{"body": "GolfCommission", "date": "2005-07-20", "page": 1, "text": "ALAMEDA GOLF COMMISSION\nMINUTES OF MEETING\nWednesday, July 20, 2005\n1.\nCALL TO ORDER\nVice Chair Tony Santare called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in Room\n#360, Alameda City Hall, 2263 Santa Clara Avenue.\n1-A.\nRoll Call\nRoll call was taken and members present were: Vice Chair Tony Santare,\nSecretary Betsy Gammell, Commissioner Ray Gaul, Commissioner Bill\nSchmitz and Commissioner Bob Wood. Absent: Chair Sandr\u00e9 Swanson\nand Commissioner Jane Sullwold. Also present were General Manager\nDana Banke and Head Golf Professional Matt Plumlee.\n1-B\nApproval of Minutes - Regular Meeting of June 15, 2005\nThe Commission approved the minutes unanimously.\n1-C\nAdoption of Agenda\nThe Commission approved the agenda unanimously.\n2.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS\n3.\nAGENDA ITEMS:\n4.\nORAL REPORTS\n4-A\nGolf Shop and Driving Range activities report by Head Golf Professional\nMatt Plumlee.\nThe Head Golf Professional reported that the annual Chuck Corica Golf\nComplex \"Demo Day\" was held on July 16, 2004. Approximately\n$23,000 in sales were reported not counting items sold out of stock.\nEleven vendors participated in the event and it was huge success. The\nvendors need to be booked about six months ahead of time. It was\nmentioned that the straps on the pull carts need replacing. A compliment\nwas given to Golf Course starter Tommy Nickerson for exemplary\ncustomer service.\n4-B\nGeneral Manager Dana Banke's report highlighting maintenance and\noperational activities for the month at the Golf Complex.\nThe General Manager reported that the Jack Clark Course was aerated last", "path": "GolfCommission/2005-07-20.pdf"}
{"body": "GolfCommission", "date": "2005-07-20", "page": 2, "text": "week and is healing well. The staff gave out two-for-one coupon, to\ntournament groups inconvenienced by the work being done, which seemed\nto make the situation better. The area of the new practice putting green\nhas been outlined and a survey of the underground utilities will be done\nthis week to eliminate any line breakage during the irrigation trenching.\nThe tree has been removed on #1 of the Mif Albright Course for the new\nhole and the new green on the new #3 hole was mowed out. The practice\narea will be opened as soon as possible and Alameda Power and Telecom\nhas been called to come out and redirect the lights. The Jack Clark Course\nirrigation pump's motor broke and has been repaired. The course suffered\nminor damage during the replacement period. A problem also occurred\nwith the Earl Fry Course pump and the repairs are being done. The new\nCity Manager, Debra Kurita is scheduled to begin on August 1 and is\nscheduling meetings with the various departments over the next few\nmonths. The General Manager, Chair Swanson, and Commissioner\nSchmitz have scheduled a meeting with the Mayor, New City Manager,\nand Assistant City Manager on August 16, 2005 to discuss the new\nclubhouse project. The General Manager complimented the Junior Golf\nClub on their organization running the tournaments. The club\nhas\npartnered with Junior Golf Resources to have the Junior Pro Shop open on\ntournament play days to distribute the golf equipment. The City Manager\nreceived a letter from Legends and Heroes requesting a meeting to discuss\ntheir contract. The comment was made that Legends and Heroes does not\nopen the snack shack on #9 of the Earl Fry Course until 9:30 am or 10:00\nam and it should be opened earlier. The question was raised whether the\ndead trees on #13 of the Earl Fry Course have been removed yet. The\nGeneral Manager stated that they have not been removed yet. The\nsuggestion was made to replace the garbage cans at the snack shack. The\nGeneral Manager stated that they have been replaced and the restrooms\nwere power washed. The General Manager also mentioned that he would\nbe on vacation starting tomorrow and returning on Monday, August 1.\n4-D\nBeautification Program by Mrs. Norma Arnerich.\nNo report given.\n5.\nCOMMISSIONERSI REPORTS\n5-A\nMarketing and Promotions, Secretary Gammell.\nSecretary Gammell gave an overview of the current marketing and\npromotions. The promotions include the Silver Club Senior Package,\nEarly Bird Package, Friday Monthly Ticket rate, Kids Play Free with a\npaid Adult, $25 Late Twilight rate, Two for One Green Fees for Affiliate\nClubs and Discounted Range Balls (morning & evening). Advertising\nincludes the new web site www.golfinalameda.com, an ad at SBC Park for", "path": "GolfCommission/2005-07-20.pdf"}
