body,date,page,text,path
GolfCommission,2007-02-28,1,"ALAMEDA GOLF COMMISSION
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
1.
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Bob Wood called the special meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. in Room #391, Alameda
City Hall, 2263 Santa Clara Avenue.
1-A.
Roll Call
Roll call was taken and members present were: Vice Chair Ray Gaul, Commissioner Bill
Schmitz, Secretary Jane Sullwold and Chair Bob Wood. Absent: Commissioner Betsy
Gammell and Commissioner Sandré Swanson. Also present was Golf Services Manager
Matt Plumlee.
1-B
Approval of Minutes-Special Meetings of November 29, 2007 and February 11, 2007.
The Golf Commission elected to add to the agenda the approval of the minutes of the
Special Meetings of November 29, 2007 and February 11, 2007. The minutes of
November 29, 2007 were approved unanimously. The following changes were made to
the minutes of February 11, 2007:
2-A, line 7: change from ""award the RFP for the Operational Review."" to ""recommend
three candidates to the City Manager, and she will then choose the consultant.""
2-A, paragraph 2, line 6: change from ""Chair Wood made the motion to accept the
aforementioned fee changes"" to ""Secretary Sullwold made the motion and Commissioner
Gammell seconded to accept the aforementioned fee changes"".
Secretary Sullwold made the motion and Vice Chair Gaul seconded to approve the
minutes with the aforementioned changes. The Golf Commission approved unanimously.
2.
AGENDA ITEMS:
3-A
Report on Chuck Corica Golf Complex Master Planning and Conceptual Design of Clubhouse
Facility. (Action Item)
Chair Wood introduced Miriam Delagrange of the Development Services Department. Ms.
Delagrange referenced the Dahlin Group Master Plan, which the Golf Commission had not
received. The plan goes over what cost estimates Dahlin would provide and the cost of their
services. At a meeting on January 25, 2007 between Dahlin representatives, Doreen Soto and
Miriam Delagrange from Development Services Department and Dana Banke from the Chuck
Corica Golf Complex, Dahlin was given direction on some basic concepts to enable the project
to be completed in phases. The Dahlin report breaks the Master Site Plan into the following
phases. Phase A-New Bar/Grill/Banquet Facility (approximately 8,500 s.f.), Phase B1-New Pro
Shop Facility (approximately 8,000 s.f.), Phase B2-Exterior modifications to the existing Pro
Shop Facility (assumed as a potential option, it the existing pro shop building is to remain for
a
longer period of time after Phase A is completed), Phase B3-New Entry Canopy and Site
Chuck Corica Golf Complex
Page 1
2/28/07
Golf Commission Minutes",GolfCommission/2007-02-28.pdf
GolfCommission,2007-02-28,2,"Development: development of an entry canopy that will ""join"" Phase A and Phase B1, along
with the development of a new vehicle routing/bag drop area, Phase C-Site and landscape
improvements immediately adjacent to the existing/new building areas, Phase D-Entry Drive
Improvements, Site Monument (at entry drive and at the corner of Island and Dolittle Drives),
Phase E-Site Parking Improvements, site entry bridge feature at creek, realigning of the on site
parking and addition of planter islands and irrigation for landscaping. The Dahlin report is a
master plan proposal to do the basic design not for submitting any construction drawings just an
idea to work with and get cost estimates to see how much each phase would cost so that it can be
proposed to City Council to determine which options to proceed with. She also stated that there
could be cost savings by completing the planning now rather than later. Chair Wood stated that
the Golf Commission will not be able to take action on the item without first reviewing the
material. The Golf Commission was given copies of the report and the discussion ensued. Ms.
Delagrange referenced the report stating that Dahlin will utilize previous design concepts and
cost estimation, they will provide minor modifications to the site and the cart barn, driving range
and snack shack structures are existing and no work is planned at these areas. The buildings will
be demolished on a per phase basis. The new buildings will be placed at about the same location
as the existing buildings to minimize additional site work. No changes in the golf course design
were included. Dahlin will also provide an analysis for anticipated cost savings if the City were
to
construct both Phase A and Phase B as one project instead of separately. As part of the
conceptual building design, they will provide a scenario for creating a shared set of restrooms
between the Bar/Grill/Banquet Facility (Phase A) and the Pro Shop (Phase B). Dahlin will
provide a maximum of two conceptual layouts for the new Bar/Grill/Banquet facility (Phase A)
and the Pro Shop (Phase B). Included in the professional fees are three presentations/meetings
with the Golf Commission and one presentation/meeting with the City Council and provide
standard design review submittals and cost estimation summaries for all presentations/meetings
Secretary Sullwold requested that a cost estimate be looked at for renovating the existing
restaurant building and build a new kitchen and banquet facility behind it. Chair Wood agreed
that the use of the existing structures should be looked at and if the structures are not usable he
would like to know why. The request will be passed on to Dahlin for evaluation. The general
consensus amongst the Golf Commission is that the main priority is the banquet facility. Ms.
