body,date,page,text,path
PlanningBoard,2012-08-27,1,"APPROVED MEETING MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD
MONDAY, AUGUST 27, 2012
1. CONVENE:
7:08 p.m.
2. FLAG SALUTE:
Board member Köster
3. ROLL CALL:
Present: President Zuppan (arrived late), Vice-President
Burton, Board members Ezzy Ashcraft, Henneberry, Knox
White, and Köster.
Absent: None
4. MINUTES:
Minutes from the Regular meeting of June 25, 2012
Board member Knox White motioned to approve minutes as amended
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion
Motion carried, 6-0; no abstentions
Minutes from the Regular meeting of July 9, 2012
Board member Knox White motioned to approve minutes as amended
Board member Henneberry seconded the motion
Motion carried, 4-0; abstentions Vice President Burton and Board member Köster
Minutes from the Regular meeting of July 23, 2012
Board member Knox White motioned to continue the minutes
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion
Motion carried, 6-0; no abstentions
5. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION
Andrew Thomas, Planning Services Manager, requested that item 8B be moved from
the consent calendar to the regular agenda items.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft motioned to move item 8B from the consent calendar to
the regular agenda items.
Board member Henneberry seconded the motion.
Motion carried, 5-0; no abstentions
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 1 of 13
July 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-08-27.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-08-27,2,"Andrew Thomas requested that item 9D be continued to a date yet determined to allow
staff more time to prepare the report.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft motioned to continue item 9D to a date yet to be
determined in the future.
Board member Knox White seconded the motion
Motion carried, 5-0; no abstentions
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
6-A
Future Agendas
Andrew Thomas, Planning Services Manager, provided an overview of upcoming
projects.
President Zuppan arrived.
7. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
President Zuppan opened Oral Communications.
Kelly Johnston, St. Joseph's Elementary School, stated that the school will issue a
written response to the community comments and concerns. She reiterated that the
project is in compliance with the master plan and will result in a net zero population
increase. She stated that the financial aspects of the project are outside the Board's
scope. She invited the board members to tour the campus and see how the project
complies with the school's master plan.
President Zuppan closed Oral Communications
8. CONSENT CALENDAR.
8-A
Zoning Administrator and Design Review Recent Actions and Decisions. A
report of recent actions on minor variances, minor variances, and design
review applications.
Item 8-B was moved to the Regular Agenda Items.
Board member Knox White motioned to approve the consent calendar.
Vice President Burton seconded the motion.
Motion carried, 6-0; no abstentions
9. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 2 of 13
July 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-08-27.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-08-27,3,"8-B
Approve a Modification to the Master Street Tree Plan to Add Robinia
pseudoacacia (Black Locust) to the Planting Palette for the 1300 Block of
Bay Street.
Planning Services Manager gave brief presentation.
President Zuppan opened public comment.
Karen Flanders, resident, stated that the residents of the street would like the tree-
scape to remain as is.
David Maxcy, resident, stated that the current trees are pink, and the residents of the
street would like the replacement trees to be the same or at the very least, the same
color.
President Zuppan clarified with staff and informed the residents that the Robinia
pseudoacacia trees are in fact pink and the plan modification is to guarantee that the
correct tree is planted.
Belinda Ray, resident, stated that the arching trees that meet in the middle make the
street beautiful and create character. She said she would like the trees to remain the
same. She referenced the amount of commercials filmed on the street because of the
trees.
Tim Rumberger, resident, stated he is not aware of any invasive issues, or sidewalk
damage caused by the current trees. He referenced the amount of commercials filmed
on the street and cited economic incentive for keeping the same species of trees; he
urged the Board to approve the motion as it has been amended to allow for the pink
version of the tree.
President Zuppan closed public comment.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft voiced her approval of the amendment and suggested to
staff that more of these trees be planted throughout the City because of their economic
value.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft motioned to approve a modification of the Master Street
Tree Plan.
Board member Knox White seconded the motion.
Motioned carried, 6-0; no abstentions.
