body,date,page,text,path
GolfCommission,2005-11-16,1,"ALAMEDA GOLF COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MEETING
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
1.
CALL TO ORDER
Secretary Betsy Gammell 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: Secretary Betsy Gammell,
Commissioner Ray Gaul, Commissioner Jane Sullwold and Commissioner
Bob Wood. Absent: Chair Sandré Swanson, Vice Chair Tony Santare and
Commissioner Bill Schmitz. Also present were General Manager Dana
Banke and Head Golf Professional Matt Plumlee.
1-B
Approval of Minutes - Regular Meeting of October 19, 2005
The following correction was made:
Item 5-B , , line 8-2006 should be 2004.
The Commission approved the minutes unanimously with the
aforementioned correction.
1-C
Adoption of Agenda
The following correction was made:
The incorrect date of October 19, 2005 was on the Agenda.
The Commission approved the agenda unanimously with the
aforementioned correction.
2.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
3.
AGENDA ITEMS:
3-A
Report on Split Tees Trial Period.
The General Manager reported that the split tee trial dates were held on
Saturday, November 5 and November 12, 2005. On November 5 the
General Manager and Head Golf Professional and Marshals were on hand
to monitor the tees for the trial period. It was apparent that additional Pro
Shop staff and Marshals are needed have the program run smoothly. The
goal of 32 groups for each wave of split times was not reached with only
Page 1 of 4",GolfCommission/2005-11-16.pdf
GolfCommission,2005-11-16,2,"23 groups in the first wave and 21 in the second wave. There were holes
in the tee times, which made it difficult to keep the pace of play going
although many groups finished in less than four hours. Most groups were
happy with the pace of play but a few felt rushed. Also noted there were
no rounds after 3:00 pm. To monitor the groups and the pace of play more
coordination is necessary and six Marshals are needed on the course. In
summary there was no increase in the number of rounds, which in turn
means no increase in revenue. The program is also very labor intensive
for the Pro Shop and the Marshals. The General Manager stated that it is
probably better to try the split tees in the spring. The suggestion was
made to have the split tees on the Earl Fry Course due to the demand for
the peak times on that course. The General Manager spoke with
customers about the program and it was suggested to alternate between the
two courses. The important marketing point is the four-hour round of
golf. Customers not interested in playing that fast can play on the other
course with straight tee times.
4.
ORAL REPORTS
4-A
Golf Shop and Driving Range activities report by Head Golf Professional
Matt Plumlee.
The Head Golf Professional reported that the new flags have been placed
on the practice greens in the clubhouse area and the new practice green is
open at the Driving Range. The Head Golf Professional also mentioned
that two new employees have been hired in the Pro Shop. They are Julio
Leon and Timothy Harris, both of whom have prior golf course
experience.
4-B
General Manager Dana Banke's report highlighting maintenance and
operational activities for the month at the Golf Complex.
The General Manager reported that the maintenance crew is currently
improving the drainage on the #5, #6, #8, #10 and #14 of the Earl Fry
Course. Also the green on #8 of the Mif Albright Course is being redone
as well as the green on #4 and the new tees on #1 and #4. The work
should be completed by spring. The aeration completed by Planet Air
recently was successful although a few spots have to be lightly aerated due
to some thatch growth. The Superintendent will be covering the broken
windows at the fire tower this week to help prevent water damage.
Economic Research Associates (ERA) will be conducting a complex fee
comparison report for the clubhouse project. The report will be looking at
the fees of local golf facilities to determine how the fees at the Chuck
Corica Golf Complex can be changed. Treadwell and Rollo came and
drilled the bores for the soil analysis for the clubhouse project and the
Page 2 of 4",GolfCommission/2005-11-16.pdf
GolfCommission,2005-11-16,3,"report should be completed soon. The negotiations and contract are
ongoing with Tom Geanekos of Jim's Coffee Shop and the item will be on
the December 6, 2006 regular City Council meeting for approval. Mr.
Geanekos has some exciting ideas for decorating the restaurant facility.
The City receives 8.5% of the gross revenue monthly and that amount will
be increased to 10% when the new clubhouse is built. The General
Manager also mentioned that he is working on a contract for new
maintenance equipment and it should be completed in early 2006.
4-D
Beautification Program by Mrs. Norma Arnerich.
