Golden Mean) during
Design Review. Staff recommended that the Board uphold the original denial of the
Major Design Review.
The public hearing was opened.
Ms. Linda Cortez, appellant, 1514 Pacific Avenue, noted that they were attempting to
preserve their house and maintain the inherent architecture of the house during the
remodeling process. Although raising of the house did not conform to the Golden Mean,
she did not believe it would change or detract from the inherent architecture of the house
in a perceptible manner. She noted that the two adjoining houses next to her house were
not identical to hers, and there were slope differences; she distributed photos of those
houses to the Board. She did not agree with staff's assessment that the addition of two
risers would create an undesirable elongation of the stairs.
Mr. Ian Ordinaria, appellant, 1514 Pacific Avenue, requested the Board's reversal of
staff's denial of raising the house. He noted that the Golden Mean did not necessarily
address the connection between proportionality and beauty, and did not believe it should
be a rule. He did not believe the Golden Mean should be applied to the whole structure,
although it was applicable to elements such as doors and windows. It also was not clear
that it should be the sole standard for a horizontal or vertical measurement, and he noted
that the whole structure of the Cathedral at Notre Dame was not in conformance with the
Golden Mean, although sections of it were. He noted that regarding the neighboring
buildings, they were not meant to be tract homes. He noted that there were more than 20
homes with visually longer stairways than their home within a two-block radius of their
home, including the Alameda Fire House. He requested that the Planning Board reverse
staff's denial of their application.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 15
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,16,"Mr. Walter McQuesten, 1416 Pacific Avenue, supported the applicant's project, and
believed their plans would be an improvement for the entire block. He noted that he
hoped to undertake a similar project in the future. He believed the raising of the house
would provide safety from flooding. He supported the reversal of staff's denial.
Mr. Richard Rutter noted that he was an architect, and supported staff's denial of this
application. He noted that in the past, neighbors came to agreements regarding roof lines
and design proportions.
In response to an inquiry by Mr. Piziali, Mr. Rutter replied that 16 stairs were the limit
before a landing must be included, and that the applicants were not close to that limit.
Ms. Janelle Spatz, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society, spoke in support of
staff's recommendation. AAPS believed that staff's points were valid, and that in the past
contractor Ken Gutlaben had spoken before the Planning Board to say that digging down
was as easy as building up. She believed that should suffice for this project, and believed
the applicants' plans would be visually disruptive.
The public hearing was closed for Board discussion.
In response to an inquiry by Ms. McNamara whether the neighboring house had a full
unit on the basement level, Mr. Brighton replied that he did not have that information. He
addressed the simple aesthetics of the structures, and the future use of the interior was not
part of the decision. Ms. McNamara noted that there was more than one separate address
on the neighboring home.
Ms. McNamara expressed concern that this house was used in the Planning Board's
discussion of the Golden Mean; this existing architecture already exceeds the Golden
Mean by a significant amount. She was concerned about imposing the Golden Mean on
this applicant given the existing architecture, and did not believe that was the applicants'
fault.
Vice President Cook did not believe there was a reason to make the architecture
proportionality worse, and believed the number of existing houses exceeding the Golden
Mean was one of the reasons for adopting that guideline. She sympathized with the
applicants, but wished to stem the tide of losing Alameda's architectural heritage. She did
not see a unique circumstance to warrant raising the house in this case, and agreed that
digging down was a workable solution.
Ms. Mariani agreed with Vice President Cook's comments. Although she sympathized
with the owners, 1512 Pacific Avenue was a sister house built by the same builder, and is
on the registry. She believed the architectural integrity of this house should be
maintained.
Mr. Piziali noted that he felt for the applicants, and noted that the Board directed staff
that they wished to follow the Golden Mean wherever possible. He agreed with Mr.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 16
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,17,"Gutlaben's assessment that going down for the additional square footage would be
workable and cost-effective.
President Cunningham noted that the design guidelines utilized the Golden Mean to aid
staff in regulating houses being raised.
Ms. McNamara inquired whether the Board would issue a blanket rejection, or to use the
Golden Mean in a case-by-case assessment.
President Cunningham noted that context in the buildings was very important in order to
preserve the character of Alameda. He believed that the number of houses being raised
was beginning to erode that character. He did not believe the Board would issue blanket
rejections.
Mr. Lynch believed that excavating down would be a workable solution for the
applicants, and believed there was a difference between how the Board applied the
Golden Mean as a guideline for individual homes. He noted that for the other individuals
who spoke, he would examine every case separately, and would not issue a blanket
rejection.
M/S Mariani/Cook to adopt Planning Board Resolution No. PB-05-03 to support staff's
recommendation to deny this appeal.
AYES - 6; NOES - 1 (McNamara); ABSTAIN - 0
Ms. McNamara wished to bring staff's attention to the changes made in Ms. Cortez's
comments for the minutes of the November 8, 2004, meeting in which this item was
heard. She wanted to ensure that those changes were made; the excerpt of those minutes
did not reflect that change. Ms. Cortez's original comments were reflected, not the
amended comments. The correct wording should be: ""She believed that families
attempting to increase square footage to accommodate a growing family should not be
lumped in with houses with many illegal residences.""
Ms. Altschuler noted that the changes had been made, and that the draft minutes had been
included in the packet. She noted that the correct comments by Ms. Cortez would be
reflected in the packet.
Ms. Kohlstrand left the meeting following this item.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 17
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,18,"Page 18
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,19,"Ms. Altschuler noted that she and Mr. Cormack would be retiring within the next three
and six months, depending upon a variety of factors. The City is currently recruiting for a
Supervising Planner to replace her position, and there was a position open for a Planner
III. She added that City Manager Jim Flint has left, and that Bill Norton was acting as
interim City Manager. He had previously been a City Manager in Alameda.
In response to an inquiry by Vice President Cook, Ms. Altschuler replied that Melodie
Bounds had taken a position in West Hollywood. Currently, the Planning and Building
Department planner staff consisted of Dennis Brighton, Allen Tai, and David Valeska
(part-time).
Mr. Lynch believed that the hiring of any planners and the City Manager would best be
accomplished following the hiring of Mr. Fuz's replacement. He noted that contract
planners were useful, but that their training often took time away from already
overworked staff planners.
Ms. Altschuler noted that waiting to hire planners may cause stress on existing planners
and other staff members.
Mr. Cormack noted that the Board members' comments were well-taken and was
confident that the positions would be filled in a reasonable amount of time.
Ms. Altschuler noted that she was most concerned about the public information counter,
and that the planners' efforts were split between working at the counter and writing staff
reports. She noted that the contract planners could work with use permits and variances,
and the staff planners could work the counter. She noted that she recently spent a day at
the counter.
President Cunningham noted that a problem with contract staff was the consistency of
information given to the public.
Mr. Lynch supported enhancing the staffing levels.
Ms. Harryman suggested that the Board agendize this subject for a future meeting.
Ms. McNamara noted that the photos in the Webster Street Design Guidelines were all
black.
Ms. Altschuler noted that staff would review the document and provide more legible
copies for the Planning Board, City Council and the public.
12.
ADJOURNMENT:
9:40 p.m.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 19
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-10,20,"Respectfully submitted,
Jefry Cormack, Interim Secretary
City Planning Department
These minutes were approved at the January 24, 2005, Planning Board meeting. This
meeting was audio and video taped.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 20
January 10, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-10.pdf
LibraryBoard,2005-01-12,1,"Minutes of the
ALAMEDA FREE LIBRARY BOARD
January 12, 2005
The regular meeting of the Alameda Free Library Board was called to order at 7:01 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Leslie Krongold, President
Ruth Belikove, Vice President
Karen Butter, Board Member
Mark Schoenrock, Board Member
Absent:
Alan Mitchell, Board Member
Staff:
Library Director Susan Hardie, Secretary
Jenna Gaber, Recording Secretary
CONSENT CALENDAR
Board member Butter MOVED approval of the Consent Calendar. Vice President
Belikove SECONDED the motion which carried by a unanimous voice vote.
An asterisk indicates items so enacted and adopted on the Consent Calendar.
A.
*Report from Library Director highlighting Library Department activities for the
month of January 2005. Accepted.
B.
*Draft Minutes of the Regular Library Board meeting of December 8, 2004.
Approved with 2 corrections.
C.
*Library Services Report for the month of November 2004. Accepted.
D.
*Report from Finance Department reflecting FY 2003-04 Library expenditures
(by fund) through December 2004. Accepted.
E.
*Bills for ratification. Approved.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A.
Main Library Project Update
Board member Butter asked when Project Manager Bob Haun would be available to give
the members of the Library Board an updated report on the main library project. Director
Hardie stated that in an effort to make the best use of everyone's time, we are hoping that
Bob's monthly report to Council will serve to inform the Board as well. She also
commented that the Board receives the Construction Report each month. She stated that
Bob Haun is very willing to answer questions directly, and is available by phone or
email. Board members indicated that this arrangement is fine for now.
The Library Director reported that on February 28th a Notice to Proceed will be given
to
the contractor. The groundbreaking ceremony will be in early March. The Steering
Committee will have representatives from Alameda's library and business community.
Vice President Belikove asked if there was a list of changes from Value Engineering that
the Board could review. Library Director Hardie reported that there is a list of items and
recapped some of the items for the Board. She noted that the City Council decided to
proceed with LEED Certification.
Vice President Belikove asked if donations could be solicited to help keep the curved
staircase that was eliminated during Value Engineering. Board member Butter stated
that
1",LibraryBoard/2005-01-12.pdf
LibraryBoard,2005-01-12,2,"the construction contract has already been approved. To change the stair again would
incur substantial additional cost. Director Hardie mentioned the concern that additional
fundraising may be needed for the branches.
NEW BUSINESS
A.
Library Building Team (M. Hartigan)
The Library Building Team did not meet during December.
B.
Alameda Free Library Foundation (R. Belikove)
Vice President Belikove stated that the Foundation did not meet in December. The
Foundation will be meeting later this month. The Foundation sent out a year-end
fundraising letter which had some success.
C
Friends of the Alameda Free Library (M. Skeen)
Molly Skeen reported that the Junior Friends will host a themed storytime at the Main
Library on January 22nd. On February 10th the members of the Friends will attend a
benefit screening and reception for Leslie Krongold's documentary My Rabbi. On
February 18th, 19th and 20th the Friends will host a mid-winter book sale at the Al DeWitt
Officers' Club at Alameda Point.
D.
Library Building Watch (L. Krongold)
President Krongold reported that the newsletter will be sent out this week. The logo team
met this week and they decided not to move forward on the logo for awhile.
F.
Patron suggestions/comments (Speak-Outs) and Library Director's response.
None.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (Public Comment)
None.
LIBRARY BOARD COMMUNICATIONS
Vice President Belikove commented on the 20th anniversary of Alameda Reads. She
suggested that everyone in Alameda read the same book as a way to celebrate this
occasion. She also noted articles on Library Closures in Salinas, Reading at Risk and
Time Running Out for Libraries.
Board member Butter distributed an article on Literacy and immigrants.
Board member Schoenrock asked if the City is still having a budget deficit. Library
Director Hardie replied in the affirmative and stated that the new Interim City Manager is
meeting with Council and staff to discuss this issue. The City Council wants to maintain
services and to date no budget cuts have been approved.
DIRECTOR'S COMMENTS
Library Director Hardie stated that she has not yet received her appointment for Day in
the District but will keep the Board informed. She reported that there was a theft of 5
computer monitors at the Bay Farm Library. The police department is investigating. The
library received a bequest that will be used to purchase materials for the opening of the
new library.
2",LibraryBoard/2005-01-12.pdf
LibraryBoard,2005-01-12,3,"ADJOURNMENT
Board member Schoenrock MOVED to adjourn the meeting at 7:53 p.m. Board member
Butter SECONDED the motion which CARRIED by a unanimous voice vote.
Respectfully submitted,
Susan Hardie, Secretary
3",LibraryBoard/2005-01-12.pdf
RecreationandParkCommission,2005-01-13,1,"MINUTES OF
RECREATION AND PARK COMMISSION
ALAMEDA
RECREATION & PARKS
MEETING OF JANUARY 13, 2005
1327 Oak St., Alameda, CA 94501
(510)747-7529
DATE:
Thursday, January 13, 2005
TIME:
7:00 p.m.
PLACE:
City Hall, 2263 Santa Clara Ave., Third Floor, Room 360
Alameda, CA 94501
1.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Chair Jay Ingram, Vice Chair Jo Kahuanui, Commissioners Christine
Johnson, Georg Oliver, and Bruce Reeves
Staff:
Dale Lillard, Recreation Services Manager (RSM)
Patrick Russi, Recreation Supervisor (RS)
Absent:
Suzanne Ota, Recreation & Parks Director
2.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approve Minutes of November 4, 2004 Recreation and Park Commission Meeting.