9-A
Conditional Use and Design Review Application- - PLN11-0378, 1600 Park
Street (Former Good Chevrolet Site) Proposed commercial buildings,
including two one-story structures and a parking lot to be accessed from
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 3 of 13
July 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-08-27.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-08-27,4,"Foley Street, Tilden Way, and Park Street. The applicant is also
requesting a conditional use permit for approval of a drive-thru lane and
window and 24 hour operations. The application also requires the removal
and replacement of up to two existing street trees in the Tilden Way
median.
Vice President Burton recused himself.
Andrew Thomas, Planning Services Manager, gave brief presentation.
President Zuppan clarified with staff that the plans have changed and now included
actual windows facing Tilden.
Greg Kline, architect, gave brief presentation and corrected staff's presentation stating
that CVS prefers the right turn only option from the driveway onto Park Street. He
clarified that the arched glass above the window boxes is clear glass and allows
pedestrians to see in.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft clarified with Mr. Kline that the glass used in the window
arches on Tilden Way, the arched windows in the rear of Pad A building as well as the
Pad B is spandrel glass, which has a coating that doesn't allow people to see through
it.
She confirmed with staff that the code requires 1 bicycle parking space per every 10
vehicle spaces.
Obaid Khan, City Traffic Engineer, confirmed that two long term bicycle parking spaces
(bike lockers) have been included in the conditions (number 61), which is in addition to
the regular, short-term bicycle parking.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft clarified with staff that turn-around space according to the
traffic study REA has been provided. She clarified that space in the parking lot for a
holiday tree has also been reserved.
Josh Eisenhut, Armstrong Development, gave brief presentation.
Board member Henneberry clarified with Mr. Einsenhut that by requesting the 24 hour
use permit now, before business conditions warrant the need, allows CVS all the
necessary permits to quickly implement operational hour changes in the future without
seeking additional approval.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft clarified with staff that it would take less than two months
to hold a public hearing and seek approval for CVS to extend operating hours. She
confirmed with Mr. Eisenhut that Armstrong Developers have opened several CVS
stores in urban settings; however those stores were modifications to an existing
building.
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 4 of 13
July 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-08-27.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-08-27,5,"Board member Knox White clarified with Mr. Eisenhut that the addition of a Park Street
entrance/exit only provides convenience to CVS customers as well as the smaller retail
stores that will inhabit the other building.
Board member Köster clarified with staff that any modifications to the driveway will be
applied to the two parking plans which have been provided, one with an REA and one
without.
President Zuppan opened public comment.
Patsy Paul, resident, stated that she is against 24-hour use permit because of increased
traffic, safety, noise pollution, light intrusion, additional CO2 emissions, and parking
impact. She requested that the Board deny the application for the use permit.
Nanette Burdick, resident, expressed concern with the design permit commenting that
the Foley Street entrance is problematic, because it is a narrow residential alley with
limited residential parking. She expressed concern about additional employee parking
impacting already limited residential parking. She suggested that Tilden Way, be
changed to a one way street with parking for employees, and Tilden way become the
main entrance for CVS. She expressed concerned about safety, noise pollution,
lighting, trash be placed at least 50 feet away from any resident, 4 foot attractive brick
wall providing some privacy and proper screening so neighbors aren't looking into a
parking lot.
Robb Ratto, Executive Director of PSBA, completely supportive of the project.
Expressed support of the drive-through pharmacy, which will allow CVS to be
competitive with both Walgreens. He stated the window boxes are imperative for
running a retail business, and asks CVS to incorporate public art into the window
boxes. He said he liked the diagonal entrance on Park Street because it mirrored the
buildings in the core section, and allow a little characteristic, He asked the Board to
allow for ingress and right turn only egress on Park Street, stating it's imperative for
traffic flow and customer ease.
Audrey Lord-Hausman, resident, expressed concern regarding pedestrian safety
especially the Lincoln and Buena Vista intersection and encouraged the Board to design
the intersections to be more pedestrian safe. She also requested that one or two
benches be installed to allow pedestrians and shoppers to rest.
Colin Herrick, resident, commented on the placement of the garbage bins right against
the neighboring house and asked that the bins be relocated. He expressed discontent
with the entire project, concurred with Ms. Burdick's comments regarding Foley Street
and parking. He also commented on the traffic impact the development will have.