Nothing to report.
5.
COMMISSIONERS REPORTS
5-A
Marketing and Promotions, Secretary Gammell.
Nothing to report.
5-B
Golf Complex Financial Report, Commissioner Gaul
The revenue for golf on all three courses for October 2005 versus October
2004 was up less than 1% and rounds of golf were up 4%. The fiscal year
to date revenue for golf was down 7% and rounds were down 7%. The
Mif Albright Course revenue was down 14% from last year and down
28% for the fiscal year. All other concessions excluding golf were up 4%
for the month and down 7% for the fiscal year. Total revenue for the Golf
Complex was up 2% for the month of October 2005 versus October 2004
and down 7% for the fiscal year 2005/2006. The expenditures for the
month were higher than last year in part due to the increase in water bills
due to the lack of rain and the three payroll periods.
5-C
Men's and Senior Club Liaison, Vice Chair Santare.
Nothing to report.
5-D
New Clubhouse Project, Commissioner Schmitz.
Nothing to report.
5-E
Maintenance, Buildings, Security, Albright Course and Driving Range,
Commissioner Sullwold.
Commissioner Sullwold reported that last Thursday on the Ladies play
date a member of the Women's Golf Club was in the parking lot putting
her golf clubs in her car and left her purse unattended for a moment and it
Page 3 of 4",GolfCommission/2005-11-16.pdf
GolfCommission,2005-11-16,4,"was stolen. Also mentioned was the need to repair the garbage can behind
the #7 hole on the Jack Clark Course. The suggestion was made to put
pampas grass in the area between #15 and #16 of the Jack Clark Course.
The grass would be aesthetically pleasing and would act as a good border.
5-F
City Council and Government Liaison, Chair Swanson.
Nothing to report.
5-G
Front Entrance Beautification Project, Commissioner Wood.
Commissioner Wood stated that he would meet the Superintendent at the
Fire Tower this week.
5-H
Golf Complex Restaurant Report, Legends & Heroes.
Nothing to report.
6.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON AGENDA (Public Comment)
Nothing to report.
7.
OLD BUSINESS
Nothing to report.
8.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Included in the Commission packet was a memorandum to the Finance
Department showing the surcharge payment for October 2005 of $14,116.
The year-to-date total to the General Fund is $63,658 for the fiscal year
2005/2006.
9.
ANNOUNCEMENTS/ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:37 p.m.
The agenda for the meeting was posted 72 hours in advance in accordance with the
Brown Act.
Page 4 of 4",GolfCommission/2005-11-16.pdf
TransportationCommission,2005-11-16,1,"TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES
NOVEMBER 16, 2005
Chair Knox White called the Transportation Commission to order at 7:40 P.M.
1.
ROLL CALL - Roll was called and the following recorded:
Members Present:
John Knox White
Robb Ratto (left at 8:20 PM)
Michael Krueger
Jeff Knoth
Robert McFarland
Eric Schatmeier
Absent:
Pattianne Parker
Staff Present:
Barbara Hawkins, City Engineer
Barry Bergman, Program Specialist II, Public Works
2.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chair Knox White made the correction on the October minutes that Commissioner McFarland
was not absent but late.
Commissioner Schatmeier requested a minor edit on page 8. He noted that it should say ""40%
farebox recovery ratio,"" not ""40% month recovery ratio"".
Commissioner Ratto moved for approval of the October meeting minutes. Commissioner
Schatmeier seconded the motion. Motion carried by a unanimous vote - 5 (Commissioner
Krueger abstained).
4.
COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS
Commissioner Krueger provided an update on the activities of the Pedestrian Plan
Subcommittee. The Pedestrian Plan public workshop was held on November 9th, with about 15
members of the public in attendance. The discussion was based on questions presented by the
subcommittee to help guide the development of policies for the Pedestrian Plan. Topics included
positive and negative characteristics what people of walking environments in Alameda, as well
as tradeoffs that may be required to balance the needs of pedestrians and other modes of traffic.
Commissioner Krueger stated that the next step will be compiling the input into a form that can
be used to develop the draft policies for the Plan. He noted that the subcommittee will solicit",TransportationCommission/2005-11-16.pdf
TransportationCommission,2005-11-16,2,"input from representatives of other boards and commissions at the Pedestrian Plan Task Force
meeting in early December.
