{"body": "PublicArtCommission", "date": "2005-09-28", "page": 1, "text": "CITT\nMINUTES OF PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE\nthe\nMEETING OF SEPTEMBER 28, 2005\n(Revised 2/7/06)\nDATE:\nWednesday, September 28, 2005\nTIME:\n7:00 p.m.\nPLACE:\nCity Hall, 2263 Santa Clara Avenue, Third Floor, Room 360\nAlameda, CA 94501\n1.\nRoll Call:\nThe meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m.\nPresent:\nChair (C) Huston, VC Lee, Committee Members (CM) Cecilia\nCervantes (late), K.C. Rosenberg, and Peter Wolfe\nStaff:\nChristina Bailey, Secretary, Public Art Commission\nChrista Johnson, Assistant to the City Manager (A2CM)\n2.\nApproval of Minutes\nA.\nMinutes of Meeting on June 23, 2005\nOn page 2, Section 5A, paragraph 2, CM Wolfe wished to make clear that\nhis understanding was that the Development Services Department was\ngoing to allot Public Art funds for the restoration of the theater and that it\nshould be done at a publicly accessible area.\nM/S/C\nRosenberg/Cervantes\n(approved)\n\"That Minutes of Public Art Advisory Committee Meeting on June 23,\n2005 be approved with changes.'\nApproved (4) - Huston, Cervantes, Rosenberg, Wolfe\nAbstain (1) - Lee\n3.\nOral Communications\n(Any person may address the Committee in regard to any matter over which\nthe Commission has jurisdiction or of which it may take cognizance that is\nnot on the agenda.)\nSecretary Bailey stated that the Public Art website would be moved from\nthe Recreation & Parks website, to the Planning & Building Department's\nwebsite. She asked whether members wanted to be recognized as\nPAC Meeting\n1\nMinutes\nSeptember 28, 2005", "path": "PublicArtCommission/2005-09-28.pdf"}
{"body": "PublicArtCommission", "date": "2005-09-28", "page": 2, "text": "Commission Members on the site. PAC members agreed that they should\nbe listed. CM Cervantes asked that her e-mail could be included as well.\n4.\nWritten Communications\nNone.\n5.\nOld Business\nA. Update on South Shore Shopping Center - (Oral Presentation)\n-\nTad Savinar, Art Consultant, Harsch Investment\nProperties\nBefore Commission's conference call with Mr. Savinar, they discussed\nthe project. CM Rosenberg asked whether they can place additional\npieces after they have met the Ordinance's requirements. C Huston\nanswered in the affirmative. CM Rosenberg went on to ask if Mr.\nSavinar could bring in only those projects that meet the funding\nthreshold. The process would be streamlined if he could be more\nspecific. Secretary Bailey suggested that they address the issue when\nthey spoke with Mr. Savinar. CM Wolfe inquired as to whether or not\nthe artists have considered where their art will be placed in the mall.\nDuring the call, Mr. Savinar explained two goals for this\npresentation/discussion. First, that everyone understands what has\nbeen presented to date with an opportunity for further comments.\nSecond, the ability to move forward with the actual application process\nand obtain the correct forms.\nHe went on to explain that South Shore Shopping Center will be in a\nCraftsman style, indigenous to the area. One cause for the delay in\nbringing the project before the PAC was that new alleyways and\ncirculation paths have been devised.\nMr. Savinar stated that the developer is interested in using local artists\nwhenever possible. He went on to speak about three artists whose\nwork will be featured throughout the center; Ake Grunditz and JaYing\nWang of Alameda, and John Laursen from Portland, OR. The works\nwill carry regional or Alameda-specific imagery. The Public Art will be\nfeatured throughout the center.\nC Huston stated that she was hungry to see the artists' own style, while\nCM Rosenberg emphasized being able to see the artists' voice in their\npieces.\nCM Rosenberg expressed her desire to see how the art will relate to the\nsetting. Mr. Savinar stated that the landscape artist has been charged\nPAC Meeting\n2\nMinutes\nSeptember 28, 2005", "path": "PublicArtCommission/2005-09-28.pdf"}
{"body": "PublicArtCommission", "date": "2005-09-28", "page": 3, "text": "with making the interior circulation areas that of a neighborhood scale,\nnot a large shopping center. He likened it to walking through a gallery\nor museum, not a plaza or square.\nMr. Savinar concludes the presentation by explaining that his client is\none of the most aggressive print collectors in the United States. The\nclient wants the collection at South Shore to be family-oriented and\nappealing to the masses, but not watered down; however, he has\nrejected some pieces with \"edge.' C Huston reiterated her desire for\noriginality in the pieces. She went on to state that opportunities for\ninnovation can be used in subtle ways through material and scale for\ninstance.\nAfter the presentation, the PAC discusses South Shore further. A2CM\nJohnson stated that the $150,000 does not all go towards the public art\npiece. After the administrative and consultant fees, approximately\n$97,500 will be left for actual pieces. Mr. Savinar should consider that\ntransportation and recognition plaques are included in the amount.\nCM Rosenberg stated that the Laursen work would most likely have a\npositive outcome after PAC review. CM Wolfe expressed his desire to\nsee how the Laursen panels would be placed throughout the center.