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 5 of 13
July 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-08-27.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-08-27,6,"Jacqueline Miranda, resident, concurred with previous speakers, and requests that the
Foley Street entrance and exit be closed and the right turn only exits on both Tilden and
Park be installed.
Irene Dieter, resident, expressed surprise with the acceptance of the statement that
housing over retail establishments on Park Street doesn't make economic sense, and
stated that the same thought could be applied to Alameda Point and sets a bad
precedence. Requested explanation for allowing one and not the other.
Lear Blitzstein, resident, concurs with Mr. Herrick's statements and is opposed to CVS,
a corporation moving into the neighborhood. Expressed concern with light and noise
pollution, parking impact, traffic congestion and speeding.
Heath Carlisle, resident, concerned about the extra traffic from the development
especially with a 24 hour use permit, and requested that no entrance/exit be allowed on
Foley Street.
Brian Kernan, concurred with comments made by Nanette Berdict regarding Foley
Street, disagree with 24 hour use permit, and expressed concern with delivery times
and inadequate amount of parking. He requested that Tilden way be reduced to single
lanes each way, with metered parking.
Jacqueline Cooper, resident, generally opposes the CVS, concerned with the placement
of garbage bins, and against the 24 hour drive through. She asked the Board to
consider whether a development that includes a CVS pharmacy and Chase bank keeps
with the smaller boutique businesses that inhabit Park Street.
David Maxcy, resident, he likes the design and believes it will enhance Park Street. He
expressed concern regarding traffic impact on Park Street.
Lorre Zuppan closed public comment.
Andrew Thomas stated that the zoning is commercial manufacturing, that there is an
increase in the parking ratio. He clarified that if the Foley Street entrance/exit is closed
there will probably not be an REA with the Market Place, which would impact the
proposed landscaping and improvements on the Market Place parking lot. He stated
that the traffic study doesn't show a significant increase on Foley Street.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft clarified with staff that Tilden Way is an exclusive transit
right of way and a truck route and traffic can be slowed down by use of medians.
Board member Henneberry clarified with staff that lane reduction on Tilden would
significantly impact arterial traffic and the operations of the street and may require a
General Plan amendment.
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 6 of 13
July 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-08-27.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-08-27,7,"Staff expressed a need to maintain lanes for exclusive transit services and bike lane
requirements. Staff suggested reviewing the posted speed limit and working with the
police department for speed enforcement.
Board member Köster stated that the sidewalks are not continued onto Tilden Way
between Foley Street and Buena Vista and is a problem with pedestrian access.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft requested that staff look into whether proper signage is
posted throughout the area. She stated that the conditions address comments
regarding light and noise pollution. She clarified with staff that truck deliveries would be
limited to 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
Board member Henneberry stated the one way entrance and exit on Park Street is a
good compromise and is supportive. He stated in terms of fairness that the drive-
through pharmacy should be permitted. He questions the need for the 24 hour
operating permit and suggested that CVS apply for that permit at a later time, once
business conditions prove the need. He stated that he would prefer fewer spandrel
windows.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft stated that her preference is to allow only for an entrance
into the development from Park Street with that customers exit onto Tilden or Foley.
She will support the drive-through pharmacy, but questions the actual need for it. She
is not supportive of the 24-hour use permit stating that there is not a current need, and
that there is no point in burdening the residents. She stated that she wants the majority
(3) of the Park Street windows to be windows and the remaining two could be window
boxes.
Board member Knox White commented that Tilden needs to be changed into a 25 mph
zone. He stated that he would like the City to find a way to make the current proposed
design on Tilden work temporarily while the City works through the process for
redesigning Tilden to make sure the City gets what it wants. He recommended that the
one way Park Street entrance be approved and reduce the lane width, which would
allow Building B expand in size. He stated that parking should not be permitted
between the two buildings. He stated that ""good faith REA"" discussions should be
required and he projects that REA would result in a net loss in vehicles exiting onto
Foley Street. He stated that he is not supportive of the 24 hour use permit, and stated
that CVS can request it at a later date, should they determine a need. He encouraged
that the investment group investigate ideas/agreements to allow residential parking
overnight. He would like to condition that the garbage bins be relocated, and a lighting
plan be approved. He suggested that truck delivery be limited to Tilden Way. He will
acquiesce on the windows.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft requested that the wording of condition #72 be changed
from ""encouraged"" to ""required.""