Delagrange referenced the site drawings prepared by BMS. The BMS material relates to Phases
C, D, & E in the Dahlin report. The master site plan shows the entrance drive, parking and
proposed temporary banquet facility. The Golf Commission did not receive copies of the
entrance area drawings, which includes the following three alternatives. Alternative 1 is a
minimal site change plan that includes removing existing pavement, the roadway wall, and the
existing fence. The plan would add two eight foot entry markers, a six-foot ornamental wooden
fence, a new curb and gutter, a concrete pad, various trees, shrubs, ground cover and lawn,
including irrigation, for the total cost of $218,057. Alternative 2 is a modest site change
including all of the changes in Alternative 1 with the addition of a six foot entry wall made of
concrete block in place of the two eight foot entry markers. There is also miscellaneous site
furnishings and asphalt paving. The cost for Alternative 2 is $298, 397. Alternative 3 combines
the items in Alternative 2 with the deletion of the furnishings and adds a faux pond and a project
identification sign at a cost of $304,572. There are also three alternatives for the parking area
and temporary banquet facility. Alternative 1 is a minimal site change plan that includes
removing existing pavement and sidewalk and curb. The alternative includes a rerouting of the
entrance to allow for a bag drop area, project identification signs, new curbs and gutters, asphalt
concrete paving, concrete sidewalk, various trees, shrubs, ground cover and lawn, including
irrigation, and miscellaneous site furnishings for a cost of $285,725. Alternative 2 is a modest
site change plan that includes removing existing pavement, sidewalk and curb. The alternative
Chuck Corica Golf Complex
Page 2
2/28/07
Golf Commission Minutes",GolfCommission/2007-02-28.pdf
GolfCommission,2007-02-28,3,"includes a more extensive rerouting of the entrance to allow for a bag drop area with additional
foliage in and around the clubhouse building and beautification to the courtyard area, in addition
to the project identification signs, new curbs and gutters, asphalt concrete paving, concrete
sidewalk, various trees, shrubs, ground cover and lawn, including irrigation, and miscellaneous
site furnishings. Alternative 3 is a major site change plan that includes removing existing
pavement, sidewalk and curb. The alternative includes a more extensive rerouting of the
entrance to allow for a bag drop area with additional foliage in and around the clubhouse
building and beautification to the courtyard area with special colored paving, in addition to the
project identification signs, new curbs and gutters, asphalt concrete paving, concrete sidewalk,
various trees, shrubs, ground cover and lawn, including irrigation, and site furnishings for a cost
of $758,650. Chair Wood suggested that additional lighting be added to the proposal for the
parking area and the exterior of the buildings. The action on the item has been postponed to a
future meeting.
3-B
Report on the Chuck Corica Golf Complex Marshal Program. (Action Item)
:
The Golf Services Manager reported that at the special meeting of the Golf Commission
on February 11, 2007 the Golf Commission requested staff to present a revised Marshal
Work Program and a revision to the Employee and Volunteer Benefit Program for the
Chuck Corica Golf Complex (CCGC). The current program consists of 40 volunteers
that help patrons with their golf cart, start players on the first tee and monitor play on the
three golf courses. Marshals work a minimum of a 6-hour shift and receive benefits for
the service. The recommended program would have a maximum of 35 marshals, with an
additional 5 relief marshals and 3 marshal coordinators and the Marshals are to work one,
7 hour shift per week during the peak season, and one, 6 hour shift per week during the
off season. The marshals are expected to attend bi-annual general meetings with golf
professional staff and be trained every 6 months by marshal coordinator trainer and the
Marshals are to assist with Golf Complex sponsored events. The CCGC Employee and
Volunteer Benefit Program provide complimentary green fee, cart fee and range
privileges to volunteers and employees of the Golf Complex. It is important to provide
use of the golf course facilities in order to attract a volunteer and paid work force.