\nB. Update on Library Project - (Oral Report)\nSecretary Bailey stated that the PAC received documents in their July\nAgenda Packets that gave further background information on the\nongoing library project. This includes a memo sent to the Mayor and\nCity Council by Susan Hardie, retired Library Director. It explained the\nbackground of the Public Art process, including the approval process\ncarried out by the PAAC on July 21, 2004.\nSecretary Bailey added that funding for Masayuki Nagase's eight\nmedallions, Cadence of the Water, has been secured. The medallions\nhave the highest priority, because they are required to be installed\nduring construction. She also shared that an article had been featured\nin the Alameda Journal on Tuesday, July 26. It pictured Masayuki\ncarving giant stone, similar to that which will be used for the library.\nC. Update on Bay Ship and Yacht - (Oral Report)\nSecretary Bailey explained that the Planning & Building Department\nreceived a letter from Cris Craft, Chief Engineer representing Bay Ship\n& Yacht, on August 5, 2005. He questioned whether the Public Art\nOrdinance applied to their project, since they are the tenants and their\nPAC Meeting\n3\nMinutes\nSeptember 28, 2005", "path": "PublicArtCommission/2005-09-28.pdf"}
{"body": "PublicArtCommission", "date": "2005-09-28", "page": 4, "text": "project was an improvement. He requested a credit for the amount\nalready paid for the Administrative Fee.\nThe Building Official and Deputy City Attorney reviewed the Ordinance\nand the project, and found that the construction effort does trigger the\nart fee imposed. The project was deemed a major improvement, which\nincluded the construction of a new building. The term \"Tenant\nImprovements\" is commonly used in leases and entails interior\nimprovements performed or installed by the tenant. The City's\nresponse was sent to Mr. Craft on September 8, 2005.\nD. Update on Bridgeside Shopping Center - (Oral Report)\nSecretary Bailey explained that she has spoken with Bruce Qualls from\nRegency Centers, contact person from Bridgeside. Doug Wiele is no\nlonger the contact person, and he did not make Mr. Qualls aware of the\nOrdinance. A Public Art packet, including Guidelines and Ordinance,\nwas sent to Mr. Qualls.\nOn September 23, Secretary Bailey spoke with Barbara Price, CEO of\nPK Consultants, who is representing Bridgeside Shopping Center. She\nexpressed her desire to submit an application for Public Art soon.\nAccording to initial permit valuations, $40,000 will be required for Public\nArt at the Nob Hill store ($10,000 administrative fee); $23,000 will be\nrequired for Public Art at the Fueling Station ($5750.00 administration\nfee).\nCM Rosenberg asked if there were still plans to create an amphitheater.\nSecretary Bailey stated that the issue had been brought up. CM\nRosenberg went on to express that the applicant be made aware that\nnot all nautical items should be considered public art.\nVC Lee asked where all the imagery of the shipping industry came\nfrom. She was under the impression that Alameda had been settled as\na residential community. CM Rosenberg stated that unique moments in\nhistory should be incorporated into the projects.\nE. Status of Annual Report, Next Steps - (Oral Report)\nA2CM Johnson stated that an Annual Report is given to the City\nCouncil when there is money in the Public Art In-Lieu Fund. If there is\nno money, no report is needed. At this time, the fund has collected no\nmoney.\nF. City of Emeryville Artist List - (Oral Report)\nPAC Meeting\n4\nMinutes\nSeptember 28, 2005", "path": "PublicArtCommission/2005-09-28.pdf"}
{"body": "PublicArtCommission", "date": "2005-09-28", "page": 5, "text": "Secretary Bailey explained that C Huston obtained the list from the City\nof Emeryville. C Huston stated that it is a viable list, which is strong on\nindividuals and weak on organizations. CM Rosenberg stated that\norganizations can be added as they are found. CM Wolfe stated that\nart organizations are important, since they broadcast opportunities to\nindividuals.\nSecretary Bailey explained that the program does not have the required\nfunds to keep all the artists for every project's mailing list. Call for\nArtists can still be sent to large publications and art organizations, or the\nlist can be drastically reduced from over 1000 artists. C Huston now\nstates that the list could be edited to art organizations, art publications,\nand Alameda/Oakland artists.\n6.\nNew Business\nA. Reappointment for Karen Lee and K.C. Rosenberg - (Oral Report)\nSecretary Bailey stated that the Mayor reappointed VC Lee and CM\nRosenberg to another term. They were appointed at the City Council\nmeeting on Tuesday, September 20. They were previously appointed\nto a two-year term in November 2003.\n7.\nSubcommittee Reports\n-\nTheater & Garage Project - CM's Cervantes and Rosenberg\nCM's Cervantes and Rosenberg explained the process that went into\nselecting the three finalists for the Civic Center Parking Structure Art\nproject. CM Rosenberg stated that it was a competitive process, with a\nstylistically diverse pool of applicants. She was impressed that the artists\nwere interested in using the technology requested, and they knew to what\nthey were responding.\nSecretary Bailey stated that six (6) applications were submitted. C Huston\nstated that there should have been more applicants. She asked how much\nadvance notice was given to publications. Secretary Bailey stated that\nnotices went out a month in advance. C Huston stated that at least four (4)\nweeks are needed to be published, and six (6) weeks to run in order to\ngenerate more applications.\nCM Cervantes asked when the Request for Proposals would be sent out.\nSecretary Bailey stated that Development Services has been busy and the\nRFP has yet to be sent out. The artists will have about a month and a half\nto submit their conceptual design.\nPAC Meeting\n5\nMinutes\nSeptember 28, 2005", "path": "PublicArtCommission/2005-09-28.pdf"}