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 7 of 13
July 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-08-27.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-08-27,8,"Board member Köster stated that narrowing the street and providing a larger building
space in Pad B is a good idea. He stated that Tilden Way should be one way entrance
and exit and the sidewalk should continue to Buena Vista with turning lanes, truck
parking access, and a bike path. He concurs with Board comments regarding the 24
hour use permit. He requests as much screening between the parking lot, drive-
through, and residents as possible. He would prefer regular windows on Park Street
and referenced a new CVS in San Francisco that has real windows. He also concurred
with comments made by Board member Knox White.
President Zuppan clarified with staff that the Newspaper Stand in front of Pad B can be
moved if it is in the public right of way. She clarified with staff that the crosswalk from
Pacific currently has crosswalk lights.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft clarified with staff that the in-pavement lights have been
repaired and signs have been installed.
Board member Köster stated that bulb outs assist with pedestrians stepping out and
allowing motorist to see them before crossing.
President Zuppan clarified with staff that residents have a preferential parking permit
program; however they would have to incur the cost of implementing the program in
their neighborhood. She expressed interest in seeing the condition that the drive-
through be removed in the building changes occupancy, which would require a new
tenant to request permission to use it. She concurred with Board member Knox White's
suggestion to decrease the width of the entrance. She expressed concern with the left
turn lanes from Park Street and how traffic and pedestrian safety will be impacted
without lights.
Obaid Khan, Public Works, stated that access from Park Street may requires
emergency vehicle access and Municipal Code requires a driveway width of 20 feet. He
stated that staff will review the code and try to accommodate the request to reduce the
width. He stated that pedestrians must exercise judgment when crossing streets, and
that the City can restrict left turn in the future if needed.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft commented that parking between the two buildings is
convenient she likes that the spaces are screened and pushed back, and does not
object to keeping the spaces.
Board member Knox White motioned to continue the meeting to 11:30 p.m. and hear
the remaining two items.
Board member Henneberry seconded the motion.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft clarified with staff that they would prefer that the Board
attempt to review item 9B and if time permit a discussion regarding item 9C can occur.
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 8 of 13
July 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-08-27.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-08-27,9,"Motion carried, 5-0; Burton recused.
Board member Knox White expressed concern that all the activity generators (ATM,
etc ) are located at the back of the building and suggested that the activity generators
be moved to Park Street.
President Zuppan concurred with Board member Knox White and clarified with staff that
the current condition regarding Park Street entrances does not orient the front of the
building to be on Park Street. She inquired if the driveway can be moved and clarified
with staff that a condition of approval to review shifting the driveway.
Board member Köster confirmed with that the exit on Foley Street can be moved to be
closer to the end of the street and negating lights from shining into residences.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft clarified with staff that the landscaping space in the
parking lot is not walkable but just decorative.
Staff clarified that a condition of the approval for the landscape requires either a wall or
hedge on Foley Street.
President Zuppan is supportive of the comments from board member Knox White
regarding the median and sidewalk. She supports the installation of benches, REA
parking agreement, trying to address employee parking, moving the trash bins, smaller
Park Street entrance, and limiting truck delivery on Tilden outside of rush hour, and the
removal of the drive-thru when occupancy changes. She would prefer to see a higher
bike parking ratio than 1:10.
Obaid Khan, Public Works, stated that blocking traffic with a loading zone needs to be
reviewed by the Police Chief and the Public Works Director. He clarified that loading
zones are usually created in parking spaces, not travel zones.
Josh Eisenhut, Armstrong Development, clarified that he requests that the operating
hours be at least the same as the current locations hours of 7 a.m.-11 p.m.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would support the store and drive thru to
operate between 7 a.m.-11 p.m.
Board member Knox White requested that if the drive way width be larger than 14 feet,
curb to curb, than it come back to the Board for discussion.
Board member Henneberry clarified with staff that the Fire Department is looking for a
width of at least 15 feet. He stated that the project is being delayed by requesting
that the width of the driveway be changed and he cannot support that suggestion for
condition.