{"body": "GolfCommission", "date": "2005-07-20", "page": 3, "text": "the Giants games, Japan Telephone Guide Web Site, Golf 707 Internet\nSpecials and the Senior Golf Club upstart. The question was raised\nwhether a newspaper ad would be a good idea. The General Manager\nstated that the newspaper ads are very expensive. The question was raised\nregarding updating the web site. The General Manager replied that the\nsite designer, Infolane, is currently managing the web site. The staff needs\nto get training from the company to manage the site in-house. The\nsuggestion was made to continue to update the website and use it for\nadvertising because it will save money and people will use it look for\nspecials and information.\n5-B\nGolf Complex Financial Report, Commissioner Gaul\nCommissioner Gaul prepared a report outlining the complimentary pass\nplay at the Complex for fiscal year 2004/2005. Commissioner Gaul\nquestioned why the PGA/LPGA rounds averaged approximately 249 per\nmonth. The Head Golf Professional stated that the starters use that sku\ncode for all of the promotions. The Head Golf Professional will set up\nnew sku numbers for the promotions to better track the pass play. The\nHead Golf Professional will also do a report on how many rounds were\nbooked through Golf 707 for the last fiscal year.\n5-C\nMen's and Senior Club Liaison, Vice Chair Santare.\nVice Chair Santare reported that he was unable to attend the Senior Golf\nClub meeting this month but will be sure to attend both the Alameda Golf\nClub and the Senior Club meetings next month and report on both.\n5-D\nNew Clubhouse Project, Commissioner Schmitz.\nCommissioner Schmitz reported that the clubhouse project is moving\nforward. Commissioner Schmitz will be representing the Golf\nCommission at the meeting with the Mayor, City Manager and Assistant\nCity Manager on August 16, 2005. The hope is to have the financial report\nby John Ritchie completed for the meeting as well as a preliminary soil\nreport for the Chuck Corica Golf Complex site. It was stated that there are\nareas on the golf courses where the soil is very poor. Commissioner\nWood stated that the soil is generally bored and tested when the footprint\nof building is laid out and the weight bearing areas are designated.\n5-E\nMaintenance, Buildings, Security, Albright Course and Driving Range,\nCommissioner Sullwold.\nSecretary Gammell gave Commissioner Sullwold's report in her absence.\nShe reported that there are no security issues to report although there was\nan incident at the Driving Range when a customer's ball struck the canopy", "path": "GolfCommission/2005-07-20.pdf"}
{"body": "GolfCommission", "date": "2005-07-20", "page": 4, "text": "and it hit another customer. The injured party requested 911 be called and\nwas taken to the hospital.\n5-F\nCity Council and Government Liaison, Chair Swanson.\nNo report due to absence.\n5-G\nFront Entrance Beautification Project, Commissioner Wood.\nCommissioner Wood reported that he and the General Manager toured the\nfire tower recently and it seemed reasonably clean. The Fire Department\nstill has items stored in the building. The doublewide trailer adjacent to\nthe building appears to be easily removed and possibly sold for salvage.\nThere are no interior walls inside the structure so you can see the studs and\nconstruction of the walls. Commissioner Wood also made a presentation\nto the Alameda Golf Club outlining his plans for the structure. It has been\ndetermined that the building will not be habitable and only stand as a\nmonument. Commissioner Wood met with Greg McFann of the City of\nAlameda's Planning Department and Mr. McFann is going to research\nwhat needs to be done to repair the structure.\n5-H\nGolf Complex Restaurant Report, Legends & Heroes.\nNone to report.\n6.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON AGENDA (Public Comment)\nNone to report.\n7.\nOLD BUSINESS\nNone to report.\n8.\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS\nIncluded in the Commission packet was a memorandum to the Finance\nDepartment showing the surcharge payment for June 2005 of $16,638.\nThe year-to-date total is $156,825 for the fiscal year 2004/2005 to the\nGeneral Fund.\n9.\nANNOUNCEMENTS/ADJOURNMENT\nThe meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m.\nThe agenda for the meeting was posted 72 hours in advance in accordance with the\nBrown Act.", "path": "GolfCommission/2005-07-20.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-07-20", "page": 1, "text": "TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES\nJuly 20, 2005\nChair Knox White called the Transportation Commission to order at 7:30 P.M.\n1.\nROLL CALL - Roll was called and the following recorded:\nMembers Present:\nJohn Knox White\nRobb Ratto\nPatianne Parker\nRobert McFarland\nMichael Krueger\nAbsent:\nJeff Knoth\nEric Schatmeier\nStaff Present:\nBarbara Hawkins - City Engineer, Public Works\nBarry Bergman - Program Specialist II, Public Works\n2.