Chair Knox White asked for the handout on the proposed Commission meeting dates for 2006 to
be modified to indicate that the November and December meeting dates not be listed as
""alternate"" dates, and that the meetings be held on the third Wednesday of the month for both
November and December to avoid conflicts with holidays. Since there were no objections from
the Commissioners, Chair Knox White asked that the dates for both meetings be finalized.
Commissioner Krueger noted that he has some questions about the process on providing red curb
at bus stops. He presented Staff Hawkins with a list of locations that do not currently have
sufficient red curb and requested an update on this process.
5.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - Non-Agenized Items
None
6.
OLD BUSINESS
6A. Revised Scope for Shuttle Analysis
Staff Bergman stated that at the October meeting discussed a proposed work scope for
a
consultant to review potential technologies for use in a future shuttle service. The Commission
recommended that a specific project be identified before the technologies be analyzed. Staff has
revised the draft work scope to address the concerns and is bringing it back to the Commission
for comment.
Commissioner Schatmeier noted that the work scope mentions coordination with the ferry and
BART schedules, but AC Transit should be included as well. He also asked that an analysis of
the fare structure be included in the scope.
Staff Bergman responded that AC Transit would be included in the study, but this was
inadvertently left out of the draft.
Commissioner McFarland wanted to know what level of work is being conducted in terms of
estimating ridership.
Staff Bergman said a technical analysis would not be possible given the size of the project. The
consultant would identify key employers and other stakeholders to help develop some ridership
estimates.
Commissioner Krueger asked if this is an investigative study to access the feasibility of a shuttle
or if a decision has already been made to begin a shuttle program.
Staff Bergman stated that nothing specific has been planned up to this point.",TransportationCommission/2005-11-16.pdf
TransportationCommission,2005-11-16,3,"Commissioner Krueger asked if the study would look at modifying existing bus routes if they
could serve the same purpose as a shuttle.
Staff Bergman indicated that the work scope focused on a shuttle service, but that Alameda staff
and AC Transit staff have discussed this project and would continue to communicate regarding
overlaps in service and ways in which the services might be coordinated.
Commissioner Ratto asked if the shuttle program would focus on service to existing areas.
Staff Bergman answered that the shuttle would be designed to connect BART and downtown
Oakland to Alameda.
Chair Knox White said the scope should define the project as addressing the west end. He also
expressed his concern that there is still not an identified goal, and stated that the consultant
would need to begin with a goal to determine the effectiveness of the proposed program. In
addition, he asked that the scope be modified to include an assessment of the effectiveness of a
limited number of stops, serving primarily longer trips, versus providing more stops and
potentially serving more localized transit use.
Commissioner Krueger moved that the Commission support the work scope prepared by staff,
with the following modifications: 1) primary and secondary objectives need to be clarified, 2)
the project is limited to the west end, 3) the service could include modification of existing
routes that may travel outside of Alameda, 4) there should be consideration of bus frequency in
addition to routes and hours of operation, and 5) analyze the benefits for local versus more
limited stops.
Commissioner Schatmeier seconded motion. Motion carried by a unanimous vote - 6.
7.
NEW BUSINESS
7A.
Bus Shelter Survey
Staff Bergman noted that the draft survey was brought to the Commission on Disability Issues
and that they submitted comments. They expressed concern about the canopy shelters because it
has posts but no walls, which can make it difficult for a visually impaired person to navigate the
sidewalk.
Commissioner Schatmeier asked how the survey would be conducted.
Staff Bergman said would get input from riders, people who live adjacent to the bus stops, and
the group Alamedans for Responsible Transit Shelters (ARTS), which funded some of the
shelters. He stated that the survey would also be posted on the city web site to receive comment
from the larger community. For riders the surveys would have to be distributed and collected at
the shelters.",TransportationCommission/2005-11-16.pdf
TransportationCommission,2005-11-16,4,"Chair Knox White asked that staff contact AC Transit and have them email Alameda riders with
a
link to the survey.
Commissioner Schatmeier mentioned that people who not normally use the bus stop would have
to make a special trip in order to get their opinion of it. Important to survey people
Staff Bergman mentioned that under number 2 we could add in none of the above or other as
an
option for none of the above so that we can tell which people are filling them out.