M/S/C
REEVES/KAHUANUI
(approved)
""That the Minutes of November 4, 2004 be approved."" ""
In Favor (5) - Ingram, Kahuanui, Johnson, Oliver, Reeves
Absent (0) -
3.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, AGENDA
(Any person may address the Commission in regard to any matter over which the
Commission has jurisdiction or of which it may take cognizance that is not on the agenda.)
Pat Colburn, Alameda Arts Center President, discussed with the Commission their request
to amend the Public Art Ordinance (2892) and encourage developers to provide aid to the
established arts venues in Alameda. They will be taking their request to the Public Art
Advisory Committee (PAAC). Depending on the decision of the PAAC, this item may
come forward to the Recreation and Park Commission. RSM Lillard stated that staff is
waiting for a legal interpretation from the City Attorney's Office. In the meantime, this
request will go before the PAAC the week of January 17.
1
Recreation & Park Commission Mtg.
Minutes
Thursday, January 1, 20055
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service",RecreationandParkCommission/2005-01-13.pdf
RecreationandParkCommission,2005-01-13,2,"4.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Letter from Pat Colburn, Alameda Arts Center President, requesting an amendment
to Ordinance 2892 and encourage developers to provide aid to the established arts
venues in Alameda.
5.
NEW BUSINESS
None.
6.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A.
Continued Discussion and Consideration of Request from Mayor and City
Council to Develop a Park Use Policy - (Discussion Item)
Discussion was held regarding what to include in the Park Use Policy.
Kahuanui requested a listing of equipment (sheds, etc.) at the parks. So the Commission
will know what is existing to begin the process of developing a policy. The list should be
anything that is not ARPD's. Acreage for each park should also be included on the list.
Oliver stated that individuals selling balloons and ice cream in the parks should have City of
Alameda permits and a permit from ARPD. He also suggested not allowing
demonstrations. RSM Lillard stated that if they are doing business in the City of Alameda
they should have a City of Alameda Business License.
Johnson suggested obtaining park use policies from other cities so that the Commission
does not have to reinvent the wheel. The Commission could then apply points that are
what Alameda needs. Ms. Johnson provided some copies of other cities (e.g., Midland,
Portland) as examples.
Chair Ingram stated that there are other cities that we can borrow from when generating the
policy. RSM Lillard stated that some ideas from other cities could be used.
Chair Ingram suggested not putting anything in a park when the park is less than three (3)
acres. Councilmember Kerr's comment regarding incorporating traffic should also be
considered.
RSM Lillard stated that staff will put together a draft policy with the sample policies from
other cities and recommendations by the Commission.
George Phillips, Boys and Girls Club Executive Director, stated that he was at the meeting
to be aware of the process. Mr. Phillips stated that he hopes the Commission will look at
the following:
2
Recreation & Park Commission Mtg.
Minutes
Thursday, January 13, 2005
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service",RecreationandParkCommission/2005-01-13.pdf
RecreationandParkCommission,2005-01-13,3,"-
During deliberations the Commission will make the distinction between protecting
park property and keeping it as an integral part of the community.
-
Service issues to the community.
-
Do not discount size or anything else in terms of evaluating what benefits non-park
and recreation programs in the neighborhood. Neighborhoods should not be
deprived of potential services just because of park size.
Chair Ingram asked Mr. Phillips if he knew that Alameda is way underserved as far park
acreage in the community, more so than a lot of other cities. Mr. Philips stated that he is
very well aware.
Chair Ingram asked Mr. Phillips the status of rebuilding the Boys and Girls Club. Mr.
Phillips stated that they have prepared a proposal for the School District. Everything
seems acceptable with the School District. The proposal needs to go before the School
Board.
B.
Discussion and Selection of Joint Meeting Dates with City Council -
(Discussion/Action Item)
RSM Lillard stated that the staff and City Clerk are still trying to confirm a date for the Joint
Meeting with Council.
C.
Discussion of Annual Commission Goals, Objectives, and Accomplishments
Including Park Master Plan - (Discussion/Action Item)
Chair Ingram stated that he would like to have the list of Goals, Objectives, and
Accomplishments for the Joint Meeting with Council.
Suggested list of accomplishments were:
-
Marina Waterfront Park
-
DeWitt Officers' Club has been fully utilized. Is booked six months to one year in
advance.
-
Small Dog Park - Development of Small Dog Park Website/installation of bulletin
board.
-
Dog Park Drainage
-
Creation of Sport Advisory Committee
-
Use of Coast Guard park field easing shortage of athletic fields.
-
Collaborated with Friends of Franklin Park for funding additional improvements to
Franklin Park Playground Renovation.
-
Design and Renovation of Littlejohn and McKinley Park Play Areas as well as the
Alameda Point Multi-Purpose Field.
-
Initiated discussion with the Peralta Community College District (PCCD) for use of
the soccer field and track at the College of Alameda.
3
Recreation & Park Commission Mtg.
Minutes
Thursday, January 13, 2005
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service",RecreationandParkCommission/2005-01-13.pdf
RecreationandParkCommission,2005-01-13,4,"-
Made significant progress in cost recovery.
7.
REPORTS FROM RECREATION COMMISSION AND RECREATION AND PARK
DIRECTOR
A.
Park Division
Alameda Point Gymnasium: Community use of the gymnasium by Alameda sponsored
organizations has increased 20 percent this year. Beginning in January, Encinal High
School and St. Joseph Notre Dame High School will share court time after school for
basketball practices through March. FUTSAL (indoor soccer) will begin its 5th season at
the gym commencing in January. Approximately 40 teams participate in this league. All
games are scheduled on weekends and are open to the public.
Also, the Golden State Warriors will be holding a basketball camp at the gymnasium from
December 20-23, for boys and girls between the ages of 8-16. The focus of this camp is
individual skill development, learning proper fundamental skills, and development of a
healthy team attitude. This camp will also feature appearances by current and former
Warriors players and coaches.
Franklin Park: Friends of Franklin Park purchased three beautiful Victorian picnic tables
with benches which have been installed. The Park Division staff worked with the
Recreation Division and Friends of Franklin Park to find the best location for the tables.
Also, a new driveway was installed at the entrance to Franklin Park. This work has
enhanced the appearance as well as the safety of the location.
Veteran's Building: Meetings are continuing between a local Veteran's Committee and
City staff to develop plans to renovate the kitchen. Staff has been informed by the
Alameda County Health Department that a commercial kitchen will be required and an
onsite meeting with the Health Department is scheduled for Thursday, December 16. This
project will be financed by the Veteran's Committee, who plan to hold fundraising events
and obtain donations from local businesses.
Leydecker Playground Renovation: A Request for Proposal (RFP) for the relocation of
the Leydecker Playground was recently completed and is being reviewed. This project will
include relocating the existing playground to the volleyball court area and removal of the old
play equipment once the project is completed. This project will be funded by the 2002
Resources Bond Act-Per Capita Block Grant (Proposition 40) and is expected to be
completed by May 2005.
Alameda Point Multi-Purpose Field: The Public Works Engineering Department has
hired a new contractor to finish the park. The Park is still under construction and
Engineering is working hard to have the new contractor complete the project. The park is
already looking better and should be ready for limited baseball use in March 2005.
4
Recreation & Park Commission Mtg.
Minutes
Thursday, January 13, 2005
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service",RecreationandParkCommission/2005-01-13.pdf
RecreationandParkCommission,2005-01-13,5,"Field renovation work: At this time each year we complete renovation work to our turf
areas to ready them for the upcoming season. The work completed this month includes
replacement of 14,000 square feet of sod at Lincoln Park, aeration and fertilization of all
Parks, and over seeding of all fields.
B.
Recreation Division
All youth from ages of 8-13 years have been participating in the National Elks Hoop
Shoot at all of our parks. The City Finals will be held on January 8 at the Old Alameda
Gym at 3:00 p.m. Please feel free to drop by the parks and check out the fun.
More than 500 residents attended the Annual Mayor's Holiday Tree Lighting Ceremony,
held this year under clear skies. This year's ceremony featured performances by the
Community Band, Dancing Christmas Trees (who actually competed in the Macy's
Thanksgiving Day Parade), music by the Mistletones, and an appearance by Santa Clause.
On December 11, Breakfast with Santa took place at the newly dedicated Albert H. Dewitt
O' Club. More than 55 parents and children enjoyed a special breakfast with Santa. The
children also wrote letters to Santa, made a special reindeer door hanger, colored Holiday
pictures, and took a photo with jolly old Santa Claus.
On the weekend of December 18 & 19 Santa made a special visit to Alameda by personally
going to 33 homes and spreading the Holiday cheer. Our Santa's Visits Program offers
Alameda citizens the opportunity to have Santa and his helper makes a visit to your home
and personally talks with your children.
The Winter Wonderland Camp at Harrison Center in Lincoln Park takes place from
December 20-24 and December 27-31. Wonderland Camp provides opportunities for the
camper to experience special Holiday crafts, drama, games, cooking projects, and loads of
fun. During the first week, there are 51 youth (Grades K-5) enjoying the Camp while for the
second week there are 40 registered so far. The Camp runs from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
everyday and extended care is available before and after camp from 7:30 -9:00 a.m. and
3:00 -5:30 p.m.
Other news, the ARPD ""Blues News"" Gazette, second edition, was published to promote
all of our programs and special events for the winter 2004-2005. The ""Blue News"" Gazette
is a handy quick reference guide to all of Alameda Recreation and Parks youth division
programs. The ""Blue News"" Gazette was distributed to all Kindergarten through 8th Grade
children in Alameda as well as at the libraries and local parks.
Another upcoming special event at the Al DeWitt O' Club is the ever popular
Father/Daughter Valentine Dance. The Dance will take place on February 10 & 11 from
the hours of 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. Sign-ups will begin January 10, 2005. This is usually a sold
out event with over 200 Fathers/Daughters in attendance.
5
Recreation & Park Commission Mtg.
Minutes
Thursday, January 13, 2005
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service",RecreationandParkCommission/2005-01-13.pdf
RecreationandParkCommission,2005-01-13,6,"Attendance at both teen centers remains high. The Teen Underground had 320 drop-ins,
and the Chipman Teen Program had 410 drop-ins during the month of December (while
school was in session). During the winter break, the Teen Underground is open from
Monday through Thursday from 12:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. We will also be going on some
special Holiday trips which include bowling, ice skating in San Francisco, and a trip to
Boomers in Livermore for games during winter break. Chipman Teen site is closed during
the break.
The Teen Program is getting ready for a new and exciting 2005. We are sponsoring a 3-
On-3 Teen Hoop Tournament which starts from middle January through March. The
tournament will be at Encinal High School Gym and times will vary.
The Alameda Youth Committee (AYC) has been busy being good helpers during this
Holiday season. They were busy with the Mayor's Tree Lighting Ceremony on December
4th, by selling warm beverages and treats and assisting regular staff with the event. They
brought in $119 from snack sales due to their hard work and dedication. Another event in
which AYC helped out was the Albert H. DeWitt Officers' Club Dedication which was held
on December 18, 2005, and assisted staff with serving beverages to guests. In other news,
AYC board has been discussing going to Boomers as an AYC outing, bonding activity, and
year-end (mid year) celebration for their work and commitment.
This years Teen Spring Break Trip will be traveling down to Southern California which
includes; Magic Mountain, Universal Studios, Medieval Times (Dinner and Show), then
Disneyland. Sign ups are currently underway.
Recreation After school Program (RAP) for K-5th Graders, continues to help parents by
providing the youth of Alameda with an after school recreation program at selected park
sites throughout Alameda. Participants may sign up for either 5, 3, or 2 days a week and
the hours are from after school until 5:30 p.m. each day.
Parks and Playgrounds, our free drop-in recreation program, has continued to thrive at
our 10 sites (Franklin, Krusi, Leydecker, Lincoln, Littlejohn, Longfellow, McKinley, Miller,
Tillman, and Woodstock).
The Public Art Policy Guidelines have been adopted by the Recreation & Park
Commission. The Public Art Advisory Committee (PAAC) has been gearing up for several
new projects that will be starting after the first of the year. The PAAC will be meeting about
infusing public art into the Webster Street Renaissance Project and the Park Street
Streetscape & Town Center Projects. A formal Public Art plan should also be coming
together for the South Shore Shopping Center project. Staff has met with Tad Savinar, art
consultant, for the project and a formal plan should be implemented into the new year.
Harsch Investment Properties has provided the City with a $150,000 performance bond to
insure they will complete public art for the Center.
6
Recreation & Park Commission Mtg.
Minutes
Thursday, January 13, 2005
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service",RecreationandParkCommission/2005-01-13.pdf
RecreationandParkCommission,2005-01-13,7,"We are taking registration for the Junior Warriors Basketball program for K-5 Grades.
The program will run on Saturdays at the Larry Patton Gym. The program will start on
January 22 and run until March. The fee is $65 which includes jersey, tickets and
instruction.