However, in order to help achieve greater revenues it is important to protect the ""peak""
times in which patrons use the golf course. Therefore, complimentary use of the facilities
should be curtailed to protect peak revenue times. Currently there are no constraints on
when volunteers and employees can receive complimentary privileges. The
recommendation is for the volunteers/employees to receive complimentary golf Monday-
Thursday on all courses. Fridays all day on the Jack Clark Course and Mif Albright and
at twilight on the Earl Fry course. Friday at Saturday, Sunday, and Holidays after
twilight on all golf courses. One bucket of range balls per day and they must register in
the range pro shop. There will be a cart fee of $10.00 per player for employees,
volunteers and guests. The volunteers and employees will still receive 20% off
merchandise (soft goods only), excludes golf balls, and golf equipment and no discount
on sale/clearance items. Special orders are cost (including shipping) plus 10% and tax
and there is a discount on food and beverage on scheduled workdays.
3-C
Report on Volunteer and Employee Benefits at the Chuck Corica Golf Complex. (Action Item)
The recommendations made in the previous agenda item will also apply to the employees
at the Chuck Corica Golf Complex. The $10 cart fee per rider will include all
Chuck Corica Golf Complex
Page 3
2/28/07
Golf Commission Minutes",GolfCommission/2007-02-28.pdf
GolfCommission,2007-02-28,4,"complimentary play as well.
3-D
Report on Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Budget.
Chair Wood introduced the City Manager Debra Kurita and Chief Financial Officer Juelle Ann
Boyer. The City Manager stated that at the February 20, 2007 City Council meeting the Golf
Complex deficit was brought up during the Mid Year Budget Update. The City Council directed
the Chief Financial Officer to draw up a resolution mandating a balanced budget for the Golf
Fund by the end of the fiscal year within 30 days and will be brought to the City Council at the
March 20, 2007 meeting. The first course of action was to determine what the deficit would be
by the end of the fiscal year. The Chief Financial Officer determined that by the end of the fiscal
year based on the prior months actual revenue and expenditures and a forecast for the final 5
months of the year that the Golf Fund would see a net cash loss of approximately $212,000. The
General Manager had recommended various expenditure cost cutting measures such as a
reduction in the cart fleet and water usage. The City Council understands that if it would harm
the operation of the Golf Complex to balance the budget then other solutions need to be looked
at. Commissioner Schmitz mentioned that the Golf Commission has recommended various fee
increases to help increase revenue. The forecast does not include any funds for Capital
Improvement Projects. The monthly reports the Golf Commission currently receives are based
on the online information available to the golf staff. The Finance Department has access to more
detailed information. The Golf Commission would like to have the General Fund Expenditures
itemized in detail on the monthly financial report. The request was made to receive the Chief
Financial Officer's report on a monthly basis to give the Golf Commission a clearer view of the
Golf Complex financials and a running Enterprise Fund Balance. The ultimate goal is to have
the Golf Fund's current revenue equal the current expenditures. The balanced budget does not
ensure that the Enterprise Fund will not continue to go down. The question was raised as why
the $300,000 lent to Development Services is non-interest bearing. The Chief Financial Officer
stated that the interest on inter department loans is negotiated at the time of the loan, and interest
was not added to the loan to Development Services.
4.
ANNOUNCEMENTS/ADJOURNMENT
Ron Salsig announced that he received two writing awards for articles, which appeared in
the New York Times, Los Angeles Times and the Alameda Sun. The Golf Commission
congratulated Mr. Salsig on his accomplishments. The City Manager announced that the
City Council and the Alameda Unified School District would have a Joint Meeting on
March 15, 2007.
The Special Meeting was adjourned at 8:37 PM.
The agenda for the special meeting was posted 24 hours in advance in accordance with the Brown Act.
Chuck Corica Golf Complex
Page 4
2/28/07
Golf Commission Minutes",GolfCommission/2007-02-28.pdf
PublicArtCommission,2007-02-28,1,"Minutes of the Regular Public Art Commission Meeting
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Conference Room 360, City Hall
1.
CONVENE:
7:05 p.m.
2.
ROLL CALL:
Chair Lee, Vice-Chair Huston, Wolfe
Commissioners Cervantes and Rosenberg were absent.
STAFF PRESENT: Douglas Vu, Planner III, and Tony Ebster, Recording
Secretary
3.
MINUTES:
Minutes for the Regular Meeting of November 29, 2006
Vice-Chair Huston motioned to continue the minutes of November 29, 2006 to
the Public Art Commission meeting of March 28, 2007.
Chair Lee seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 2.
[Abstain: Commissioner Wolfe - 1; Absent: Commissioners Cervantes and
Rosenberg - 2.]
4.