Commissioner Krueger suggested that rather than listing all of the shelters that they be grouped
by the shelter design, so respondents could comment on a type of shelter. The questions about
the shelters could be asked about each shelter type, instead of each specific location,a nd
respondents could indicate how often they use each shelter type.
Commissioner McFarland asked how the survey would evaluate protection from the weather
when they were just installed in April of this year. He also asked how staff would know if the
shelters are adequate for people with disabilities.
Staff Bergman said that the plan is to distribute the survey in December, so respondents should
have some experience using the shelters in the rain. He also noted that based on feedback from
the Disabilities Commission, staff was planning to include a question about whether people have
a disability, and what type, to see if that perspective is reflected in the survey responses.
Commissioner Ratto asked if the survey could be delayed until the first week in January. He
noted that six new shelters on Park Street are about to be installed, and this would allow people
the opportunity to comment on them.
Staff Hawkins said that Public Works had made a commitment to the Planning Board to issue the
survey in October, but had been delaying it to get input on how effective the different shelters are
in the rainy season. She indicated that waiting until January should not be a problem.
Public Comment
Mr. Spangler supported delaying the survey until January. He suggested that the questions about
the color and style be separated from the usage of the shelter. He also recommended that the
survey enable people to better describe likes and dislikes, and to evaluate other amenities at the
stops, such as trash cans.
Close Public Comment
Chair Knox White recommended that questions be divided into ridership questions and
community questions, as this would help to separate the issues of how well the shelters meet the
needs of transit riders and the impacts that different shelter designs have on the neighborhood.
Commissioner Schatmeier stated that the survey should help with the decision about how many
more shelters would be purchased and how to pay for them.",TransportationCommission/2005-11-16.pdf
TransportationCommission,2005-11-16,5,"Chair Knox White stated that ARTS is interested in doing additional fundraising to purchase
more shelters.
Staff Hawkins said that six shelters from ARTS cost approximately $22,000 and maintenance has
been budgeted for $40,000 for the year. This includes replacing broken glass panes and
removing graffiti. A monitoring report looking at such issues will be presented to the Planning
Board.
Chair Knox White asked that the monitoring report be presented to the Transportation
Commission, since this would address the effectiveness of the shelters.
Staff Hawkins said that the Council has asked that the report be sent only to the Planning Board.
7B.
Transportation Master Plan (TMP) Consultant Work Activity
Staff Bergman said that on November 2nd the Circulation Task Force had their most recent
meeting. Suggested to bring a consultant in to review the draft materials and bring back to the
task force for review. Get input from the Commission on what should be in the work scope for
the consultant work.
Public Comment
Irene Dieter stated Oak Street has been identified as a primary bicycle route and the proposed
garage location is in direct conflict with this. She stated that in the 2002 Part Street Streetscape
and Town Center Project, in which Mr. Krueger and Mr. Ratto participated, Oak Street was not a
recommended traffic corridor, but instead proposed that Oak Street between Lincoln and Central
be redesigned as a pedestrian plaza with no curbs and limited traffic. She also state that a
parking garage was never recommended at the corner of Oak and Central. She urged the
Transportation Commission to write a letter to the Development Services Department stating that
this garage location is in conflict with the goals of the transportation plan.
Mr. Spangler distributed his recommended revisions to the previous draft of the Circulation Plan.
He stated that the Pedestrian Plan Workshop was very informative. Mr. Spangler suggested that
a key idea underlying the Circulation Plan should be that every other mode should enhance and
improve pedestrian transportation and safety, including disability access and connectivity. He
also expressed his support for Ms. Dieter's comments regarding the recommended uses for Oak
Street, and noted that several participants at the Pedestrian Plan workshop advocated for
pedestrian plazas.
Close Public Comment
Commission Krueger asked if the Circulation Subcommittee considered how the parking garage
would impact on the street classifications.",TransportationCommission/2005-11-16.pdf
TransportationCommission,2005-11-16,6,"Chair Knox White responded that one purpose of the classification is to help define street design.
He stated that the Circulation Subcommittee chose not to identify Oak as a collector or arterial,
which could encourage the expansion of lanes, and noted that the Circulation Plan includes no
volume limits for streets. He said that the classification of 8th Street poses a similar issue, and the
subcommittee chose to classify it as a collector to indicate that the street should not be
redesigned to encourage additional through traffic. He suggested that it may be appropriate to
use different terminology if that is causing confusion. He also noted that while it is not reflected
on the map, that the subcommittee recommends classifying Oak as a priority pedestrian street.