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 9 of 13
July 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-08-27.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-08-27,10,"Board member Ezzy Ashcraft clarified with staff that the Fire Department would prefer to
maintain fire access on both Tilden and Park Street.
Staff stated that they will make the driveway as small as possible and report back to the
Board with the final measurements and justifications.
Board member Henneberry commented that a building on the other side of town was
recently approved with very few windows.
Board member Knox White stated that he will not hold up approval because of two
windows, but he encourages the applicant to increase real windows, and reduce the
window boxes.
Both board member Köster and Ezzy Ashcraft concurred with board member Knox
Whites statements.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft motioned to approve the staff resolution as amended.
(See attached final Resolution)
Board member Henneberry seconded the motion.
Motion carried, 5-0; Vice President Burton recused.
9-B
Appeal of Design Review PLN11-0208 - 1333 Broadway - Winslow Holmes &
Ray Butkovich. Appeal approval of a design review project that consists of
adding a second story to the single-family residence. The height of the home
will increase by 8'-4""; the maximum height of the addition is 28'-11"" (35 feet
permitted). Grounds given for appeal: shading and loss of privacy
Board member Köster left the meeting.
Board member Henneberry motioned to continue item 9C to the following meeting.
Board member Knox White seconded the motion. He also suggested that an ad-hoc
sub-committee be formed to work with staff and address some minor details of the
amendment.
President Zuppan assigned Vice President Burton, Board member Knox White, and
herself as members of the ad-hoc committee.
Motion carried, 5-0; no abstentions.
Andrew Thomas, Planning Services Manager, gave brief presentation.
Board member Knox White motion to continue the meeting until midnight.
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 10 of 13
July 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-08-27.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-08-27,11,"President Zuppan has closed public comment.
President Zuppan clarified with staff that story poles were not part of the requirements,
and that requirement is not embedded in any city regulations.
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 11 of 13
July 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-08-27.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-08-27,12,"Board member Knox White stated that most houses on the block are two stories but the
distance between the buildings are much wider. He stated that he is considering
approving the appeal and denying the addition. He concurred that the lighting will be
impacted.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she spoke with Board member Burton and
determined that the design review could be improved. She suggested that the Board
consider going back and redesigning the addition.
Mr. Suji, stated that he is going by the recommendation of planning and that although it
is difficult to consider a redesign, it is something he would consider.
Board member Knox White confirmed that if the appeal is upheld then the project is
denied and the applicant must start over.
Board member Knox White motioned to extend the meeting until 12:15
Board member Henneberry seconded the motion
Motion carried, 5-0; no abstentions.
Board member Knox White clarified with the applicant that the applicant is not interested
in
applying for new permits when his neighbors are probably going to oppose the
redesign. He stated that he may be interested in approving something that is consistent
with the code, but not necessarily this particular design, stating that if the applicant is
following the rules it is very difficult for the Board to not approve the permit.
President Zuppan stated that based on the staff report it is clear that the neighbors are
not interested in a redesign since they oppose the addition of a second story.
Vice President Burton clarified with staff that a variance is not being asked for. He
stated that there are no rules against a second story addition, and that there won't make
much difference with the amount of light and air if the leaves height is maintained and
the addition is set back two feet. He stated that since the applicant has designed
according to the code and he has a hard time upholding the appeal.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft stated that the one applicant is concerned with privacy,
while the other neighbor is concerned with lighting.
Board member Henneberry stated that he will support staff's recommendation.
President Zuppan stated that she is not inclined to uphold the appeal.
Board member Knox White stated that if Board chooses to deny the appeal then the
municipal code needs to be changed due to adverse effects of blocked lighting and
views. He stated that there are very specific finding that he cannot make and to. He
stated that he will be vote to uphold the appeal.
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 12 of 13
July 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-08-27.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-08-27,13,"Board member Ezzy Ashcraft stated that there are adverse effects on shading and
lighting and if the applicant were to go back and redesign and the neighbors continued
to object that the Board could overrule the objection. She stated that she cannot in
good conscience make the finding.
Board member Knox White motioned to continue the meeting to 12:30 a.m.
Vice President Burton seconded the motion.
Motion carried, 5-0; no abstentions.