ORAL COMMUNICATION
Carol Burnett with the Alameda Art Association introduced herself and informed
the Commission that they wanted to raise awareness of local artists. She
expressed the desire for developers and project applicants to use local artists.
She requested the Alameda Art Association be placed on the City's Artist
Directory. Commission Member Huston agreed to refer the Alameda Art
Association to the groups identified in the Artist Resource List.
Commissioner Wolfe asked if there were other art associations in Alameda. Ms.
Burnett gave some information on other organizations in Alameda that can be
called upon for projects. The Commission agreed that as part of the to do list,
they would only maintain an Artist Resource List.
5.
REGULAR AGENDA
a.
Approve Meeting Calendar for 2007
M/S Huston/Lee to continue item to meeting of March 28, 2007
AYES - 3; NOES - 0
b.
Review of Alameda Towne Centre History Panels and Update",PublicArtCommission/2007-02-28.pdf
PublicArtCommission,2007-02-28,2,"Mr. Vu mentioned that the developer for Alameda Towne Centre is installing
more art than is required by the Ordinance.
Mr. Vu asked if there were any changes or concerns regarding the panels for
Alameda Towne Centre. Chair Huston mentioned that too many people were
omitted and thus the panels didn't reflect the diversity of Alameda and the panels
form a false history. Otherwise, she believed the panels were really well
designed. Commissioner Wolfe agreed there wasn't enough representation
regarding the diversity of Alameda. Chair Huston expressed concern that non-
white people were only shown as workers and not as heroes or persons of
distinction. The Commission agreed there needed to be more acknowledgment
of the diversity and segregation in Alameda's past. It was suggested that either
additional panels be incorporated or current panels be updated to include the
diversity of the City.
Mr. Vu offered to draft a letter to Tad Savinar to commend the work done on the
panels as well as offer thoughts and suggestions on what could be added. Chair
Huston agreed to proof the letter prior to mailing.
C.
Review of Alameda Free Public Library Art
Commissioner Wolfe stated that he liked the panels at the new Free Library but
expressed some issues with their installation. He liked the stone panel inside.
He felt the rabbit was not as good and was worried that someone could injure
himself or herself on it. Chair Huston stated the rabbit was supposed to be
interactive and felt that it wasn't. She also questioned the poor quality of the
work.
Commissioner Lee expressed concern that a screen behind the children's desk
had been proposed but wasn't there.
The Commission agreed the outside panels were successful but were concerned
the windowsills hang over the panels too far and take attention away from the
panels. They felt that the architecture frames the panels poorly and are oriented
more towards rainfall and not the integration of the art. This resulted in the
panels looking too subtle. The Commission also felt the original plans didn't
clearly illustrate how the panels would be installed, therefore making it difficult to
visualize how the finished product would look. The finished panel was not
exactly what was expected.
The Commission would've liked to see more detailed plans for the art in order to
get a better sense of the context. They would've liked more consideration given
to the integration of the architecture and the artwork.",PublicArtCommission/2007-02-28.pdf
PublicArtCommission,2007-02-28,3,"The Commission then proposed the idea of a catalog, or record of art projects.
The catalog would be for future Commission Members and would consist of
several items:
1.
The original art proposal for a given project
2.
A review of the finished product
3.
Commission Member comments and opinions on the finished
product and how accurate it was to the original proposal.
The Commission felt this would be a valuable asset and a good reference for
creating and updating the art review process.
d.
Performing Arts Program at Bridgeside Shopping Center
Chair Huston felt the conditions of approval did not reflect the programming that
the applicant and Commission agreed to, and therefore, the resolution approving
the Bridgeside amphitheatre project was inaccurate. She expressed that the
applicant should be held to their agreed details, even though specific details
weren't reflected in the resolution.
6.
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS:
Chair Huston expressed concern regarding whether the renovation of the Historic
Alameda Theater will fulfill the public art requirement. She stated that any
restoration work already being done as part of the project's scope couldn't also
be used to fulfill the public art requirement. She stated there were inaccuracies
identified in Development Services' staff report to City Council. Commissioner
Wolfe stated that he disagreed with Chair Huston's assessment of the Ordinance
and its Policy Guidelines regarding what aspects of a project can be used to fulfill
the public art requirement. Chair Huston and Commissioner Wolfe agreed to
review the Ordinance and its Policy Guidelines and discuss their findings at the
next meeting.
7.
ADJOURNMENT:
8:45 pm
Respectfully submitted,
Douglas Vu, Secretary
Public Art Commission",PublicArtCommission/2007-02-28.pdf
TransportationCommission,2007-02-28,1,"TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES
February 28, 2007
Chair Knox White called the Transportation Commission to order at 7:35 p.m.