\nAPPROVAL OF MINUTES\nCommissioner Krueger had an exception to the minutes of April 27th. page 3. He requested the\nremoval of the phrase \"a grid should not be introduced where it does not currently exist.\" Did\nnot say that it should never be used in an undeveloped area. He stated that while this may apply\nto an existing development, a grid system may be appropriate in a currently undeveloped area.\nChair Knox White noted that he was identified as JKW on page 2.\nHold off on the approval of the minutes until Commissioner Schatmeier arrives.\n3.\nAGENDA CHANGES - None\n4.\nCOMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS\nNone of thesub-committees oftheTMPhave met. A meeting has been scheduled for July 27th\n5.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS\n6.\nOLD BUSINESS\n6A.\nBroadway/Jackson Phase 2 Feasibility Study\nStaff Hawkins did a presentation on the above. She showed a large drawing of the study and\ndescribed the various components of each of the three alternatives being studied, and noted that\nshe had presented an earlier version to the Transportation Commission. The first part of the study\nwas a survey that was conducted with council members of Alameda and Oakland to determine", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-07-20.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-07-20", "page": 2, "text": "their familiarity with the original project study report and proposed improvements. The City of\nAlameda had some familiarity with the improvements but was not fully aware of all of them.\nThey knew about the Martin Luther King exit and knew basically direct access to Alameda was\nnot provided.\nBecause Oakland and Alameda could not find a solution for direct to Alameda, a portion of the\nfunding was set aside and it was decided that at a later time a feasibility study would be\nconducted to look at Alameda access. This is the study currently under way. The primary\nstakeholders are: the City of Alameda, City of Oakland, Caltrans and ACTIA. The secondary\nstakeholders were: Port of Oakland, Congestion Management Agency (CMA), Chinatown, West\nAlameda Business Association (WABA), and developers from Alameda (Catellus and Alameda\nPoint Community Partners) and Oakland (Signature Properties and another developer).\nStaff Hawkins stated that Alameda supports going forward with a proposal so that the\nstakeholders would support it. Having the stakeholders support the recommended solution\nwould be an important step in securing funding. The feasibility study is only looking at the\nfeasibility as to which ones they can build, which ones are structural impossible and which ones\nimpact too much on historic sites, etc.\nStaff Hawkins noted that currently Oakland does not support the construction of a new Harrison\nStreet off-ramp. One possible solution that may enable the Broadway off-ramp to meet the needs\nof both Alameda and Oakland is a \"Texas U-Turn\", which would allow drivers to exist at the\nBroadway ramp, make a U-turn before reaching Broadway, and accessing the Webster Tube.\nStaff Hawkins noted that it will be expensive to build all these improvements. The\nTransportation Commission could help by providing recommendations regarding priorities or\nsteps that could be taken to facilitate coordination with other agencies.\nCommissioner Parker asked what the life of an elevated freeway would be. She asked how any\nother proposed projects could relate to potential phasing of the Broadway-Jackson\nimprovements.\nStaff Hawkins said that Caltrans is currently working on a seismic retrofit down by Oak Street.\nOtherwise, Caltrans does not see any additional safety project needs within the next 50 years.\nChair Knox White asked what options have been already eliminated from consideration.\nStaff Hawkins said that she couldn't detail all 13 alternatives, but a number of them included\nsuperstructures.\nCommissioner Parker asked about project timing. Would it be phased? How would the timing\nmatch up with development in the area?\nStaff Hawkins said in terms of funding we have approximately $12 million is allocated to the\nproject. But in the countywide transportation plan we could get up to $28 million, much of\n2", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-07-20.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-07-20", "page": 3, "text": "which would come from the State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP). This has been\nidentified as a priority at the county level; the next step is to compete for funds at the state level.