The Hoop Shoot Contest is currently taking place at all park sites. The City finals will be
held on January 8th at 3:00 p.m. at the Larry Patton Gym.
Both the Adult Softball and Adult Flag football has come to an end. Both leagues had a
great turn out and all players where really happy.
C.
Mastick Senior Center
November 2004 Statistics (Statistics are two months behind):
Volunteers: 114
Volunteer Hours: 1,830 (1830 X $8.51= = $15,573)
New Members: 128
Total Membership to Date (July 1, 2004 to present): 2,199
(Note: Membership renewal is tied to the new Fiscal Year)
Average Number of Lunches Served Daily: 52
Monthly Sign-ins: 12,277
Holiday Closures at Mastick: Mastick Senior Center will be closed for the following
holidays:
New Year's Day Holiday, Saturday, January 1, 2005.
Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
Monday, January 17, 2005.
Note: Meals on Wheels is available to provide meal service on the days Mastick is closed.
To reserve a meal, please call 865-6131.
Medical Return Trip Improvement Program (MRTIP) is designed to provide a more
responsive system for getting home after/from medical appointments. The City of Alameda
has contracted with Friendly Transportation to provide transportation services after/from
medical appointments. On Friday, December 17, 2004, a letter with five (5) complimentary
vouchers was sent to 251 interested Paratransit users. The program is made available
through Measure B funding. This program is being administered at Mastick Senior Center.
Start the year off right by getting your affairs in order! Join Mary Widenor, Attorney and
Alameda Adult School instructor, for her five-week class on Will and Estate Planning.
This class is scheduled for Friday, January 21 & 28 and February 4 & 11, between 10:00
and 11:30 a.m. in second dining room. Please pre-register in the office, or call 747-7506.
Join us for the New Member Orientation on Thursday, January 13, 2005, at 10:30 a.m. in
the Lobby. The New Member Orientation familiarizes new members with the Center
7
Recreation & Park Commission Mtg.
Minutes
Thursday, January 13, 2005
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service",RecreationandParkCommission/2005-01-13.pdf
RecreationandParkCommission,2005-01-13,8,"providing information on the various activities, programs, and services; a guided tour of the
Center, and a complimentary lunch prepared by Bay Area Community Services (BACS)!
Pre-registration is required. To make a reservation, please stop by the office or call 747-
7506. You will be amazed at what we have to offer!
Monthly dance moves to new date in January! Mastick Swingers
Presents ""Winter Wonderland"" on Monday, January 24, 2005, 1:00 pm to 4:00 pm (Doors
open at 12:30 pm). Dance to the music of Manny Gutierrez, socialize with friends, and
enjoy refreshments in the Mastick Social Hall. Cost: $3 per person w/ membership card or
$4 per person w/out membership card.
Mastick ""Pool"" Team Wins 8-Ball Tournament! Mastick & Ruggieri (Union City) Senior
Centers competed in an 8-Ball Pool Tournament on Friday, November 19, 2004. Two
rounds of 8-Ball were played resulting in a tie. In the play-off game, Team Captain Chuck
""Stroker"" Young won the final game, giving Mastick a final victory of 9 to 8, retaining their
undefeated streak for the last three years! The Mastick Pool Players are very appreciative
for the thrilling and fun tournament, delightful refreshments and lunch hosted by Union City.
The Mastick Pool Players graciously donated their cash prize, $20, to Mastick Senior
Center! Hip Hip Hooray for Mastick's Pool Players!
Book Donation Policy: Thanks to your generous donations, the Mastick library continues
to burst at the seams! In November 2004, additional shelving was added to accommodate
the overflow! The Mastick library is now accepting books copyrighted 1995 through 2005,
""classics,"" and current month magazines ONLY. The Friends of the Library accepts books
on behalf of the Alameda Free Library for their semi-annual books sale. For small to
moderate donations, please contact the Alameda Free Library at 747-7777. For moderate
to large donations, please call 521-7745. Again, thanks for making the Mastick library a
wonderful resource within our community!
On Thursday, January 13, 2005, AC Transit representatives will be in Room D between
10:00 and 11:00 am to process applications and take photographs for senior and disabled
AC Transit I.D. cards. A new card is $3 and a replacement card is $5. Seniors, 65 and
older, are eligible with proof of age (e.g., DMV I.D., Passport, Alien I.D., or Visa).
Individuals, 65 years and under, can apply for a disabled discount card with proof of
disability (e.g., DMV Placard receipt or Medicare card) and Medical Certification Form
(available in the Mastick office) completed by your doctor. If you have any questions,
please call Norman Davis, AC Transit, at (510) 891-4709. To register, please come to the
Mastick office.
Trips! Trips! Trips! - Join us on Tuesday, January 25, 2005, at 1:00 p.m. in the Media
Room for a slide show of the 2005-2006 Extended Trip Travel Packages presented by
Collette Tours. Preview the June trip to South Dakota Black Hills and Badlands, the
November trip to Costa Rica, as well as a sneak preview of the 2006 Australia & New
Zealand Trip. Don't miss this opportunity to walk through fantastic vacations. Also, ask
Mariel about 2005 Overnight Trips to Sacramento and LA/ Palm Springs.
8
Recreation & Park Commission Mtg.
Minutes
Thursday, January 13, 2005
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service",RecreationandParkCommission/2005-01-13.pdf
RecreationandParkCommission,2005-01-13,9,"How Respond to a Power Outage and Other Disasters: Living in earthquake country,
we experience infrequent, yet disrupting events such as power outages. We now face new
challenges in the forms of hazardous material and terrorism. Do you know what to do and
are you prepared to ""ride out"" a minor to disastrous event? Alameda Power & Telecom
(AP&T), the Alameda Fire Department, the American Red Cross, and Mastick Senior
Center have joined together to offer a one hour disaster preparedness training to help you
face the challenge on Tuesday, January 25, 2005, at 1:00 pm in Room D. Learn how to:
make a disaster plan, build a disaster kit, take advantage of opportunities for additional
training such as CPR, First Aid, and AED, take advantage of opportunities in disaster relief
areas, and give blood. There will be an emphasis on unique challenges faced by seniors
and resources available to help relieve these challenges. To reserve a seat, please call
747-7506. However, we will gladly accommodate those that ""drop-in!""
D.
Other Reports and Announcments
1.
Status Report on Northern Waterfront Committee (Commissioner Oliver)
Commissioner Oliver will see if the Committee is being disbanded.
2.
Status Report on Alameda Point Golf Course Design Committee (Vice Chair
Reeves)
No report at this time.
3.
Status Report on Alameda Point Advisory Committee (APAC) (Chair Ingram)
No report at this time.
4.
Status Report on Transportation Master Plan Committee (Commissioner
Johnson)
No Report at this time.
8.
STATUS REPORT ON ONGOING PROJECTS
None.
9.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, GENERAL
None.
10.
ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA
Continued Discussion and Consideration of Request from Mayor and City Council to
Develop a Park Use Policy
9
Recreation & Park Commission Mtg.
Minutes
Thursday, January 13, 2005
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service",RecreationandParkCommission/2005-01-13.pdf
RecreationandParkCommission,2005-01-13,10,"Discussion and Selection of Joint Meeting Dates with City Council
Discussion of Annual Commission Goals, Objectives, and Accomplishments
Including Park Master Plan
11.
SET DAY FOR NEXT MEETING
Thursday, February 10, 2005
12.
ADJOURNMENT 8:39 p.m.
10
Recreation & Park Commission Mtg.
Minutes
Thursday, January 13, 2005
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service",RecreationandParkCommission/2005-01-13.pdf
PublicArtCommission,2005-01-18,1,"CITT
OF
MINUTES OF PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF
JANUARY 18, 2005
(Revised 3/16/05)
DATE:
Tuesday, January 18, 2005
TIME:
7:00 p.m.
PLACE:
City Hall, 2263 Santa Clara Avenue, First Floor, Room 160
Alameda, CA 94501
1.
Roll Call:
The meeting was called to order at 7:10 p.m.
Present:
Chair (C) Huston (late), Vice Chair (VC) Lee, Committee Members
(CM) Cecilia Cervantes, K.C. Rosenberg, and Peter Wolfe
Absent:
Suzanne Ota, ARPD Director
Staff:
Dale Lillard, Recreation Services Manager (RSM)
Pat Russi, Recreation Supervisor (RS)
Christina Bailey, Cultural Arts Specialist (CAS)
2.
Approval of Minutes
A.
Minutes of Meeting on December 15, 2004
M/S/C
Rosenberg/Cervantes
(approved)
""That Minutes of Public Art Advisory Committee Meeting on December 15,
2004 be approved.'
Approved (3) - Lee, Cervantes, Rosenberg
Absent (1) - Huston
Abstain (1) - Wolfe
3.
Oral Communications
(Any person may address the Committee in regard to any matter over which the
Commission has jurisdiction or of which it may take cognizance that is not on the
agenda.)
None.
4.
Written Communications
-
Letter from Pat Colburn regarding the funding of art centers through the
Public Art Allocation
-
Staff report from RSM Lillard regarding the Webster Renaissance Project
Public Art and the Park Streetscape & Town Center Project
5.
Old Business
PAAC Meeting
1
Minutes Revised
January 18, 2005",PublicArtCommission/2005-01-18.pdf
PublicArtCommission,2005-01-18,2,"A.
Consideration of 2005 Meeting Dates - (Discussion/Action Item)
RS Russi inquired about the fourth Thursday of the month as a possible
meeting date. C Huston stated that this would fit her schedule, at least
through June; PAAC members agreed. CAS Bailey will send out the
dates and meeting locations via e-mail.
B.
Continued discussion of Public Art Annual Plan - (Discussion/Action
Item)
CM Rosenberg shared that she would like to see the program goals, from
the Guidelines, worked into a Mission Statement. RSM Lillard stated that
if the PAAC chose a couple of goals, then staff could draft a short Mission
Statement.
C Huston asked that each member choose the goals they'd want to see in
the Mission. CM Cervantes shared that ""supporting the promotion of arts
in Alameda; in order to provide the Community with art opportunities"" is
important. CM Rosenberg shared that ""promoting a diverse and
stimulating cultural environment, and strengthening cultural awareness,
innovative thinking, lifelong learning and the City's sense of community""
should be highlighted. VC Lee chose ""Public art integrates the vision of
artists and design professionals in planning and designing the urban
landscape.""
VC Lee asked whether the PAAC would be dealing with physical objects
or contributing to the operating costs and salaries of local non-profits. RS
Russi stated that it would be up to the PAAC. C Huston stated that she
would be more inclined to have more interesting art pieces throughout the
City, rather than supporting the existing non-profits.
CM Rosenberg stated that it would be difficult to monitor funds provided
to non-profit organizations for the purposes of supporting ongoing
operation and staff costs. RSM Lillard shared that a number of
organizations that provide grants have strict guidelines detailing how the
funding may be used. Most tend to emphasize the program or service to
be provided while attempting to avoid evaluating the particular non-profit
themselves. Physical pieces of art can be enjoyed by everyone when
placed throughout the City.
C Huston asked about the legality of issuing Public Art Fund monies to
local non-profits. RSM Lillard stated that the way he understood the
ordinance, funding could not be provided to non-profits for ongoing
operating expenses such as staff salaries but that funding could be
utilized to provide a performance, exhibition or special event.
CM Cervantes inquired about using monies for appropriate exhibits. RSM
Lillard stated that the in-lieu fund could be amended. CM Rosenberg
asked about the possibility of deciding on a specific defined event and
offering a competition for non-profits. RSM Lillard stated that PAAC could
PAAC Meeting
2
Minutes Revised
January 18, 2005",PublicArtCommission/2005-01-18.pdf
PublicArtCommission,2005-01-18,3,"move to do that, but would need to specify funds go only towards
exhibits/events. CM Rosenberg suggested that the PAAC take a look at
local non-profits on an annual basis for the purpose of assessing
communications.
C Huston inquired as to whether the permits are being written in a way
that is minimizing the one percent. She wanted to add this to the Annual
Plan under Political.
C Huston asked PAAC if they wanted to have data collection maps. VC
Lee stated that it would be a good idea to have specific sites and goals in
mind. C Huston also inquired about having a project calendar. RSM
Lillard stated that the Planning/Building Department lists projects in terms
of seasons.
RS Russi explained that he has been working on a generic RFP and
Public Art application. Each RFP will have different details and a unique
cover letter. RSM Lillard stated that PAAC would receive a draft by the
February meeting.
C.
Discussion of Art Donation - (Discussion Item)
RSM Lillard explained that Emily Lewis, a St. Joseph Notre Dame
student, approached Alameda Recreation & Parks and she would like to
paint a mural on or in one of our buildings. Director Ota and RS Russi
met with Emily, her mother, and high school art teacher. The project will
be no cost to the City. The Department proposed that the mural be
painted on three panels for easy mobility.