1.
ROLL CALL - Roll was called and the following recorded.
Members Present:
John Knox White
Jeff Knoth
Michael Krueger
Eric Schatmeier
Srikant Subramanium
Absent:
Robert McFarland
Robb Ratto
Staff Present:
Obaid Khan, Supervising Civil Engineer
Barry Bergman, Program Specialist II
2.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a.
October 25, 2006
b.
November 15, 2006
c.
January 31, 2007
Chair Knox White requested that page numbers be inserted in the minutes. Commissioner
Schatmeier requested that in the January minutes, that they be changed to reflect that Mr. Knopf
was comparing Alameda to San Francisco.
Commissioner Schatmeier moved approval of the minutes for the October, November, and
January meeting minutes. Commissioner Krueger seconded the motion. Motion passed
unanimously, 5-0
3.
AGENDA CHANGES
Chair Knox White suggested that the Alameda Landing TDM item be heard before the shuttle
study.
Transportation Commission
February 28, 2007
Page 1 of 9",TransportationCommission/2007-02-28.pdf
TransportationCommission,2007-02-28,2,"4.
COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS
a.
Multimodal Circulation Plan
b.
Pedestrian Plan
c.
TSM/TDM Plan
Chair Knox White encouraged people to sign CalPIRG's online petition opposing the budget cuts
by Governor Schwarzenegger, which would cut $1.1 billion from the Public Transit account.
5.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were none.
Staff Khan inquired whether the Commissioners would be available for a joint meeting with City
Council on March 27, 2007. He understood that Commissioner Schatmeier was available, as was
Chair Knox White and Commissioners Krueger and MacFarland. He added that Commissioners
Knoth was not available, and that he had not heard from Commissioner Ratto. Commissioner
Subramaniam indicated he may be able to attend. The meeting would be held in the evening.
6B.
Alameda Landing TDM Goals and Program Development - Second Presentation
Outcome: Review and recommend finalization of performance goals, the methodology
by which the goals will be evaluated, monitoring guidelines, and a process
Staff Bergman summarized the staff report, and noted that this discussion item would return as an
action item in March, and would go to the Planning Board in April.
John Atkinson, consultant to Catellus on this project, complimented City staff on its expertise.
He believed the City had a unique opportunity to forge a sustainable TDM program. He noted
that the program goals would be to reduce vehicle trips and congestion. Mr. Atkinson stated that
the emphasis of the program would be reducing peak commute times through the tubes and into
the project area. Later the program would have broader goals. He believed that the TDM
measures should be judged on cost effectiveness. He stated that the intent of the project is for an
Alameda Landing Transportation Management Association to be established to serve the project
area and to ultimately merge into a future West End TMA. He stated that Catellus agreed
wholeheartedly that the implementation of an EcoPass program through AC Transit would be
beneficial for the project. He stated that the Census data for the rest of Alameda were not directly
applicable to this project.
Mr. Atkinson noted that there was a concern about bike capabilities on the shuttle, and that some
people had asked about using a trailer. He noted that none of the operators he contacted were not
comfortable with that concept for safety reasons. He noted that bike racks could be mounted on
the front and the back of the shuttle, which yielded a capacity of six per loop, or approximately
36 per day.
Transportation Commission
February 28, 2007
Page 2 of 9",TransportationCommission/2007-02-28.pdf
TransportationCommission,2007-02-28,3,"He believed that the TDM program would be comprehensive enough that retail trips could be
reduced. He noted that the water shuttle could potentially partner with Alameda Power &
Telecom. Part of the agreement was to do a comprehensive water shuttle feasibility study, and
many of the issues would be raised there; the type of vehicle would be included in the
comprehensive water shuttle study. The shuttle would be coordinated with existing transit, as
well as with the employers' work schedules in order to make it effective. Their goal was to
provide a variety of commute options, and they would continue to work with AC Transit with the
residents and employees of the Landing. He noted that there would be a maximum amount of
commute choices, and a minimum amount of waiting time for those choices. With respect to
counts, they believed that surveys would serve as a viable reflection of the effectiveness, and
would allow them to make changes based on users.
Mr. Atkinson noted that staff had suggestions for the survey particulars, by expanding the survey
to maximize the return. The end goal was to get as much feedback on these programs from the
tenants and residents as possible, in order to tailor and make the program as effective as possible.