Staff clarified that four votes are need to uphold the appeal.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft stated that by narrowly looking at the findings she cannot
make the finding that Mr. Butkovitch's privacy is impacted since the addition is looking in
on the attic which she does not consider living space.
Board member Knox White motioned to uphold both appeals.
Board member Henneberry seconded the motion.
Motion does not carry 1-4; no abstentions.
9-C
Recommendation to Approve a Zoning Amendment, Design Review Manual,
and Final EIR for the North Park Street Planning Area. Item Continued to a
later date.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
NONE
BOARD COMMUNICATIONS:
Board member Knox White requested that the Board receive copies of the St. Joseph's
Master Plan prior to Board review of the item. He suggested that Harbor Landing send
an update letter to the Board as an off agenda item. He stated that Otis Street, a priority
bikeway, was recently and no bike facilities were installed. He questions if proper
protocol was followed and would like to find out how ensuring proper protocol is
followed is going to be addressed.
President Zuppan stated the Southshore Center needs to come back for review
because they have not met all compliance requirements (bike lane, sidewalks, etc)
12.ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
NONE
13. ADJOURNMENT
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 13 of 13
July 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-08-27.pdf
SuccessorAgencyOversightBoard,2012-08-27,1,"RESOLUTION NO. 12-04
RESOLUTION OF THE OVERSIGHT BOARD FOR THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE
COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA ADOPTING
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING, AUGUST 27, 2012
WHEREAS, the Oversight Board for the Successor Agency to the Community
Improvement Commission of the City of Alameda organized itself pursuant to Chapter 4
(commencing with Section 34179) of Part 1.85 of Division 24 of the Health and Safety Code (the
""Board""); and
WHEREAS, it is necessary for said Board to adopt minutes of public meetings; and
NOW, THEREFORE, THE OVERSIGHT BOARD FOR THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY
TO THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The approval of meeting minutes of the special meeting on August 27, 2012,
of the Oversight Board for the Successor Agency to the Community Improvement Commission
of the City of Alameda, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference.
FURTHER RESOLVED: That pursuant to California Health and Safety Code
Section 34179(h), this action by the Oversight Board for the Successor Agency to the
Community Improvement Commission of the City of Alameda shall be effective five business
days from the date of this Resolution, pending a request for review by the California Department
of Finance
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of October 2012, by the following vote:
,
AYES:
4
NOES:
O
ABSENT:
3
Person
Chair
ATTEST:
Posonary Valesba
Secrétary of the Board",SuccessorAgencyOversightBoard/2012-08-27.pdf
SuccessorAgencyOversightBoard,2012-08-27,2,"EXHIBIT A
OF
City of Alameda
Successor Agency Oversight Board
Special Meeting Minutes
Monday, August 27, 2012 at 6:30 p.m.
City Hall, Conference Room 391
1.
CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL
Chair Russo called the meeting to order at 6:38 p.m. The roll call was taken by
Member Potter. Present were Chair Russo; Vice-Chair Biggs; and Members Chan,
McMahon, Ortiz, Gerhard, and Potter. AC Transit alternate appointee Chris Peeples
was also in attendance.
At this time, Member Potter introduced City of Alameda Assistant City Attorney
Stephanie Garrabrant-Sierra, who will be assisting the Oversight Board and Successor
Agency. Other staff members in attendance were City Attorney Janet Kern and
consultants Bob Staedler and David Doezema.
2.
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE MINUTES - MAY 3, 2012 SPECIAL MEETING
Motion/Second (Chan, Ortiz) and unanimous to approve the minutes as
submitted.
3.
OVERVIEW OF AB1484
City Attorney Kern gave a presentation regarding how the changes to AB1484
affect the Oversight Board.
a. Changes to ROPS
i.
Must be adopted 90 days before the time frame they cover. The 3rd
ROPS must be submitted to DOF by September 1.
ii. Added penalties - the successor agency can be fined $10,000 per day
and have its administrative budget cut by 25 percent if ROPS are not
submitted on time.
iii. DOF review periods have been extended from ten to 40 business
days. This allows DOF much more time to review and respond to all
actions of the Oversight Board. There is a meet and confer process for
successor agencies to dispute a DOF determination.
b. Housing Asset List
i.