\nAlameda stakeholders have indicated that two of their high priorities are the horseshoe access\nramp onto northbound I-880 and direct access onto southbound I-880.\nCommissioner McFarland asked if there is a weave problem at the proposed off-ramp on\nnorthbound I-880 and the existing on-ramp getting onto I-980.\nStaff Hawkins answered that the weave distance was evaluated and is not a problem.\nStaff Hawkins stated that we will need to weigh congestion relief benefits against the estimated\ncosts, and this will impact on project phasing.\nCommissioner McFarland asked what environmental document is required.\nStaff Hawkins answered that the next step would be the environmental analysis and the project\nstudy report, if we go forward with all the project elements. Hopefully this could be done in two\nyears.\nCommissioner Parker asked about the direct route from I-880 down toward the Broadway on-\nramp, how that relates to the existing Jackson Street ramp, and whether it is possible to use the\nexisting ramp to access the tubes.\nStaff Hawkins stated that using the Jackson Street exit would require drivers to travel through the\nproduce district to get to the tube. They tried to have direct access from the Jackson Street ramp\ninto the tubes, but that would have precluded access to Jack London Square or Chinatown.\nCommissioner Krueger asked if AC Transit is involved in any of these discussions, as the\ntransbay buses would be impacted, as well local buses on Broadway.\nStaff Hawkins said that the analysis has accounted for the required turning radii of the buses, but\nthat AC Transit has not been actively involved in discussions of the design. The study team has\ntalked about identifying queue jump lanes to enhance access to the Webster tube.\nStaff Hawkins agreed that it is a good time to involve AC Transit in the project discussions.\nPublic Comment Opened\nMelody Marr from the Alameda Chamber of Commerce asked who the stakeholders are for the\nproject.\nStaff Hawkins responded that the stakeholders included City of Alameda, City of Oakland,\nCaltrans, Port of Oakland, Chinatown, West Alameda Business Association, Signature Properties\n(which has a project in Oakland), Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority\n3", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-07-20.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-07-20", "page": 4, "text": "(ACTIA), Catellus, Alameda Point Community Partners, and the Peralta Colleges, Congestion\nManagement Agency,\nMs. Marr asked that the Chamber of Commerce board members and others be given a\npresentation on the project in September.\nMs Stieg wanted to know who actually are the representatives that are part of this committee\ndiscussion and who represents Alameda's interests.\nStaff Hawkins stated that they were listed on the email that is sent to them.\nMs. Steig mentioned that she and some of other people on the email list are not able to attend the\nmeetings. She indicated she would like to find out more about why the 13 of the 16 project\ndesign options were eliminated. She also asked if she could obtain a list of the proposals and the\npros and cons of each before the final report is completed.\nStaff Hawkins said that it would be presented to the City Council and then the City Council can\nopen it up for comments. She added that the Stakeholders meeting would be a good place to\nexpress her concerns.\nMs Steig said that she was not able to make those meetings because they are on Mondays. She\nasked that the Commission take no actions on this feasibility study until the Alameda business\ncommunity has a chance to review and comment on it. She expressed concern that some of the\noptions would have a negative impact on Alameda.\nCommissioner Ratto stated that WABA was a designated stakeholder and understood some of the\nscheduling problems. He asked if they have been receiving the meeting packets.\nStaff Hawkins said that emails are sent to them along with the information from the meetings.\nCommissioner Ratto suggested that since WABA is unable to send a representative to the\nstakeholder meetings that a representative from the Chamber of Commerce be identified to\nrepresent the Alameda business community.\nMs. Stieg supported this idea, and asked that the Chamber be added as a stakeholder.\nStaff Hawkins agreed.\nPublic Comment Closed\nCommissioner Parker said that she would like to see which proposals were discarded. She added\nthat the project's scope of work looks at freeway access from Alameda but does not address other\nissues Alameda is concerned with, such as connectivity from Alameda to Chinatown or Jack\nLondon Square.\n4", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-07-20.