He noted that they wanted shuttle feedback, and that the dock location would be covered under
the comprehensive water shuttle study. They have had ongoing meetings with the Port of
Oakland and a variety of other agencies, and of the approval process that would be needed; they
would forward that to staff. He noted that the study would examine whether the shuttle would be
on demand or operate on a regular schedule.
Public Comment
There were no speakers.
Closed Public Comment
Commissioner Krueger noted that he looked at the updated version online, and saw that the
EcoPass was mentioned only as an optional measure. He did not see that it would play a large
role, and inquired whether it was still under development.
Mr. Atkinson noted that the EcoPass representative attended their meeting with AC Transit, and
that the EcoPass would be part of the long-term solution. If it proved to be economically and
operationally viable for them to make changes to existing lines and provide a greater degree of
service to Alameda Landing and then other sites, the EcoPass would be a part of that
comprehensive AC Transit strategy to serve the project. While EcoPass programs have typically
served large employers, he suggested that it may be possible to enable smaller employers to
participate by having the program administered through the TMA. He noted that the budget for
TDM measures was limited. It may be that AC Transit service would be a good long-term
option, but there would not be sufficient funds and ridership available for it to be implemented
early in the project, so the private shuttle would provide interim service.
Transportation Commission
February 28, 2007
Page 3 of 9",TransportationCommission/2007-02-28.pdf
TransportationCommission,2007-02-28,4,"Mr. Krueger stated that the financial analysis seemed to treat the AC Transit option as a
standalone option. He inquired whether it could be viewed as an incremental extension of the
existing service. He suggested reconfiguring two existing lines to include Alameda Landing and
Alameda Point, and believed it would only need to cover the incremental cost of the existing
line. He added that it would not cannibalize the AC Transit ridership with the shuttle, and did not
see that possibility listed.
Mr. Atkinson agreed it was that was a viable point.
Commissioner Schatmeier inquired whether the possibility of incorporating the EcoPass into a
program with employers similar to a parking cashout. Mr. Atkinson replied that could be
investigated for both businesses and residential uses.
A discussion of the EcoPass program ensued.
Chair Knox White stated that developments like Alameda Landing pay taxes and that AC Transit
therefore has a responsibility to provide some level of service there. He believed that the TDM
program should be augmenting this service, not paying AC Transit to serve the development.
Chair Knox White believed one of the major issues faced by the Commission was how to start a
TMA that was Alameda Landing-focused, and meld it with the Citywide TDM process. He
believed that would likely result in a Citywide TMA. He recommended that the document state
that the TMA is originally being set up for Alameda Landing to address its TDM goals. He noted
that there was an expectation that once the City's TDM program is completed, and has gone
through the EIR process and Council adoption, it would be folded into a larger TMA. He also
expressed a concern that the TDM program is being set up as a benefit for the Alameda Landing
project, while the intent is that the program should be mitigating traffic congestion.
Staff Khan stated that staff wants to help ensure that the TMA addressed the goals that were
established, and not have to wait until the rest of the entities joined in for the program to be
successful. So it should establish a TMA for Alameda Landing, and should be able to move into
the future for the West End TMA, and ultimately would be consistent with a citywide TDM plan
and program.
Bruce Knopf, Catellus, noted that they were very interested in ensuring the program achieved the
goals that were set out. He added that Catellus was very experienced in running TDM programs,
and they participated with other entities in Emeryville in operating the Emery Go Round. They
understood the process of working with partners to achieve goals, and always thought of this
program as fitting into the larger transit picture in the West End. They were also very concerned
about ensuring that the financial obligation that the tenants and residents would be paying into
will bring direct benefits to the project. Over the long term, they were looking for a way to
balance those two objectives.
Transportation Commission
February 28, 2007
Page 4 of 9",TransportationCommission/2007-02-28.pdf
TransportationCommission,2007-02-28,5,"Chair Knox White would like to further explore the role of municipalities in other TMAs, and
wanted to ensure that the City had a real voice in how it moved forward, such as the Council
having a voting member or be required to approve the program. He wanted to be careful that the
TDM program did not become exclusively a shuttle program. He felt strongly that the City
should evaluate the program by counting trips, using the ITE trip generation rates as a baseline.
Mr. Knopf noted that the City Council has some authority over the TDM program, as it must
approve any reallocation of the budget involving at least $45,000.
Chair Knox White recalled that at the last meeting, Commissioner Schatmeier suggested not
using the word ""shuttle,"" and that it should be discussed in a more inclusive sense. He believed
the surveys were good and worthwhile, but believed that counting cars would be the best way to
judge the effectiveness in the early years. He believed the agreement between City Council and
ProLogis gave a lot of cover for not meeting the goals. He believed that the efforts should go
beyond what was expected, and that all participants should work aggressively to meet the goals.