Commissioner Knoth asked for clarification on the pedestrian map.
Chair Knox White stated that the pedestrian zones were not identified as a way to indicate
pedestrian routes, but as a way to identify priority areas where funding should be targeted. He
emphasized that the map is only an initial draft, and that the Pedestrian Subcommittee should
hopefully use this as a starting point.
Commissioner Schatmeier stated that he hoped the role of the consultant is to evaluate the
Subcommittee's proposals from a technical standpoint and to look at the consequences of those
decisions, and not to question the intent of the Subcommittee.
Commissioner Knoth asked what staff's concerns are about the Subcommittee's
recommendations, and what staff would like to see the consultant do.
Staff Bergman said that staff's concerns were mostly related to some of the issues already
discussed, such as the classifications of Park Street and Webster Street as minor arterials, and 8th
Street, and that the definitions do not fit the standard definition of collector and local. He noted
that the consultant work scope has not yet been drafted, and that staff is looking for input from
the Commission.
Staff Hawkins stated that part of the problem was how the process was set up, that Subcommittee
and the task force would meet but other department would not have a chance to comment until
after it went through all the boards and commissions.
Chair Knox White disagreed, stating said that in the first part of the Circulation Plan, the draft
material was routed to staff for comment prior to being presented to the other boards and
commissions. What are the goals of the consultant.
Staff Hawkins said that the goals are to look at the work. Lots of it was based on the personal
experience and living in the city, whereas the consultant can draw upon on work they have done
in other areas. They can look at the concerns raised by the Subcommittee and staff and draw on
their experience resolving similar issues elsewhere.
7C.
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Call For Projects
Staff Hawkins referred to four handouts that had been distributed: 1) the calendar on how to
proceed with the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), 2) a list of the carry over projects, 3) a list",TransportationCommission/2005-11-16.pdf
TransportationCommission,2005-11-16,7,"of the unfunded projects, and 4) a sample CIP project priority ranking sheet. She noted that the
upcoming CIP will include only the one-time capital projects and the annual projects will be
removed. Staff Hawkins requested input on the unfunded projects and other improvements that
the Commission would support including in the CIP. She noted that projects would be evaluated
in December to determine if proposed projects rank high enough to move forward in the process.
Chair Knox White asked if there is a description of the projects.
Staff Hawkins said that if there are any questions about specific projects to contact her.
Commissioner Krueger asked what was included in the Bus Stop Accessibility Improvement
Phase II.
Staff Hawkins stated that December 16 is the deadline for input on the projects, and that there
will be three public meetings through the CIP process, one on Bay Farm Island, one on the East
End, and one on the West End.
Commissioner Krueger moved to continue this item on the December 14th meeting.
Commissioner Schatmeier seconded the motion. Motion carried by a unanimous vote - 5.
8.
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
Staff Hawkins stated that staff has been working on resolving the issue of the disputed bus stop
near Lum School. She said that Public Works staff spoke with the Alameda Police Department
about potentially working with the crossing guards at Lum School to not have the children cross
the street while a bus is stopped. However, staff has received a number of letters from residents
and the crossing guards at Lum School asking that the bus stop not be re-established. She said
that this will be brought to the Technical Transportation Team (TTT), and that the Commission
would be notified as to the date of that meeting.
Commissioner Krueger asked if there were any alternative locations for that bus stop.
Staff Hawkins said that staff did look at other sites, but there are a number of driveways in that
area, so it is hard to find an area that has the length needed for the bus stop. As a result, there
would be a potential loss of on-street parking if an alternative site is chosen.
Chair Knox White had talked with the mayor and requested to have a joint Transportation
Commission/City Council meeting for sometime before the end of January. He said that the
purpose would be to receive some feedback from the Council on their work to date and guidance
on future directions for the Commission.
Staff Bergman mentioned that Tuesday, December 13, the Cross Alameda Trail Steering
Committee will be holding a public workshop from 6-8:30 p.m. at the College of Alameda in the
library.
Meeting was adjourned at 9:00 PM.",TransportationCommission/2005-11-16.pdf