DOF required submittal by August 1. Staff compiled and submitted the
Housing Asset List to meet the deadline and it is being presented to
the Board at this meeting.
ii. The DOF has 30 days to object to any item on the Housing Asset List
and there is a meet and confer process for any disputes.",SuccessorAgencyOversightBoard/2012-08-27.pdf
SuccessorAgencyOversightBoard,2012-08-27,3,"Successor Agency Oversight Board
Minutes of Special Meeting, August 27, 2012
Page 2
c. Audits
i. There are a number of audits that are required under AB1484:
1) Due Diligence Review - Housing 20% funds. Successor
agencies must hire an independent outside auditor who is
approved by the County Auditor/Controller. DOF guidelines for
due diligence review are expected by August 31.The Housing
Audit must be completed by October 1, and have Oversight
Board approval by October 15. However, the audit cannot be
approved in one meeting; there has to be a public meeting five
days before the final action. If there are unencumbered funds
identified by the audit, a check releasing that money will be due
to DOF by November 28.
2) Due Diligence Review - Non-Housing 80% funds - Must be
completed by December 15, and have Oversight Board
approval by January 15. This will also be a two-meeting
approval process. If there are unencumbered assets uncovered
by the audit, those funds will be due to DOF by April 10. Unlike
ROPS, there is no financial penalty for each day the Review is
late; however, there is a trigger where Alameda's property or
sales tax could be used to make up the difference DOF believes
is owed.
3) The State Controller is conducting an independent audit of all
assets transferred after January 31, 2012, to see if they were
inappropriately transferred and if there should be a clawback.
This is a change from the original transfer date of January 31,
2011. Once the audit process is completed, the DOF can issue
a Finding of Completion. Once that finding is issued, the
successor agency will know that the assets left can be used for
the purposes intended. Within six months of the issuance of the
Finding of Completion, staff will prepare a long term property
management plan that will be brought to the Oversight Board for
its approval. Then we will begin to follow that plan with the
intention of maximizing the value of the assets.
d. The Oversight Board actions are now even more subject to DOF control:
everything has to be done by resolution and DOF has more added time to
review a board action.
e. There is now clarification in the statute that the Successor Agency is a
separate legal entity. The formation of this separate legal entity for Alameda
will be brought before the City Council in September.
Member Ortiz expressed concern that the Oversight Board does not have
separate legal counsel. The Successor Agency's interests may be different from the
interests the Oversight Board should be looking at. Two weeks ago in Oakland the
board's own attorney challenged what the successor agency was putting forward to",SuccessorAgencyOversightBoard/2012-08-27.pdf
SuccessorAgencyOversightBoard,2012-08-27,4,"Successor Agency Oversight Board
Minutes of Special Meeting, August 27, 2012
Page 3
them. City Attorney Kern responded that she would recommend that in order to save
money, independent counsel should only be brought in to resolve specific areas of
dispute between the taxing entities and the Successor Agency. Alameda's situation
may not be as complicated as Oakland's. There will be independent audits and final
review by DOF. Chair Russo agreed that this was a complex issue and
recommended that this item be placed on the agenda for a full discussion at a future
meeting. Members could bring their constituency counsel with them for this
discussion. The Chair recommended that City Attorney Kern consult other oversight
boards to see how they are handling this issue. Member Potter suggested that
members could come back with specific examples of concerns and potential areas
of conflict to help shape the discussion. The Chair stated that it would be better to
have this be a scoping discussion rather than trying to identify potential conflicts.
City Attorney Kern stated that she would discuss this with other agencies and bring
back her findings to the Board.
This item was submitted for information, only; no board action was requested.
4.
REVIEW OF HOUSING ASSET LIST
Mr. Doezema reported that the list, a requirement of AB1484, had been prepared
by the housing successor, the Alameda Housing Authority. It documents assets
transferred from the successor agency to the housing successor as of August 1, 2012,
the date of the list. DOF was provided with this list. DOF has 30 days to review the list
and object to any item. If DOF has no objections to any of the items, the housing items
are then protected from clawback to the successor agency.
Exhibit A lists real property. All the real property on this list consists of
affordability covenants. These are deed restrictions that limit occupancy of affordable
units to low- and moderate-income people. There are 95 of them. There was no other
property transferred other than deed restrictions.