C Huston suggested that the student-artist use canvas and Velcro; this
process makes displaying, moving, and storing the piece easier. CM
Rosenberg added that a sona tube could be used to store the piece, if
canvas and Velcro are used.
CM Rosenberg also stated that if one of her students came to her about
painting a mural, she would suggest that they look into past murals from
the City where they are doing the piece. This way, they could better their
own work.
6.
New Business
A.
Webster Renaissance Project Public Art and the Park Streetscape &
Town Center Project - (Discussion Item)
Sue Russell from City Development Services attended the meeting to
share the progress of the Park & Webster Streetscape Projects. She
mentioned that both streets would be under construction simultaneously.
She also expressed a desire to have a representative from the PAAC sit
on each project's subcommittee. CM Wolfe mentioned that he had been
part of the Webster Street Design Committee, as well as the Downtown
PAAC Meeting
3
Minutes Revised
January 18, 2005",PublicArtCommission/2005-01-18.pdf
PublicArtCommission,2005-01-18,4,"Commission Taskforce. VC Lee stated that she would be willing to
volunteer also.
M/S/C
Rosenberg/Huston
(approved)
""That Peter Wolfe be appointed as the liaison between the Public Art
Advisory Committee and the Webster and Park Streetscape
Projects.""
Approved (5) - Huston, Lee, Cervantes, Rosenberg, and Wolfe
M/S/C
Rosenberg/Huston
(approved)
""That Karen Lee be appointed as the substitute liaison between the
Public Art Advisory Committee and the Webster and Park
Streetscape Projects.'
Approved (5) - Huston, Lee, Cervantes, Rosenberg, and Wolfe
B.
Consideration of funding of art centers by the Public Art Allocation -
(Discussion Item)
Pat Colburn, President and founder of the Alameda Art Center,
addressed PAAC members on behalf of the AAC. She stated that the
Center has been open for eight months and has 160 members. She
expressed the Center's struggle to obtain funding as a non-profit 501 (c) 3.
She inquired as to whether or not Public Art Fund monies could be
allocated to local non-profits. She also mentioned that she had contacted
Harsch Development about their one percent.
Meeting attendee, Marilyn Pomeroy, was part of the group that drafted
the original Public Art Ordinance. She thought that the in-lieu fund was
meant to go towards grant proposals, and that the PAAC was developed
to handle these grants. CM Rosenberg stated that the role of the PAAC
is to see that the quality of artwork meets a certain quality level.
Ms. Pomeroy inquired as to what the PAAC thought about local non-
profits writing proposals directly to developers. C Huston stated that their
proposals would inevitably end up in front of the PAAC for approval. VC
Lee expressed concerns over non-profits being pitted against each other
for limited funds. In addition, it could also lead to friends and relatives of
the developers unfairly lobbying for funds.
Ms. Pomeroy asked if Harsch Development had already set aside its one
percent for onsite art. RSM Lillard stated that they have an art consultant
and plan to exceed the one percent. The developer sees public art as
adding to the Center's appeal.
C Huston shared that it might be helpful for local non-profits to submit a
one-page ""wish list"" to the PAAC. Those submissions would help the
PAAC make changes to the Guidelines in the future.
PAAC Meeting
4
Minutes Revised
January 18, 2005",PublicArtCommission/2005-01-18.pdf
PublicArtCommission,2005-01-18,5,"C Huston expressed her hesitation in rushing to use money from the
Fund. CM Rosenberg echoed her sentiment that the Committee would
not want to make hasty decisions about the money. CM Wolfe stated that
there are so many organizations and so few developers; the developers
might become antagonized by all the groups seeking money. VC Lee
also expressed her concern over how the PAAC would establish an
organization's value, if they were to offer grants for non-profits.
C.
Role of Committee Members serving as representatives to public art
projects - (Discussion Item)
RSM Lillard stated that PAAC members, serving on other subcommittees,
would report to PAAC at their next scheduled meeting (e.g., CM Wolfe will
attend the Park and Webster Streetscape Project meeting, and will then
report to the PAAC).
7.
Oral Communications, General
CM Wolfe inquired about the concept of gifts and donations. RSM Lillard
stated that this was the first time in 17 years that a citizen had
approached the Department about donating art and PAAC could look at
this at a later date. CAS Bailey shared that a file on Gifts and Donations
is being compiled.
RS Russi updated the PAAC on Tad Savinar, Art Consultant for Harsch
Development. Due to a setback in the developer's conceptual plan, the
development and placement of art has been delayed. Despite this setback,
Mr. Savinar is familiarizing himself with local artists.
8.
Adjournment:
The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
PAAC Meeting
5
Minutes Revised
January 18, 2005",PublicArtCommission/2005-01-18.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-18,1,"MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- - -JANUARY 18, 2005 - -7:30 P.M.
Acting Mayor Gilmore convened the Regular Meeting at 7:45 p.m.
Roll Call - Present Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore,
Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5.
[Note: Mayor Johnson was present via teleconference from The
Capital Hilton, 16th and K Street NW, Washington DC only for the
Resolution Opposing the Proposed Casino paragraph no. 05-037].
Absent :
None.
AGENDA CHANGES
(05-027) Councilmember Matarrese moved that the Public Hearing to
consider an Appeal of J. Barni [paragraph no. 05-034]; the Public
Hearing to consider amendment to Zoning Map [paragraph no. 05-035];
and the Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of Rita Mohlen
[paragraph no. 05-036] be moved to the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the
following voice vote: Ayes: Louncilmembers Daysog, deHaan,
Matarrese and Acting Mayor Gilmore - 4. [Absent Mayor Johnson -
1. ]
(05-028) - Councilmember deHaan moved that discussion regarding
options for relocation assistance legislation [paragraph no. 05- -
040] be heard first on the Regular Agenda.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which FAILED by the
following voice vote: Ayes Councilmembers Daysog and deHaan -2.
Noes : Councilmember Matarrese and Acting Mayor Gilmore - 2.
[Absent : Mayor Johnson - 1. ]
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(05-029 ) Proclamation declaring January as Blood Donor Month in
the City of Alameda.
Acting Mayor Gilmore read and presented the proclamation to Beth
Wren, Donor Recruitment Account Manager.
Ms. Wren thanked the Council for their support of the Red Cross and
announced that there will be a blood drive on Friday in San Leandro
at the Creekside Community Church.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
1
January 18, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-18,2,"Michael John Torrey, Alameda, commented on the importance of
donating blood.
(05-030) Presentation by Peter Simon, Dean, College of Alameda and
Liz Sullivan, Organizer with Oakland Community Organizations
regarding the proposed Oakland Aviation High School at the Oakland
Airport. Withdrawn by presenters.
(05-031) Presentation of letters of appreciation to members of the
Alameda Police Department by NC1 Danielle Carter, Recruiter, Naval
Reserve Recruiting Area Pacific.
NC1 Randy Montrose, Recruiter in Charge, Naval Reserve Recruiting
Area Pacific, presented letters of appreciation to members of the
Alameda Police Department ; Sergeant Jill Ottaviano, Alameda Police
Department, accepted the letters of appreciation on behalf of the
Alameda Police Department.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar,
including continuing the Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of J.
Barni to February 1; continuing the Public Hearing to consider
Amendment to Zoning Map to February 1; and noticing the Public
Hearing to consider an Appeal of Rita Mohlen for a later date.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent Mayor Johnson - 1. ]
[Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding
the paragraph number. ]
(*05-032) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Community
Improvement Commission (CIC) Meeting of December 21, 2004; the
Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on January 4, 2005;
and the Special Joint City Council, CIC and Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority Meeting of January 5, 2005. Approved.
(*05-033) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,049,755.31.
(05-034) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Planning
Board's approval of Design Review, DR04-0101, to allow a 5,300
square foot new commercial building (veterinary hospital) to
replace approximately 2,000 square feet of commercial buildings,
with a parking lot expansion to 23 spaces; and adoption of related
resolution. The property is located at 1410 Everett Street in the
C-C Community Commercial and R-5 Hotel Residential Zoning
Districts. Appellant: J. Barni. Continued to February 1, 2005.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
2
January 18, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-18,3,"(*05-035) Public Hearing to consider Amendment to Zoning Map to
rezone approximately 7,800 square feet (1/5 acre) at 1410 Everett
Street, APN 070-170-15, from R-5 Hotel Residential to C-C Community
Commercial and
(*05-035A) - Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map to
Designate APN 070-170-15, Approximately One-Fifth Acre, from R-5
Hotel Residential to C-C Community Commercial, on Central Avenue at
Everett Street. Continued to February 1, 2005.
(*05-036 - ) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Planning
Board's denial of Variances, V04-0006, 0007, 0008 and 0010, and
denial of Major Design Review, DR04-0026, for all development
projects at 3017 Marina Drive; and adoption of related resolution.
The site is located within an R-1, Single-Family Residential Zoning
District. The development project includes expansion of the
residence into the estuary and installation of rear yard decks.
Approval is being sought for the following: 1) Variance to AMC
Subsection 30-4.1(d) (3) (Maximum Main Building Coverage exceeding
48%) i 2) Variance to AMC Subsection 30-4.1(d) (7) and Section 30-2
(Rear Yard) because the building extends across the rear property
line into the estuary 3) Variance to AMC Subsection 30-5.7(a)
(Roof Eaves) and 30-5.7(d) (Bay Windows) because the roof leaves
above the bay windows encroach to within 3 feet from the side
property line and bay windows are not permitted to encroach into
side yards; 4) Variance to AMC Subsection 30-5.7(c) (1) (Rear Yard) ,
Subsection 30-2 (Definitions) (Yard-Rear) and Subsection 30-
4. 1 (d) (7) (Rear Yard) because decks over 36-inches in height extend
into the required side and rear yard setbacks 5) Variance to AMC
Subsection 30-5.14(c) (Barrier Heights) because the windscreens
around the patios exceed the maximum permitted - -foot height. The
Planning Board found that the Variance for the bay window
encroachment be withdrawn because encroachment is in compliance,
subject to Design Review approval. Applicant/Appellant: Rita
Mohlen. To be noticed for a later date.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
( (05-037) Resolution No. 13811, ""Opposing the Proposed Lower Lake
Rancheria-Koi Nation Casino in the City of Oakland. "" Adopted.
Michael John Torrey, Alameda, stated that it is important to make
sure that the Rancheria-Koi Nation does not get the land trust.
Melody Marr, Alameda Chamber of Commerce, stated that the Chamber
supports the Resolution; submitted a packet of information from the
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
3
January 18, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-18,4,"Chamber's Town Hall Meeting.
Mayor Johnson stated that the Council needs to send a strong
message in support of the Resolution opposing the Rancheria-Koi -
Nation proposed casino; Alameda's vote, along with the City of San
Leandro, Alameda County, and the City of Oakland, will send a
strong message to the Bureau of Indian Affairs stated she had the
opportunity to speak with Congressman Stark and that he will
support Alameda in their efforts.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that the casino proposal is not good
for Alameda, the adjoining wildlife refuge, the City of Oakland and
is a false economy that he would oppose any casino by any tribe in
any urban area; he hopes that there is unanimous support of the
Resolution.
Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the Resolution.
Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he joins his
colleagues in opposing the casino; Council should consider joining
the City of Oakland in pursuing legal issues.
Mayor Johnson stated that she has spoken to the Interim City
Manager and meetings have already taken place Alameda is working
with San Leandro to jointly respond to the environmental documents;
staff is working with the City of Oakland; Alameda County should be
included in pooling resources to save money in the battle opposing
the casino.
Councilmember Daysog stated that there should be an amendment to
the Resolution which would include directing the City Attorney to
work with colleagues in the surrounding jurisdictions to actively
oppose the proposed casino.
Mayor Johnson stated that the Resolution should be very strong,
clear and precise regarding Alameda's position on the casino; that
she would prefer to give separate direction to staff to work with
the surrounding communities and Alameda County.
Acting Mayor Gilmore inquired whether Councilmember Daysog was
amicable to giving staff direction, to which Councilmember Daysog
responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember deHaan stated that he commends the Council in taking
the lead; the matter will be an uphill push involving federal
regulations.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
4
January 18, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-18,5,"Counci lmember Daysog stated that he opposes the proposed casino for
a number of reasons, including crime and the urban planning impacts
on Alameda and other cities. the proposed casino is only one of a
wave of casinos to come which are inappropriate for the area.
Councilmember deHaan stated that the Oakland City Council wanted to
ensure that Alameda has no desire to have a casino.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 5.
( 05-038) Public Hearing on Housing and Community Development needs
for Community Development Block Grant Annual and Five-Year Plans.
The Community Development Manager gave a brief presentation on the
housing and community development needs.
Councilmember Daysog requested an Off Agenda Report update on the
Section 8 funding.