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-07-20", "page": 5, "text": "Staff Hawkins said that it was a joint effort with Caltrans, Oakland and Alameda. They were not\nlooking at local street circulation but at access to the freeways and not to preclude access to the\nlocal communities. She stated that the scope suggested by Commissioner Parker could be a\nsecond study.\nChair Knox White suggested that rather than identifying a specific alternative, it would be\nhelpful to present the Council with the Commission's priorities and concerns. He expressed\nconcern that there are significant political issues, but that the issues are not being discussed at a\npolitical level.\nStaff Hawkins noted that there were two meetings left. One was with the technical group and the\nsecond with the general stakeholders. The general stakeholders meeting would be in September.\nThere would be a discussion as to any elements that would need to be removed and then move\nforward. After that the next step would be the environmental review and the PSR report.\nCommissioner Parker said that the focus should be on doing the best job and what we want to\naccomplish.\nStaff Hawkins stated that the traffic study would include local circulation and a few blocks\nbeyond the area bounded by 8th, Oak, and MLK.\nMelody Marr from the Chamber of Commerce asked to table this until the next Transportation\nCommission meeting so that they could have time to review it.\nChair Knox White said that the Transportation Commission has no power to keep the Chamber in\nor out of this discussion. The Mayor had asked for the Transportation Commission to review it.\nStaff Hawkins said that the September meeting would be the final discussion by the stakeholders\ngroup.\nCommissioner Ratto moved to recommend Council that they contact whomever they need to\ncontact to keep all the options available at this point, and that nothing be taken off the table.\nCommissioner Parker seconded the motion. Motion carried by a unanimous voice vote - 5.\n6B\nTMP SUB-COMMITTEES APPOINTMENTS AND NEXT STEPS\nChair Knox White stated that he would hold off on committee appointments since Commissioner\nKnoth was not present.\nStaff Bergman said that the sub-committee would be meeting on July 27th\n8.\nSTAFF COMMUNICATIONS\nChair Knox White mentioned that the bus stop by Lum School on Otis Drive was removed and\nnot replaced by an alternative. As a result, there are no bus stops on Otis Drive between Grand\n5", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-07-20.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-07-20", "page": 6, "text": "and South Shore. This was well beyond the 1000 or 1200 feet requirement. There was no\nnotification of this.\nCommissioner Krueger said that he and his wife walked the route and confirmed there was no\nbus stop sign posted between Grand and Whitehall.\nStaff Hawkins said that the stop was removed at the request of the police department, that there\nwas a problem with the circulation of students, crossing guards and vehicles. Since it was within\nthe distance prescribed in the Transit Plan, City and AC Transit staff agreed to remove the stop.\nCommissioner Parker asked if the Transportation Technical Team should make that decision.\nStaff Hawkins said that the Transportation Technical Team does not deal with the removal of bus\nstops. AC Transit deals with the removal of bus stops, not the City, and the TTT has been\ndealing with the bus stop issues only when it involves parking spaces. She said AC Transit\nshould provide notification to the public if a stop is removed.\nChair Knox White asked how the recommendations of the transit plan are accounted for, if AC\nTransit has the right to make the decision unilaterally.\nCommissioner Parker said that the school should have been involved in these discussions, since\nthis affects the ability of students to take transit to school.\nStaff Hawkins noted that the school was involved in the discussions regarding the bus stop.\nCommissioner Krueger suggested that we should try to have some type of public noticing when\nbus stops are removed, even if it is not technically required.\nCommissioner Krueger said that the re-paint job of the bus shelters on Grand Avenue and Santa\nClara Avenue turned out really well. The City is doing a great job on getting graffiti removed\nfrom the shelters, and praised Public Works regarding the new and existing bus shelters.\nCommissioner Ratto noted that PSBA would be having the annual Art and Wine Fair on July 30-\n31.\n9.\nADJOURNMENT\nMeeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M.\n G:\\pubworks\\LT\\TRANSPORTATIONICOMMITTEESITC/2005/0705/072005-minutes-final.doo\n6", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-07-20.pdf"}