A Board member noted that the date of the transfer is shown as February 12,
2012. The board did not have its first meeting until April - did the Board see this
information at that meeting? Mr. Doezema responded that it did not - this was a transfer
dictated by operation of law under ABX1 26. Housing assets went to the entity that
agreed to accept them.
A Board member asked if housing is treated differently. Mr. Doezema responded
yes. Board Member Ortiz asked if DOF is inclined to be more sympathetic to housing.
Mr. Doezema responded that the law provides for transfers of assets that utilize low-
and moderate-income housing funds. Member Potter stated that once this list is
approved by DOF, these assets are protected from clawback and it will be left to the
housing successor agencies to administer the affordable housing covenants pursuant to
redevelopment law. A Board member asked if the covenants were in perpetuity.
Member Potter explained that the covenants are for 59 years. When the homes are
sold, the covenants are reimposed for another 59 years, so in a way it's like perpetuity.
The Community Improvement Commission had no proceeds in this; there was no cash,
just a requirement to keep the covenant in place. In response to a Board member",SuccessorAgencyOversightBoard/2012-08-27.pdf
SuccessorAgencyOversightBoard,2012-08-27,5,"Successor Agency Oversight Board
Minutes of Special Meeting, August 27, 2012
Page 4
question regarding the possibility of buying out a covenant, Member Potter stated that
our covenants are not drafted that way.
Mr. Doezema continued his presentation. Exhibit B - Personal Property - not
applicable. Exhibit C - Encumbered Housing Funds for Enforceable Obligations (AUSD
affordable housing and Jack Capon Villa). Regarding the $4.6 million being held in trust
for AUSD affordable housing per the pass-through agreement, Mr. Doezema stated that
DOF has yet to determine if this is an enforceable obligation or a pass-through. If DOF
determines that this is not a housing asset that's encumbered, it could determine that
the money should be returned to the Successor Agency for disbursement to taxing
entities.
Exhibit D - Loans/Grants Receivables - these are deferred or forgivable loans
made in conjunction with the development of affordable housing projects. When and if
these loans are repaid to the housing successor, they would go back to the Housing
Authority for future affordable housing activities.
Exhibit G - Deferrals - these are two loan receivables (SERAF - BWIP/WECIP
and SERAF - APIP) for funds borrowed from the low-moderate housing fund. The
repayment would go to the housing successor. These items are also shown on the
ROPS.
This item was submitted for information, only; no Board action was requested.
5.
RESOLUTION APPROVING 3RD RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT
SCHEDULE (ROPS) - January 1, 2013 to June 30, 2013
Mr. Doezema explained the latest changes to the ROPS from the prior period
ROPS. Motion/Second (Chan, Biggs) to pass the resolution. Motion unanimous
(Member Gerhard was absent.)
6.
SET UPCOMING MEETING SCHEDULE
Member Potter reported that meetings had been scheduled for October 4 and
October 11; however, the auditor has notified us that the audits will not be completed in
time for an October 1 meeting packet. She asked the members about their availability
for meetings on October 29 and November 8. The members indicated a preference for
meetings to start at 6:00 p.m. instead of 6:30 p.m. Member Potter will confirm dates
next week when she learns more about the audit schedule. The members indicated that
October 29 and November 8 would be acceptable reschedule dates if needed.
There is also a need to schedule dates for the 80% non-housing fund review.
The submittal deadline to DOF is January 15, 2013. Member Potter proposed a first
meeting on December 17 or 18 and the second meeting on January 7 or 8. The
members indicated a preference for December 17 and January 7. E-mail appointments
will be sent to the members.
7.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Matthew James Fitzgerald read a statement into the record regarding the need to
keep money in Alameda County.",SuccessorAgencyOversightBoard/2012-08-27.pdf
SuccessorAgencyOversightBoard,2012-08-27,6,"Successor Agency Oversight Board
Minutes of Special Meeting, August 27, 2012
Page 5
8.
ADJOURNMENT
Chair Russo called the meeting adjourned at 7:57 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Cosomany Velector
Rosemary Valeska
Secretary
Approved as submitted on October 18, 2012
Resolution 2012-04",SuccessorAgencyOversightBoard/2012-08-27.pdf