Jim Franz, American Red Cross, urged the Council to encourage the
continuation of a balance of service provisions that provide a
safety net in the community.
Hugh Cavanaugh, Alameda Food Bank, stated there has been a 50%
growth in the past three years and that he expects the growth to
continue over the next few years.
Steven Currie, Social Services Human Relations Board (SSHRB), read
a letter from SSHRB encouraging the Council to continue the safety
net services and programs that empower and support residents'
efforts toward self-sufficiency.
Councilmember Matarrese thanked the Social Services Human Relations
Board for their work; stated that he looked forward to receiving
the Board's recommendations.
(05-039) Report regarding Corrective and Preventive Plan in
response to the Memorandum on Internal Control Structure.
Acting Mayor Gilmore stated that the matter was being discussed
because Council requested staff to respond to questions resulting
from the City's annual audit.
Councilmember Matarrese requested information on the amount of the
fund balance deficit ; inquired whether the list of items in the
audit recommendation regarding the budget represents surplus or
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
5
January 18, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-18,6,"deficit.
The Finance Director responded that she would provide the
information to Council.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that he would like to have the
requested information coordinated with the budget information
provided in the first week of February.
Acting Mayor Gilmore stated that the City has become dependant on
Information Technology services system failure would result in
countless hours of lost productivity; Council should carefully
review the costs of addressing the issue and prioritize
accordingly.
Councilmember Daysog stated that the Plan makes a lot of the
internal mechanisms of the City transparent; requested information
on the debt reserve compliance issues.
Councilmember deHaan inquired whether bonds are typically
refinanced without the qualification process.
The Finance Director responded there would be a competitive bid
process if a bond is straight forward and uncomplicated;
complicated bonds would be negotiated; the underwriters would
respond to the Request for Proposal (RFP) stating what could be
done at what price; staff would then recommend a selection to the
governing body.
Councilmember Daysog requested that the bond bidding process be
placed on a future agenda for discussion; stated that it is
important for Council to be involved in the bidding of bonds and in
the decision not to bid.
Councilmember Matarrese stated that the City's retirement and
health benefit costs have increased dramatically; the City's Public
Employee Retirement System (PERS) contribution increased 615% from
2002 to 2004.
(05-040) Discussion regarding options for relocation assistance
legislation and a temporary moratorium on all new construction,
demolition and condominium conversion in the ""West End Atlantic
Corridor Area"" (bounded by Webster Street, Main Street, Pacific
Avenue and Ralph J. Appezzato Memorial Parkway).
The Interim City Manager provided a brief outline of the Harbor
Island Apartment eviction process and staff's coordinating efforts
to financially help the remaining tenants move.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
6
January 18, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-18,7,"Acting Mayor Gilmore stated that the Council would not be taking
action tonight; public testimony would be taken and the matter
would be continued to the February 1, 2005 City Council Meeting
;
the two meeting nights constitute one meeting; stated speakers can
speak at tonight's meeting or on February 1, but not at both.
Proponents: Regina Tillman, Alameda; Steven Garner, Alameda; Frank
Skiles, Alameda Gretchen Lipow, Alameda; Ron Salsig, Alameda;
Wendy Horikoshi, Alameda; Janet Gibson, Alameda Unified School
District; Reginald James, Alameda; Eve Bach, Alameda; Carl Halpern,
Alameda;Mary Green Parks, Alameda.
Opponents: Dominic Pasanisi, Alameda; Barbara Kerr, Alameda; Fern
Wallace, Alameda; Bernie Fitzgerald, Alameda; Melinda Samuelson,
Alameda; Steven Edrington, Alameda [submitted handout] ; Carol
Martino, Realty World Martino Associates; John Sullivan, San
Leandro; Kathy Lautz, Apartment Owners Association; Thomas S.
Cooke, Manager, Bonanza Apartments; Carmen Lasar, Alameda: and,
Monica Getten, Alameda.
Councilmember Matarrese requested that the City Attorney provide an
analysis of existing State law which might overlap with the
proposed ordinance, particularly landlord and tenant relationships
stated that there is plenty of State law protecting individual
tenants in contracts with landlords; he is concerned that there is
not much protection for the community; there is significant impact
on the community and the schools when owners choose to wipe out a
large complex; the matter is not about rent control he has never
supported rent control, which has always been a failure; there has
never been a complaint about rent being too high, only complaints
that rent is too high for the services not being delivered.
Acting Mayor Gilmore requested information on how many properties
have 40 units or more and the total number of units in the ""West
End Atlantic Corridor Area"", and requested staff to provide
information on how the ordinance would work in the absence of rent
control.
(05-041) Ordinance No. 2934, ""Amending the Alameda Municipal Code
by Amending Subsection 3-28.9 (Payment In-Lieu of Taxes -PILOT) ;
Adding a New Subsection 3-28.10 (Return on Investment in Enterprise
Funds) of Section 3-28 (Payment of Taxes) of Chapter III (Finance
and Taxation) and Adding a New Subsection 18-4.10 (Exemptions) of
Section 18-4 - (Sewer Service Charge) of Article I (Sewers
of
Chapter XVIII ( Sewer and Water) "" Finally passed.
Councilmember Matarrese stated the Ordinance provides some hope to
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
7
January 18, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-18,8,"close the gap in the budget shortfall; moved final passage of the
Ordinance.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion.
Under discussion Councilmember Daysog, stated that he was concerned
about the possibility of a charge on either cable or electric
bills; it is important to be upfront with the public regarding the
$750,000 and the possibility of recouping the money through rate
charges.
The Interim City Manager stated impacts would be determined through
the Alameda Power and Telecom (AP&T) budget processi stated that
there are always trade offs in the budget.
Councilmember Daysog stated that he supports the Ordinance, which
is the more conservative approach given the different options
presented.
Councilmember deHaan stated that there is a good likelihood that
something would need to be massaged; AP&T should not go through a
disproportionate adjustment.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote - 4. [Absent: Mayor Johnson - 1. ]
(05-042) Ordinance No. 2935, ""Amending the Alameda Municipal Code
by Adding a New Section 3-91 (City of Alameda Community Benefit
Assessment Procedure Code) to Article VI (City of Alameda
Improvement Procedure Code) of Chapter III (Finance and Taxation) . ""
Finally passed.
Councilmember Matarrese moved final passage of the Ordinance.
Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent: Mayor Johnson - 1.
]
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
None.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(05-043 - ) Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the budget review
process would take two months.
The Interim City Manager outlined the budget adoption process and
stated the mid-year budget review addresses expenditures and
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
8
January 18, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-18,9,"revenues through the end of December and should be addressed at the
first or second meeting in February.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Acting Mayor Gilmore adjourned the
Regular Meeting at 10:02 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council
9
January 18, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-18,10,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- - -JANUARY 18, 2005 - -6:30 P.M.
Acting Mayor Gilmore convened the Special Meeting at 6:33 p.m.
Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Matarrese,
and Acting Mayor Gilmore - 4.
Absent :
Mayor Johnson - 1.
The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:
(05-026) - Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency Negotiators :
Human Resources Director and Craig Jory; Employee Organizations :
Management and Confidential Employees Association and Police
Association Non-Sworn.
Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened
and Acting Mayor Gilmore announced that the Council gave directions
to labor negotiators.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Acting Mayor Gilmore adjourned the
Special Meeting at 7:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Meeting
Alameda City Council
January 18, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-18,11,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY - JANUARY 18, 2005 - - - 6:55 P. M.
Acting Chair Gilmore convened the Special Meeting at 7:15 p.m.
Roll Call - Present : Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Matarrese,
and Acting Chair Gilmore - 4.
Absent :
Chair Johnson - 1.
The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:
(05-002) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation;
Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section
54956.91 Number of cases: One.
Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened
and Acting Chair Gilmore announced that the Commission obtained
briefing from staff.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Acting Chair Gilmore adjourned the
Special Meeting at 7:32 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
Secretary, Community Improvement
Commission
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Special Meeting
Community Improvement Commission
January 18, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf
CityCouncil,2005-01-18,12,"MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY - JANUARY 18, 2005 - - - 7:25 P. M.
Acting Chair Gilmore convened the Special Meeting at 7:42 p.m.
Commissioner Daysog led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL -
Present : Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Matarrese,
and Acting Chair Gilmore - 4.
Absent :
Chair Johnson - 1.
MINUTES
(05-003) Minutes of the Special Community Improvement Commission
(CIC) Meetings of December 7, 2004; the Special Joint City Council
and CIC Meeting of December 21, 2004; and the Special Joint City
Council, CIC and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
of January 5, 2005. Approved.
Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the minutes.
Commissioner Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 4. [Absent : Chair Johnson - 1. ] Note: Commissioner
deHaan abstained from voting on the December 7 and 21, 2004
Minutes.
AGENDA ITEM
(05-004) Recommendation to approve a contract with Michael Stanton
Architecture for design review services for the proposed Historic
Alameda Theatre, Parking Structure and Cinema Multiplex Project in
an amount not to exceed $92,500.
Commissioner Matarrese stated the contract is one step closer to
getting the theatre; moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 4. [Absent Chair Johnson - 1.
]
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Acting Chair Gilmore adjourned the
Special Meeting at 7:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
Secretary
Agenda for meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.
Special Meeting
Community Improvement Commission
January 18, 2005",CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf
GolfCommission,2005-01-19,1,"ALAMEDA GOLF COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MEETING
Wednesday, January 19, 2005
1.
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Sandré Swanson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in Room
#360, Alameda City Hall, 2263 Santa Clara Avenue.
1-A.
Roll Call
Roll call was taken and members present were: Chair Sandré Swanson,
Vice Chair Tony Santare, Commissioner Anthony Corica and
Commissioner Bob Wood. Absent: Secretary Betsy Gammell. Also
present were General Manager Dana Banke and Head Golf Professional
Matt Plumlee.
1-B
Approval of Minutes - Regular Meeting of November 17, 2004 (December
meeting canceled).
The Commission approved the minutes unanimously.
1-C
Adoption of Agenda
The Commission approved the agenda unanimously.
2.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
3.
AGENDA ITEMS:
3-A
Discussion on Management Practice for Golf Complex Volunteer Marshal
Program.
The General Manager reported that the agenda item was the request of Chair
Swanson to clarify the Chuck Corica Golf Complex marshal Program. The
Complex currently has ten (10) Management Practices in place to explain various
policies. The Head Golf Professional contacted Bay Area golf courses to inquire
about the Marshal Programs and policies at their facilities to determine how they
compare to the program at the Chuck Corica Golf Complex. The General
Manager passed out the information packet containing a draft of the Management
Practice on the Volunteer Marshal Work Program and the comparison policies
from the other golf courses. The comparison shows that the marshal policies at
the Chuck Corica Golf Complex are comparable if not superior to those at other
courses. A marshal meeting was held in December to discuss the current policies.
Mike Winkenbach has been assigned to oversee the Marshal Program and has
been marshaling the golf courses on the weekends to ensure that everything is",GolfCommission/2005-01-19.pdf
GolfCommission,2005-01-19,2,"going smoothly. Monday through Thursday the marshals are able to book a tee
time, while on the weekends and holidays they can play as business allows after
twilight. The questions were raised as how the number of marshals on our crew
compares with the other courses. The number of marshal's the Complex has is
determined by the season and there are currently twenty-seven (27). During
""peak season"" more marshals are brought on. The marshals keep track of one
groups finishing time per hour in a log book in the Pro Shop to record the pace of
play. The marshals continually pass by the shop so it is not an inconvenience to
do SO. The introduction of the cart marshal was due to carts being taken by
customers without paying. The cart marshals check the customer's receipts and
write the starting times on the carts, which help to keep track of the pace of play.
3-B
Update on Golf Complex Clubhouse Capital Improvement Project (CIP).
The General Manager reported that back in November 2004 the design contract
approval for the project was pulled off the City Council Agenda. The General
Manager has met with Interim City Manager, Bill Norton, to discuss the project.
The General Manager explained the drop in revenue over the past few years and
the problems getting approval for the project. The Interim City Manager is
enthusiastic about the project and does understand the problems with the
declining revenues. They discussed possibly scaling down the project to lower
the cost. They are planning to go and look at the clubhouse at Poplar Creek in
San Mateo, which was a very successful project, and not as expensive as most.
3-C
Discussion on Practice Area for the Golf Complex Driving Range.
The General Manager reported that the Driving Range revenue has steadily
decreased since the opening of the Metropolitan in Oakland. The General
Manager has been considering placing a practice facility adjacent to the Driving
Range. The thought is to use the first and ninth holes on the Mif Albright Course
and redesign that course. The area would be lit up at night and a synthetic putting
green placed in the area. The General Manager also met with a fencing contractor
to get a bid on placing a windbreak behind the canopy section of the Driving
Range and possibly some propane heaters for additional warmth. The idea is to
keep the Driving Range open longer hours and run specials in the evening. The
Golf Commissioners mentioned that it would be beneficial to have plans for the
idea and visit the area to get a better prospective of the plans. Another thought
was to allow the electric carts on the Mif Albright Course.