Chair Knox White noted that page 3 of the TDM program read, ""The first phase of TDM
program will have regular supplementary ground shuttle service running at 30-minute
headways."" He had assumed that AC Transit would run some type of service through the project
area, and that tension would build between AC Transit and the private shuttles. He believed that
language was needed that addressed AC Transit service as the preferred transit service, and that
an agreement be reached between AC Transit regarding the thresholds that would trigger their
ability to go into offering that service.
Chair Knox White noted that the bottom of page 3 read, ""Within Alameda Landing, neither
property owner or tenant, other than the affordable housing, will be a participant in the TDM
program, paying annual TDM assessments."" He requested a clarification that this referred to the
payment, that the affordable housing tenants would not be asked to pay into the TDM program,
but that they would be able to participate in the program. Mr. Knopf confirmed that they would
not be asked to pay into the program. He stated that they would also be able to access the
EcoPass.
Chair Knox White echoed Commissioner Krueger's comments about including the EcoPasses as
one of the priority possibilities for the program, rather than a voluntary or optional item. He
noted that Table 2 on page 10 (Projected TDM Implementation) should be titled as an example
of TDM implementation. He wanted to allow the flexibility of the program to change as its
effectiveness is evaluated over time. He also noted that some items called out as part of the TDM
program were already parts of the City ordinances, and were required independent of the
existence of the TDM program. They included bike parking and bus shelters. He would like
those prerequisites to be pointed out as such.
Chair Knox White noted that a car share programs should not cost the project any money to
implement. Mr. Knopf noted that the $2000 for guaranteed ride home was mostly for the
marketing efforts and implementation; he noted it would not be effective if nobody knew about
it.
Transportation Commission
February 28, 2007
Page 5 of 9",TransportationCommission/2007-02-28.pdf
TransportationCommission,2007-02-28,6,"Chair Knox White noted staff's concern that the guaranteed ride home may only be offered to
large companies. He had spoken with the CMA about a project in which they were willing to
allow residents to take part in this program as long as there was a program coordinator. He was
pleased that the applicant was being proactive with these items.
Mr. Knopf noted that they would return in a month to follow up.
6A.
REVIEW AND PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS ON FINAL REPORT ON
WEST END SHUTTLE STUDY Outcome: Review and recommend finalization of
draft report on West End Shuttle Study. Discussion/Action.
Staff Bergman presented the staff report, and described its background based on Council's
interest in using electric vehicles as a way to improve linkages from the West End to BART.
John Atkinson, the City's consultant on the project, noted that he had spoken with AC Transit
representatives, who were interested in their roles. He hoped to have more substantive
discussions in looking at more concrete discussions. He thanked Staff Bergman for his patience
and hard work as this project changed throughout the process. He presented three conceptual
maps, and described the features and the routes. He noted that by improving the 63, it would not
impact any of the existing service, and the cross-Island service would still be at 30-minute
intervals; it might be improved to 15- to 20-minute intervals connecting BART to the West End.
He noted that service on other parts of the Island would not be diminished to benefit the West
End.
Commissioner Schatmeier noted that if the loop in the Phase 3 map is only 1 direction, that some
people would face a very long trip to connect to BART, but if the loop were bi-directional, the
headways would be doubled.
Chair Knox White noted that the written description of ""hybrid electric"" stated that emissions
were ""slightly reduced"" from diesel, but the grid showed that hybrid electrics have ""low
emissions"" and diesels have ""high emissions."" Mr. Atkinson replied that it depended on the type
of fuel used in the hybrid.
Chair Knox White inquired whether the mechanics' rates of $50 per hour were based on the
City's rates, and wished to ensure that whatever was listed matched what was actually paid.
Commissioner Krueger inquired whether the cost comparison with AC Transit was truly fair.
While their cost per mile is higher, they may be able to service the area by incrementally
expanding an existing route, rather than establishing a new one, so the cost comparison should
reflect this. He also asked that the analysis account for the benefits of providing a service
through AC Transit, which would integrate into the larger system. He noted that a potential
disadvantage of a City- or privately-provided shuttle would be the possibility of taking riders
from AC Transit, which could have a negative impact on AC Transit's existing service. In
Transportation Commission
February 28, 2007
Page 6 of 9",TransportationCommission/2007-02-28.pdf
TransportationCommission,2007-02-28,7,"addition, it may be difficult to coordinate such a service with AC Transit in terms of providing
riders with information such as maps.