4.
ORAL REPORTS
4-A
Report on maintenance activities of the Golf Course.
The report covered in the General Manager's report.
4-B
Golf Shop and Driving Range activities report by Head Golf Professional",GolfCommission/2005-01-19.pdf
GolfCommission,2005-01-19,3,"Matt Plumlee.
The Head Golf Professional reported that calling the tournament groups
about the Friday tournament rate of $39 has been beneficial and the
golf707 rounds are continuing to sell well.
4-C
General Manager Dana Banke's report highlighting activities for the
month at the Golf Complex.
The General Manager reported that the golf courses are very wet right
now. The Sand Channel Green Drainage System project done on #1 of the
Earl Fry Course seems to be working well. The wooden benches were
looked at and will be replaced. The Complex is putting together a number
of golf packages to help increase play. The staff is calling tournament
groups to encourage them to set up events on Fridays for a rate of $39.
The sale of annual passes is going very well. The cost of the passes are
$850 for Seniors, $1,000 for Residents and $1,300 for the Non Resident
which calculates to 10 months of monthly tickets. The Driving Range has
new debit card specials also, $120 for $100, $60 for $50 and $35 for $30.
4-D
Beautification Program by Mrs. Norma Arnerich.
It was reported that a dedication ceremony at the Complex would be held
to honor J. D. Grady. Mr. Grady was a longtime golfer and the former
Marshal Coordinator. The ceremony will be on January 28, 2005.
5.
COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS
5-A
Long-Range Planning and Government Liaison, Chair Swanson.
No report given.
5-B
Buildings, Security, Albright Course and Driving Range, Secretary
Gammell.
The General Manager reported that the have been no current breaches in
security.
5-C
Maintenance Status of Golf Complex and Capital Improvements, Vice
Chair Santare.
Secretary Santare reported that the Courses are still wet.
5-D
Golf Complex Financial Report, Commissioner Corica.
Commissioner Corica reported that total revenue from golf on the three (3)",GolfCommission/2005-01-19.pdf
GolfCommission,2005-01-19,4,"courses was up 28% for the month of December 2004 as compared to
December 2003, with play up by 12%. This is in spite of the severity of
the rain days during the month. For fiscal year 2004-2005, revenue and
play were down 10% as compared to fiscal year 2003-2004. Most Bay
Area courses have experienced similar or larger declines in play. All
ancillary services were down from last December except Pro Shop Sales,
cart rentals and lessons. The Golf Complex showed a loss for the month
of $175,371 for the month and a net profit of $211,573 for the first half of
fiscal year 2004/2005, down about $45,000 from the last fiscal year.
5-E
New Clubhouse, Complex Entry and General Design and Construction
Issues, Commissioner Wood.
Commissioner Wood stated that the report was previously discussed.
5-F
Golf Complex Restaurant Report, Legends & Heroes.
None to report.
6.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON AGENDA (Public Comment)
None to report.
7.
OLD BUSINESS
None to report.
8.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Included in the Commission packet was a memorandum to the Finance
Department showing the surcharge payment for November 2004 of
$10,247 and $9,830 for December 2004. The year-to-date total is $92,011
for the fiscal year 2004/2005 to the General Fund.
9.
ANNOUNCEMENTS/ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
The agenda for the meeting was posted 72 hours in advance in accordance with the
Brown Act.",GolfCommission/2005-01-19.pdf
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority,2005-01-20,1,"APPROVED
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
2-B
Thursday, January 20, 2005
The meeting convened at 8:19 p.m. with Mayor Johnson presiding.
1.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Beverly Johnson, Mayor, City of Alameda
Doug DeHaan, Boardmember, City of Alameda
Tony Daysog, Boardmember, City of Alameda
Frank Matarrese, Boardmember, City of Alameda
Marie Gilmore, Boardmember, City of Alameda
2.
Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items Only
There were no speaker slips.
3.
CONSENT CALENDAR
3-A. Amending Resolution No. 010 establishing rules and procedures for Alameda Reuse and
Redevelopment Authority meetings by amending the starting time of regular meetings from 5:30 p.m.
to 7:00 p.m. (requested by Boardmember Matarrese)
Member Matarrese motioned for approval of the Consent Calendar items. The motion was
seconded by Member Gilmore and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes - 5; Noes - 0;
Abstentions - 0.
Member Matarrese noted that this item is approved with the intent to increase public participation.
4.
ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION OF THE ARRA TO CONSIDER
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR:
4-A. Property:
Alameda Naval Air Station
Negotiating parties:
ARRA and Navy
Under negotiation:
Price and Terms
The ARRA received a briefing from the Real Property Negotiator; no action was taken.
5.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Johnson adjourned the open session meeting at 8:21 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Irma Frankel,
ARRA Secretary
1
Y:\Comdev\Base Reuse& Redevp\ARRA\MINUTES\2005\1-20-05 Special.ARRA minutes.doc",AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-01-20.pdf
CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities,2005-01-24,1,"COMMISSION ON DISABILITY ISSUES
MEETING MINUTES OF
January 24, 2005
Present: Berger, Bunker, Chair Cooney, Fort, Gwynne, Longley-Cook, McCoy, McGaughey,
Absent/Excused: Chadow, McCoy
Guests: Anne Steiner
1.
MINUTES: The minutes of December 6, 2004 where approved with the following
corrections: 1) Oral Communications, Item #3 - change ""Commissioner Ed Cooney stated
that AC transit buses are not able to align with the bus stop location due to the existing
metered parking space."" to ""Commissioner Ed Cooney stated that AC transit buses are not
able to align with the bus stop location on Santa Clara Avenue fronting City Hall due to the
existing metered parking space."" and 2) Oral Communications, Item #5 - change
""Commissioner Steffens stated that a chair should be provided in the City Clerk's Office
front counter area for refuge if needed."" to ""Commissioner Elaine McCoy stated that a chair
should be provided in the City Clerk's Office front counter area for refuge if needed.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
1. February agenda item - Commissioner Charles Bunker will inform the Commission on the
status of the Disaster Plan.
2. February agenda item - Commissioner Gina McGaughey would like a status on the Webster
Street Renaissance project. It was requested that temporary sidewalk relocations and barrier
locations during construction take into consideration the visually impaired. Secretary to
follow up.
3. Commissioner Angela Steffens asked if the City has a policy on sidewalk solicitation policy
as in one instance it resulted in accessibility problem.
4. A motion carried that Old Business, Item #1, Election of Vice-Chair be taken out of order.
OLD BUSINESS:
1. Election of Vice-Chair: Commissioner James Gwynne was elected Vice-Chair.",CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2005-01-24.pdf
CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities,2005-01-24,2,"Commission on Disability Issues
January 24, 2005
Minutes
Page 2 of 2
NEW BUSINESS:
1. Audible Signal Grant:
The secretary informed the Commission that the Public Works Department is applying for a
grant application for audible traffic signal equipment and requested the Commissions'
backing. A letter supporting the grant application was approved. Commissioner Gina
McGaughey expressed her concern that push buttons be located at the curb crosswalk, not
distant from the crossing, so as not to impede the visually impaired or wheelchair/walker
users. Guest Anne Steiner suggested that the grant application make reference to inter-model
transportation. Should the City obtain the grant, the Commission would like to review any
proposed locations and design.
2. Committee Bylaw Change:
A motion failed to change the current bylaw term limits for the Chair and Vice-Chair from
""one (1) year term or until successors are appointed"" to ""two (2) consecutive one (1) year
terms. It was mentioned that officers are elected, not appointed as stated in the bylaws.
Secretary will follow up.
3.
Policy Research, Writing and Implementation:
A motion carried to establish a sub-committee to address policy. Sub-committee members
are Commissioners Ed Cooney, Charles Bunker, James Gwynne, Steve Fort, and Gina
McGaughey. The Commission approved a letter from Chair Ed Cooney to Mayor Johnson
on the City's ability to procure accessibility assistance to disabled citizens attending City
meetings and hearings (i.e. Braille, speech/hearing impaired interpreters). Secretary
informed the Commission that the Public Works staff is meeting with other City staff to
establish a plan and would welcome any information from the Commissioners (i.e. Braille
transcriber, interpreter contacts).
OLD BUSINESS:
2. Alameda Journal Calendar:
Secretary informed the Commissioners that agenda's are provided to the Alameda Journal.
A
Commissioner stated that the City's CATV channel has Room 360 listed for meetings and
should be changed to Room 391. Secretary will follow up.",CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2005-01-24.pdf
CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities,2005-01-24,3,"Commission on Disability Issues
January 24, 2005
Minutes
Page 3 of 3
3. Oak Street City Hall Entrance: Secretary informed the Committee that the kick plate door
openers at the Oak Street Alameda City Hall door are functioning. A Commissioner stated
that the toe kick plate only operates if pressed at a certain location. Secretary will follow up.
4. City Hall Bus Stop: Secretary informed the Commission that Public Works is continuing to
resolve the accessibility to the bus stop in front of City Hall (blockage by a metered parking
space). A Commissioner stated that the existing bench location might also hinder
accessibility.
5. Breakers at Bayport 64-unit development Secretary will provide status on the Breakers
at Bayport 64-unit development. Secretary has not seen any plans. Will report at February
meeting.
6. Lower Washington Park Parking Accessible Parking Stall: Secretary informed the
Commission that the addition of a disabled parking stall at lower Washington Park adjacent
to the dog park will need to go before the Transportation Technical Team (TTT), possible on
February agenda. Commissioner James Gwynne stated that the existing two disabled spaces
need to be restriped to conform to the latest ADA standards. Secretary is aware.
7. City Clerk's Office Reception Area Seating: The secretary investigated Commissioner
Stephen's observation of the need for a chair in the reception area of the City Clerk's office.
Due to space limitation in the reception area, at the secretary's request, the Public Works
Maintenance staff fabricated a sign ""seating available upon request"" which will be displayed
at the front counter. The Commission found this to be an acceptable solution and suggested
that similar signs be placed in other departments where permanent guest seating cannot be
provided.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting adjourned at 9:20p.m. The next scheduled meeting is Monday, February 28th in Room
391, City Hall.
Sincerely,
Matthew T. Naclerio
Public Works Director
By:
Ed Sommerauer
Associate Civil Engineer
ES:lc
G:\PUBWORKS\LT\MCD Disability Committee/2005/0124min.doc",CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2005-01-24.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-24,1,"Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting
Monday, January 24, 2005 - 7:00 p.m.
1.
CONVENE:
7:06 p.m.
2.
FLAG SALUTE:
Vice President Cook
3.
ROLL CALL:
President Cunningham, Vice President Cook, Kohlstrand,
Lynch and Piziali.
Board members Mariani and McNamara were absent.
Also present were Development Review Manager Jerry Cormack, Deputy City Attorney
Julie Harryman, Supervising Planner Judith Altschuler, Planner II Allen Tai, Barbara
Hawkins, Public Works.
4.
MINUTES:
Minutes for the meeting of January 10, 2005.
Ms. Kolhstrand advised that she left after Item 9, not Item 11, as indicated on page 18.
Vice President Cook advised that page 9, paragraph 5, should be changed to read, ""Vice
President Cook noted in San Francisco, the existing piers were left intact and new so that
new structures were proposed to could be built independent of the existing piers-it. She
noted that the cost of removing the old buildings were structures was high.""
Vice President Cook advised that page 10, paragraph 11, should be changed to read,
""Vice President Cook would like a better understanding of the height of the proposed
project in relation to the Extended Stay America building to the west and the office
building to the east, as well as to the buildings located across the Estuary.""
M/S Cook/Kohlstrand and unanimous to approve the minutes for the meeting of January
10, 2005, as amended.
AYES - 5 (Mariani, McNamara absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0
5.
AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION:
None.
6.
ORAL COMMUNICATION:
Mr. Mark Irons, 835 Oak, noted that because of family time issues, he may not be able to
speak about Item 8-b and may submit a written comment. He noted that he was a strong
proponent of work/live. He believed that the current ordinance may be improved, but
noted that the risk of a ballot initiative was having no ordinance at all.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 1
January 24, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-24.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-24,2,"7.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
7-A.
TM04-0005 SRM Associates Harbor Bay Parkway (MG). Applicant requests
approval of Tentative Map 8574 in order to subdivide three parcels in to nine
parcels. The parcels are located within the Harbor Bay Business Park and are
zoned C-M-PD. Commercial Manufacturing, Planned Development District.
(Applicant is requesting a continuance to the February 14, 2005 meeting.)
M/S Piziali/Cook and unanimous to continue this item to the Planning Board of February
14, 2005.
AYES - 5 (Mariani, McNamara absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0
Planning Board Minutes
Page 2
January 24, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-24.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-24,3,"7-B.