Chair Knox White noted that this study originated from the Council's interest in developing a
service that would utilize electric vehicles, and added that some cities continued to use electric
vehicles. He suggested that since the analysis does not recommend electric vehicles, that a more
detailed explanation should be provided.
Mr. Atkinson noted that given the route under consideration - connecting Alameda to Oakland
through the tube - that the grade in the Tube would be a challenge for these vehicles.
Chair Knox White would like to know more about the advantages and disadvantages. He noted
that Santa Barbara still ran electric buses, and would like more information. He believed
Alameda would be a good place to run electric vehicles because it was generally flat, so it would
help to include a description of circumstances under which such vehicles would be a viable
option.
Mr. Atkinson noted that the Phase 3 route as shown on the map would be an ideal application for
electric buses because it was short and flat, operates only within Alameda, and had the
opportunity for charging between runs.
Chair Knox White asked that the report include a summary grid of the cost information. He
believed the conclusion should be more robust, and that the recommendations should include
some options. For example, if the City chooses to run electric shuttles, the pluses and minuses
should be included, including higher capital and maintenance costs.
Mr. Atkinson noted that Staff Bergman had made similar recommendations that separated the
monetary concerns from the other recommendations in a more sequential manner. He noted that
he wanted to include pricing on bio-diesel, and added that fueling stations were often donated.
He suggested that a bio-diesel fueling station could be constructed in the West End, and added
that the technology was continually advancing. He added that resistance to bio-fuels was
beginning to relax on the vehicle manufacturers' part.
Commissioner Schatmeier inquired about the source of the higher maintenance for electric
vehicles. Mr. Atkinson noted that it was because of the use of prototype vehicles for which
replacement parts are not standardized and readily available.
Commissioner Schatmeier requested that more detail be provided about electric buses, since that
was a major reason the study was undertaken.
Commissioner Krueger inquired whether the European track record had been examined.
Transportation Commission
February 28, 2007
Page 7 of 9",TransportationCommission/2007-02-28.pdf
TransportationCommission,2007-02-28,8,"Mr. Atkinson noted that the manufacturer for the Santa Barbara vehicles was in Goleta, and that
they had a vested interest in ensuring they worked well. He noted that the electric load on rainy
days was often a challenge, when the heater and windshield wipers were needed while the
vehicle was running.
Chair Knox White noted that since this item will be sent to the City Council, he would like to see
it again. He believed the Commission's comments were extensive, and he would rather not send
the recommendations to City Council without reviewing the revisions.
Commissioner Schatmeier asked why fuel cells were not discussed in the report.
Chair Knox White believed that AC Transit made a policy commitment to this technology, and
that they decided not to implement CNG in favor of hydrogen.
A discussion of the proliferation of shuttles ensued, including revenue impacts and ridership
confusion.
Commissioner Schatmeier recommended changing the name of the study, which seemed to
indicate that the City was about to implement a West End shuttle.
Staff Khan noted that a unit cost could be identified for the 15-minute interval, and therefore
could be applicable in other parts of the City
Commissioner Schatmeier asked to see more analysis of why the routes were chosen, and what
route choices were available. He suggested renaming the document ""Shuttle Operational
Analysis"" so members of the public did not think a shuttle was imminent.
No action was taken.
8.
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
Staff Bergman noted that the first meeting of the Line 51 Task Force was held earlier in the day,
and that it was a staff-only meeting that presented data identifying some of the issues and
problems.
Chair Knox White requested an oral report or minutes from that meeting.
Commissioner Krueger requested a status report on the red curbing. Staff Khan noted that the
first batch was ready to go to the TTT on March 14, 2007.
Transportation Commission
February 28, 2007
Page 8 of 9",TransportationCommission/2007-02-28.pdf
TransportationCommission,2007-02-28,9,"Commissioner Schatmeier asked what the status was regarding the proposed bus stops on Otis
Drive.
Chair Knox White noted that he and Commissioner Krueger understood that the TC's
recommendation was for two stops in front of Pond Isle and Willow, but Willow was not
specifically referenced in the motion. He noted that the staff report recommended that stops be
installed along Otis Drive at Sandcreek Way and Willow.
Staff Khan noted that what was going to the Council was actually an appeal of the Commission's
recommendation to install the stop at Pond Isle.
Meeting adjourned at 10:00 PM.
Transportation Commission
February 28, 2007
Page 9 of 9",TransportationCommission/2007-02-28.pdf