DR04-0111/V04-0020, 836 Oak Street, Applicant: Richard Vaterlaus for
Michael Rich (AT). The proposal is a request for Major Design Review to
legalize the unauthorized raising of a single-family residence one foot to create
habitable space in the basement. The building height was increased from
approximately 23'-0"" to 24'-0"", where 35'-0"" is the maximum permitted height.
The construction also requires a variance to AMC Subsection 30-5.7(e) to allow a
rear staircase to extend 7'-6"" into the required rear yard, where the maximum
encroachment permitted is 6'-0"". The project site is located within an R-4,
Neighborhood Residential District.
M/S Piziali/Cook and unanimous to adopt Planning Board Resolution PB-05-04 to
approve a request for Major Design Review to legalize the unauthorized raising of a
single-family residence one foot to create habitable space in the basement. The building
height was increased from approximately 23'-0"" to 24'-0"", where 35'-0"" is the maximum
permitted height. The construction also requires a variance to AMC Subsection 30-5.7(e)
to allow a rear staircase to extend 7'-6"" into the required rear yard, where the maximum
encroachment permitted is 6'-0"".
AYES - 5 (Mariani, McNamara absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0
Planning Board Minutes
Page 3
January 24, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-24.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-24,4,"7-C. UP01-0022/DR01-0089: American Tower Corporation. Washington Park,
740 Central Avenue (DV). Renewal of expired Use Permit and Major Design
Review for 90 foot tall painted metal monopole communications tower in place of
an existing 47 foot tall light pole along the upper baseball diamond left field fence
at Washington Park. Associated ground equipment would be placed in a building
of up to 825 square feet with screen-fenced ground equipment. A Use Permit is
required by AMC Sections 30-4.1(c)(1) and (2) for any structure and above
ground utility installation in the O Open Space Zoning District. (Applicant is
requesting a continuance to the February 14, 2005 meeting.)
M/S Piziali/Cook and unanimous to continue this item to the Planning Board of February
14, 2005.
AYES - 5 (Mariani, McNamara absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0
Planning Board Minutes
Page 4
January 24, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-24.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-24,5,"8.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:
8-A.
PD04-0004/DR04-0113, 433 Buena Vista Avenue, Applicant: Alameda
Multifamily Ventures, LLC (AT). The applicant requests a second Study
Session before the Planning Board to review a proposal for the construction of a
two-story 6,000 square foot community building, four 16-car garages, façade
changes to existing apartment buildings, and other improvements at the Harbor
Island Apartments site. The site is located at 433 Buena Vista Avenue, within an
R-4 PD, Neighborhood Residential Planned Development District.
Mr. Tai summarized the staff report.
Mr. Chris Auxier, project manager, Alameda Multifamily Ventures, distributed additional
information that was not included in the first set of drawings. He noted that they had tried
to be responsive to the feedback received by the Board and the public.
Mr. Shaun Alexander, Axis Architecture, project architect, displayed a PowerPoint
presentation that detailed the project overview, improvement of the property's physical
appearance, the pedestrian experience, residential amenities, public safeties, on-site
parking, and transparency with the community. He noted that the existing site limitations
were considerable, and that while was not much room to expand the parking facilities,
they could create a more pleasant environment around the buildings for the residents. He
noted that the interior common hallways, bathrooms and kitchens would be redone, and
that the landscaping would be upgraded and transformed. The carports would be
eliminated except for certain sections along the East of the property, and the parking
would be restriped to meet current standards. A new clubhouse, and four garage buildings
would be constructed; trash enclosures would be upgraded.
Mr. Alexander noted that new lower fences would be installed around the ground floor
patios to provide greater transparency. Because of the proximity to the adjacent street,
some units would feature a more solid fence look. Additional landscaping would buffer
all the buildings, and a substantial number of the trees would be added. A large amount of
concrete would be removed in the walkways and plaza space that the applicants
considered to be unnecessary. Alternative designs addressing the height and style of the
tower element were presented; the size of the tower would be reduced, and the
architecture would be simplified. They considered the gable form to be most consistent
with Alameda's existing architecture features and Craftsman detail in town; however, a
hip roof design was also presented to address the Mediterranean style elements in
Alameda. Another roof form would be added to the tower to the west, previously shown
to the Board as a flat roof.
Mr. Alexander displayed the center part of the site, which they considered to be very
important to the project. A tot lot was proposed directly north of the clubhouse, and a
child's play area would be placed to the south of the clubhouse. A group picnic area
would be placed at the east side of the pool, with a play lawn and volleyball court
adjacent to that. Each quadrant of the property would have its own minipark, off the main
Planning Board Minutes
Page 5
January 24, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-24.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-24,6,"spine of activity. The resident activities would take place on the lower floor of the
clubhouse for the tenants' convenience. The plans were changed to eliminate the office
area, and to include a coffee area. The 2nd level patio of the community center was
expanded after one set of stairs was eliminated and a new terrace is proposed as
a
transition spaces between the community center and swimming pool. He noted that the
goal of the landscape plan was to create a greener environment on the site, to beautify the
property with increased foliage, and to reduce concrete paving between the buildings.
Mr. Alexander noted that the carports would be removed, as well as some of the
perimeter fencing to open up the property. He noted that the fence along Appezzato
Parkway would be made more pleasant, with increased connections to the neighborhood.
Additional parking spaces, trees and security lighting would be placed in the parking lots.
He noted that they worked with Carol Beaver and Michael Smiley to better understand
the West Alameda Neighborhood Improvement Plan; they proposed to include two gates
along the Appezzato Parkway fence to allow access to the future greenbelt and other parts
of the community. He described the new location for the trash enclosure, which would
not block other activities on the site and would entail minimal disturbance to the
residents. He noted that approximately half of the carports on the east side would be
eliminated. The vaulted roofs on the remaining carports would be removed, which would
be replaced by a trellis element for a softer look and a smaller visual impact on the
adjacent neighborhood. He noted that the main feature of Quadrant 3 was the connection
to the adjacent neighborhood; the neighborhood plan called for a connection to
Woodstock Park. For that to occur, the City would need to gain control of 25 feet of the
existing Chipman Middle School property.
Mr. Alexander noted that the applicant was concerned about the impact of the Poggi
Street/Buena Vista Ave. curb bulb out proposed in the West Alameda Neighborhood
Improvement Plan on the traffic flow from the site, and would like the City to take that
into account as the Plan is studied. He noted that the applicant's goal was to bring new
life to an older apartment complex, provide a more attractive design and added amenities
for the residents, to increase parking, to upgrade security systems, and to improve site
safety for the residents and the City. The project would be more pedestrian-friendly with
reduced perimeter fencing, more residential design character, increased landscaping, and
more responsive to the West Alameda Neighborhood Plan.
The public hearing was opened.
There were no speakers.
The public hearing was closed for Board discussion.
Ms. Carol Beaver, Community Development Manager, recalled the meeting with Sean
Alexander and Michael Smiley of BMS Design to discuss the proposed changes to the
renovation plan. She was pleased with their willingness to consider the suggested
changes. Because the Neighborhood Plan was a conceptual plan, she understood there
would be opportunities to discuss specific site plan changes.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 6
January 24, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-24.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-24,7,"President Cunningham believed that was a counterintuitive practice in a community
where pedestrian access was encouraged.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 7
January 24, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-24.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-24,8,"In response to an inquiry by Mr. Lynch regarding an alternative to this practice, Mr.
Alexander replied that trash enclosures throughout the property would be the alternative.
Mr. Lynch believed that conformity with City Code should be the overriding factor,
followed by design.
In response to Vice President Cook's question regarding parking, Mr. Tai confirmed that
the site was underparked according to Code. Current parking standards require two
parking spaces per dwelling unit, and this property would need 1230 spaces, where
approximately 670 currently exist. The applicants proposed to increase the number of
parking spaces to approximately 699 spaces by restriping the lots and by using compact
spaces.
Ms. Barbara Hawkins, Public Works Department, distributed a photo of a trash
compactor and the access route. She noted that the new NEPDS requirements called for a
roof on the trash compactor to accommodate the truck, which would be two stories. The
compactor must be operated with a key, which would be a safety issue. The third issue
with the compactor is that it did not comply with the City recycling standards. City staff
met with ACI to determine the best solution to the trash issue. ACI had performed a
study, finding that people usually took their trash out when they went to their cars, and
that placing trash containers near the parking areas was the best practice. In addition, the
trash enclosures must be high enough to keep children from playing on them.
With respect to circulation, Ms. Kohlstrand believed that the constraints of the existing
site must be recognized, and that the applicant was going in the right direction by
removing the concrete. She was encouraged to see the connections to Appezzato
Parkway. In response to her question regarding the nature of the breaks in the wall, Chris
Auxier replied that they would be primarily used by the residents. A discussion of the
physical attributes of the fence and the gates ensued.
In response to Ms. Kohlstrand's question regarding pedestrian access at Fifth Street and
Buena Vista, Mr. Auxier replied that was an area where they did not have the intention to
create a public path through the property; it was intended for use by residents.
Vice President Cook noted that there was a broad visual corridor at Fifth Street and
Buena Vista, especially through the pool area. She was concerned that the proposed
garages would impair those visual sightlines.
President Cunningham suggested that the location of the gable ends of the proposed
garages may be changed to help direct sightlines in a particular direction.
Architectural Design Comments
President Cunningham invited comment on the three design solutions for the stair tower.
He concurred with Mr. Alexander that Option 1 would be the preferred scheme.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 8
January 24, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-24.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-24,9,"Mr. Alexander noted that they could reduce the scale of the entry somewhat, and would
be concerned about making it too short, when juxtaposed against the taller buildings.
Community Center Comments
In response to Mr. Piziali's question regarding the rest rooms, Mr. Alexander replied that
there were two bathrooms to serve the pool, another two on the ground floor, and another
two on the second floor.
President Cunningham noted that a speaker slip was received, and requested a vote to
reopen the public hearing.
M/S Lynch/Piziali to reopen the public hearing.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 9
January 24, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-24.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-24,10,"AYES - 5 (McNamara, Mariani absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0
Mr. Reginald James noted that he was a former resident of Harbor Island, and noted that
the location for the trash enclosure at Fifth and Appezzato Parkway would have to be
moved to accommodate the pathway through Fifth. He believed the northeast corner
would be a good place for the trash enclosure. He did not know whether the concept of
valet trash pickup would be workable. He believed that a recycling location would be a
positive feature on the site. He supported a reduced amount of fencing. He did not
support a high sound wall on Appezzato Parkway, and was not sure how a low wall
would work. He expressed concern about the proposed private walkway. He suggested
placing a walkway between Building 11 (rental office) and Building 12, which already
had a visual connection from Woodstock on Brush.
The public hearing was closed for Board discussion.
In response to an inquiry by Vice President Cook, Mr. Alexander confirmed that the
ground floor restrooms would be available to residents. He added that the Code required
outdoor showers for by pool users, and they intended to provide that kind of shower.
Site Amenities
President Cunningham complimented the addition of amenities as requested by the Board
at the last meeting.
Mr. Alexander noted that the inclusion of amenities in each quadrant was at the
suggestion of Reggie James, which he supported.
In response to an inquiry by President Cunningham, Mr. Tai confirmed that as part of the
conditions of approval, a landscape maintenance agreement would be required. The
agreement would specifically require the applicants to maintain the landscaping; any
neglect would enable the City to improve the landscaping at the applicants' cost.
Mr. Piziali would like to see a condition that all the construction trucks would stay off
Buena Vista and Fifth Street (because of Longfellow School).
Mr. Tai noted that if the applicants needed a construction trailer, its approval would be
subject to a use permit. The operation and functions of the construction trailer would be
reviewed at that time.
President Cunningham noted that the Board would like an indication of the phasing as
well.
In response to an inquiry by President Cunningham regarding satellite dishes, Mr.
Alexander noted that FCC requirements call for the building owner to place a satellite
dish on the roof for resident accessibility, or that the residents must be allowed to place
dishes on their balconies. They are currently working with a cable consultant (CSI) to
Planning Board Minutes
Page 10
January 24, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-24.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-24,11,"negotiate contracts for them, and he added that their current contract was particular
difficult.
Miscellaneous Comments
Mr. Lynch complimented Axis Architecture on its design work, and inquired whether
they would have more design flexibility if they started from a clean site. Mr. Auxier
confirmed that would be the case, but that it was prohibited by Measure A.
Vice President Cook noted that this site was an important part in creating a community.
for the 21st century, and hoped that dialogue about sensible planning can continue in a
constructive way.
Mr. Auxier introduced Michael Lee, the on-site construction and project manager, and
noted that he would be based locally.
Mr. Lee noted that the Board's comments about density were well-taken, and noted that
recent projects he worked on have incorporated the higher density into the designs. He
noted that they have used four-story parking garages surrounded by four-story residential
buildings, as well as three-story buildings surrounding a courtyard. He noted that it was
possible to keep the parking garages out of sight, and that there was no need for off-street
parking. In addition, retail and commercial space could be incorporated as well.
Mr. Lynch believed the remodel should be just as beautiful as the new residences across
the street, and that high-quality design elements were very important in getting the
project right the first time.
Mr. Lee noted that because the foundations and frames were already in place, this project
would be a relatively simple one to manage.
The Board comments were noted. No action was taken. A public hearing will be
scheduled for a future agenda.
President Cunningham called for a ten-minute recess.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 11
January 24, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-24.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-24,12,"8-B.
Work/Live Regulations (JA). Review and consider possible modifications of
Section 30-15 of the Alameda Municipal Code regulating Work Live Studios.
(Continued from the meeting of January 10, 2005.)
Ms. Altschuler summarized the staff report.
The public hearing was opened.
Mr. Mark Irons, 835 Oak, noted that he lived in a work/live space in Oakland for 10
years, which he enjoyed very much. He expressed concern about placing this complex
issue on the ballot because of possible misunderstanding of the deeper issues. He noted
that any legal issues may delay or indefinitely postpone any work/live spaces. He
believed the current ordinance fell short of its potential, and would like to see it upgraded
to be more accommodating. He hoped the Board would be slow and methodical in
considering the work/live uses.
Mr. Richard Rutter, 2205 Clinton Avenue, spoke in support of work/live uses with
qualifications, and noted that he had been an architect for over 25 years. He noted that
artists and architects were usually the first occupants of a redeveloped neighborhood,
which eventually became upgraded for the use of other white-collar professionals. He
believed that flexibility in planning the larger spaces along the Northern Waterfront and
Alameda Point was appropriate for the community in the long run. He suggested that
Measure A be modified to accommodate a work/live situation within appropriate zones.
The public hearing was closed for Board discussion.
Mr. Lynch noted that he supported Measure A, and inquired how Measure A and
work/live lofts were in conflict. Ms. Altschuler replied that the conflict did not arise so
much from the legal standing, because work/live studios were defined by both the State
and local ordinances as industrial uses, as opposed to residential uses. She did not believe
there was a conflict from a legal standpoint, although she believed the conflict would
arise from the perception that people still live in those spaces. She added that was the
basis for the argument against the uses as a Measure A conflict.
Mr. Lynch recalled the opposition to the demolition of Victorians in favor of multifamily
housing as being a basis for Measure A. He saw work/live as a reuse of existing
structures because the economics of a formerly light industrial/commercial space had
changed. He did not believe there was a conflict between work/live uses and Measure A.
Ms. Altschuler noted that there would be considerable resistance to any alteration to
Measure A, and that its proponents would not want to risk a slippery slope.
Mr. Lynch suggested that the residential VS. industrial nature of work/live units be
brought directly to a judge to define it once and for all.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 12
January 24, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-24.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-24,13,"Ms. Harryman noted that the current lawsuit was not the first time the City had been sued
on work/live and how it applied to Measure A. She could not communicate the exact
status of the litigation, and noted that it would probably not be the last lawsuit. She
believed that the existence of the two lawsuits (Edward Murphy and Ms. [Kowicki])
would probably bring the issue before a judge. She believed that Ms. [Kowicki] could
build, because she had the approval of the City, but because there was pending litigation,
it would be at her own risk. She did not believe Mr. Murphy had requested a retraining
order, and believed the judge may be able to overturn the City's approval. She noted that
Mr. Murphy had sued the City on this issue before, and did was not sure whether there
had been a clear ruling one way or the other. She noted that previous cases had either
been dismissed, or the parties had come to an agreement.
President Cunningham inquired what the benefit would be of bringing the work/live issue
to the voters if there was existing case law that would prove the two ordinances were
working against each other.
Ms. Harryman noted that there were pros and cons to bringing an issue to the people
versus before a judge.
Mr. Lynch believed that if a judge invalidated an ordinance, they would provide some
instruction regarding the conflicts contained in the ordinance so that it may be rewritten.
Ms. Harryman noted that judges often rule on other grounds, such as procedural grounds
or standing.
Mr. Piziali believed the ordinance should be left as is, and it may be brought up on a
ballot initiative. He was not interested in changing it at this time.
Ms. Kohlstrand believed the Board was being asked to debate the validity of the
work/live ordinance, when the larger question was Measure A. She was unsure whether
people were ready to engage in debate on Measure A yet.
Ms. Altschuler noted that the ordinance limits a geographic area, addresses zoning within
that area, and then is limited to existing buildings, particularly historic buildings.
Mr. Piziali noted that he would not want to see work/live as new construction; he
supported work/live as adaptive reuse, which was the current basis of the ordinance.
Mr. Lynch believed the voters of Alameda will recognize the common-sense purpose of
the ordinance.
Ms. Altschuler believed that the Board's consensus was that the current ordinance was
appropriate. She inquired whether the Board would be interested in addressing the
geographic limitation.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 13
January 24, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-24.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-24,14,"President Cunningham noted that he would like to see work/live branch out to Alameda
Point and Park Street. However, he did not want such a step to jeopardize the existence of
the ordinance.
Mr. Piziali believed the residents of Alameda would be able to see that work/live uses
were controlled, attractive and appropriate.
Vice President Cook believed this ordinance was a baby step toward a discussion of the
broader implications of Measure A. She believed this ordinance brought up very
important issues for historic preservation and adaptive reuse at the Base. She did not want
to see the work/live ordinance put at risk by addressing more complex and overarching
issues too soon.
Vice President Cook noted that Alameda's citizens had stopped public processes before
when it became apparent that it would be not be beneficial. She believed that Alamedans
would exercise the same common sense in this case.
President Cunningham noted that an additional speaker slip had been received.
M/S Lynch/Cook to reopen the public hearing.
AYES - 5 (Mariani, McNamara absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0
The public hearing was reopened.
Mr. Mark Irons, 835 Oak, noted that he was pleased by the Board's discussion, although
he did not disagree that work/live could be successfully extended throughout Alameda
Point. He understood the delicacy of this issue.
The public hearing was closed.
No action was taken.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 14
January 24, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-24.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-24,15,"9.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None.
10.
BOARD COMMUNICATION:
a.
Oral Status Report regarding the Alameda Point Advisory Committee APAC.
(Vice President Cook).
Vice President Cook advised that the next meeting would be hosted by the Planning
Board in Council Chambers, so that the Board may be brought up to speed and to televise
the meeting. The City Council has voted to disband the APAC at the end of the
community meeting, and had asked the APAC to pass on the information gathered over
its lifetime to the appropriate boards. She suggested that a series of meetings be held to
pass that information on, on a topic-by-topic basis. She suggested that the first meeting be
held before the first community hearing to discuss regulatory issues, in order to bring the
Board up to speed on that information.
Vice President Cook noted that there had been considerable discussion at the first
community meeting about re-examining Measure A as it relates to Alameda Point. She
noted that there was some communication at the second meeting, suggesting that the staff
should not consider a non-Measure A alternative. She noted that a possible scenario at the
Base was being considered that would include some discussion or possible changes to
Measure A for the Base. She noted that was a very controversial issue.
Mr. Cormack advised that Andrew Thomas would make that presentation to the Board,
either on February 14th or 28th, 2005; the 14th was preferable.
b. Oral Status Report regarding Northern Waterfront Specific Plan (Vice
President Cook).
Vice President Cook advised that there had been no further meetings since her last report.
c. Oral Status Report regarding the Golf Course Committee (Board Member
Piziali).
Board Member Piziali advised that he had confirmed the continuing existence of the
Committee, although the meetings were on hold at this time, possibly due to a funding
issue.
d. Oral Status Report regarding the Golf Course Committee (Board Member
Mariani).
Board Member Mariani was not in attendance to present this report.
Ms. Kohlstrand inquired whether it would be possible to receive the Board packets earlier
than the Friday before the meeting. Mr. Cormack noted that the packet had been delayed
to receive late information on Harbor Island.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 15
January 24, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-24.pdf
PlanningBoard,2005-01-24,16,"President Cunningham recalled that there had been a move to post the packet on the website.
Mr. Lynch noted that staff transition had been discussed during the previous meeting, and
requested that it be agendized for a future meeting, so that the City Manager be able to take
part in the discussion. He believed that a discussion within the next month would be most
beneficial.
11.
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS:
Ms. Altschuler noted that the continued staffing levels affected the ability to distribute an
email packet, and that they were attempting to maintain the same work product with a smaller
staff. She noted that statutory requirements such as noticing were the first priority of the staff.
Ms. Altschuler advised that the support staff requested that she discuss the issue of Roberts
Rules of Order as they related to meeting minutes. She noted that the Planning Board minutes
were considerably more detailed than what is required, and added that the Council minutes
were shorter and did not provide as much information. In order to provide additional time for
support staff to perform other duties, she requested the Board's input regarding more limited
meeting minutes. She noted that the meeting was recorded on audio and videotape, and added
that lengthy minutes must be reviewed and amended by staff. In addition, there was a
tremendous amount of paper used in the distribution of the minutes.
President Cunningham believed that for study sessions, that a list of bullet points would be
sufficient. Routine items would still be well-served by briefer minutes.
Ms. Altschuler noted that more important or controversial items would still need detail
appropriate to their complexity.
Ms. Kohlstrand supported that suggestion.
Ms. Altschuler noted that if the condensed minutes were not useful, the extended minutes
could be reinstated.
In response to an inquiry by Mr. Lynch, Ms. Altschuler confirmed that Building Inspectors
generally dropped the packets off while on their rounds in the field.
12.
ADJOURNMENT:
10:27 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jane
Jetry Cormack, Interim Secretary
City Planning Department
These minutes were approved at the February 14, 2005, Planning Board meeting. This
meeting was audio and video taped.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 16
January 24, 2005",PlanningBoard/2005-01-24.pdf
SocialServiceHumanRelationsBoard,2005-01-27,1,"Social Service Human Relations Board
Minute of the Regular Meeting Thursday, January 27, 2005
CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL - President Franz called the meeting to order at 7:40pm.
Present were Vice President Chen, Members Wasko, Flores-Witte, Bonta, Hollinger Jackson.
Staff were Beaver and Brown.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - The December 8, 2004, special meeting minutes were approved.
M/S Flores-Witte, Bonta, and unanimous with Hollinger Jackson abstaining.
The January 6, 2005 Special Meeting minutes were approved. M/S Bonta, Flores-Witte and
unanimous with President Franz abstaining.
An introduction by Member Hollinger Jackson. She gave a brief description of her background
and work experience.
CITY COUNCIL REQUEST TO REVIEW SENTINEL FAIR HOUSING SURVEY AND
REPORT - Executive Director of Sentinel Fair Housing (SFH) Mona Breed, provided an
overview of her agency, and gave a presentation regarding the testing process, including training,
use of forms, questionnaires, etc. Sentinel Fair Housing is a private Fair Housing agency that
was started 20 years ago by the Urban League and civil rights leaders. Breed has been the
Director for the past 10 years. Sentinel was selected to monitor Denny's Restaurants under
consent decrees of the U.S. Court, and was selected by the Department of Housing and Urban
Development to train testers for a national discrimination study by the Urban Institute. Breed
stated that the standards and competencies of Sentinel are uncontested, and described the basic
characteristics of discrimination testing:
Testers: Testers are private citizens and members of various protected classes (race, religion,
sexual orientation, disabled, etc.) Testers come from a variety of places, for example, Sentinel
just trained 40 University of San Francisco law students as testers. Applicants are screened prior
to training, including a criminal background check and credit check; then Ms. Breed personally
reviews all applicants. Testers must be able to be recognized as the protected class they will
represent in the test, e.g. if testing for discrimination against people with disabilities, the tester
must have a visible disability. Testers must go through Sentinel's HUD-approved training
process prior to acceptance. Testers are never told what issue they are testing and the only time
they would ever learn more about a test case is if they are required to testify pursuant to a fair
housing lawsuit. Testers are paid a stipend of $35 per test, which usually takes from 1-1/2 to 3-
1/2 hours per test.
The Testing Process: When Sentinel receives a discrimination complaint, paired testers are sent
to find or disprove a discriminatory housing practice. Two people who are as similar as possible
except for the single variable being tested are sent out with various specific instructions
regarding their housing application. In response to a question, Breed indicated that testing is not
entrapment and that testing is deemed legal by the courts, indeed it is one of the only ways that
discrimination testing can be fairly done. She noted also that more often than not they find no
discrimination has occurred in reported incidents. Sentinel had participated in a statewide study
of discrimination in 2000-01 and found some instances of differential treatment in Alameda.
F:SSHRB\AGENDA & MINUTES\2005",SocialServiceHumanRelationsBoard/2005-01-27.pdf