{"body": "PublicArtCommission", "date": "2005-09-28", "page": 6, "text": "8.\nCommissioner Communications\nNone.\n9.\nUpcoming Meeting Dates\nWednesday, October 26, 2005\nWednesday, November 23, 2005\nWednesday, December 28, 2005\nCM Cervantes suggested that the November meeting be moved to\nNovember 30. C Huston suggested canceling December date due to the\nholidays.\n\"That November meeting date be changed from November 23 to\nNovember 30, and that the December meeting be cancelled be\napproved.'\nM/S/C\nHuston/Rosenberg\n(approved)\nApproved (5) - Huston, Lee, Cervantes, Rosenberg, Wolfe\n10.\nAdjournment:\nThe meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m.\nPAC Meeting\n6\nMinutes\nSeptember 28, 2005", "path": "PublicArtCommission/2005-09-28.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-09-28", "page": 1, "text": "TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES\nSeptember 28, 2005\nChair Knox White called the Transportation Commission to order at 7:37 PM.\n1.\nROLL CALL - Roll was called and the following recorded:\nMembers Present:\nJohn Knox White\nRobert MacFarland\nPatianne Parker\nRobb Ratto\nEric Schatmeier\nAbsent:\nJeff Knoth\nMichael Krueger\nStaff Present:\nBarbara Hawkins, City Engineer\nBarry Bergman - Program Specialist II, Public Works\n2.\nAPPROVAL OF MINUTES\nCommissioner Parker moved approval of the minutes for the July 20\nTransportation Commission meeting. Commissioner Ratto seconded the\nmotion. Motion carried by a unanimous vote - 5.\n3.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nNone.\n4.\nCOMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS\nTransportation Master Plan (TMP) Multimodal Circulation Plan Subcommittee - The\nSubcommittee has been working on a revision of the City's street classification system\nand met with the Task Force. A follow-up Task Force meeting is scheduled for October\n12.\n5.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS - NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS\nNone.\n6.\nOLD BUSINESS", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-09-28.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-09-28", "page": 2, "text": "6A.\nTransportation Master Plan (TMP) Priorities\nStaff `Bergman presented the staff report. He noted that since the original timeline for the\nTMP was approved, that circumstances had changed; as a result, staff is recommending a\nrevision to the planned order of some of the mode-specific plans of the TMP.\nSpecifically, the City had received a grant for the Pedestrian Plan, and recently the\nCouncil has expressed an interest in several activities that would fit into the discussion\nfor the Transportation Systems Management/Transportation Demand Management\n(TSM/TDM) Plan. Since the Multimodal Circulation Plan is well under way, and would\nserve as the framework for the entire TMP, staff views this as the highest priority.\nCommissioner Parker stated that is would be easier to keep track of the progress of the\nTMP if staff could prepare a chart illustrating the TMP schedule.\nCommissioner Parker also noted that the proposed ECO Pass program is specific to\nemployers and asked why it could not be expanded to a larger population across the City.\nShe also noted that there is a proposed pass program for the Alameda Point development.\nStaff Bergman responded that AC Transit is in the process of developing a standardized\nformula for calculating the costs of these types of programs. Currently they only have\nthree programs in place, all in Berkeley - for City of Berkeley employees, University of\nCalifornia staff, and University of California students. Because of the different\ncharacteristics of these populations, the costs for these programs need to be calculated\nseparately.\nPublic Comment Opened\nBill Smith recommended the use of benefit assessment districts to develop funding\nsources for needed transportation improvements.\nLucy Gigli, President of BikeAlameda, stated that she was wary of further delaying the\nbike plan update. She noted that it has been six years since the initial plan was\ncompleted, and that there is a need for many changes to the current plan.\nJon Spangler expressed his concern about the feasibility of collecting all of the required\ndata for the pedestrian plan by the end of the school year. He reiterated Ms. Gigli's\nconcerns about the bike plan, and indicated that he would like to see it made a higher\npriority.\nPublic Comment Closed\nChair Knox White recommended that once the bike plan update begins that a second\nbicycle plan update workshop be held due to poor attendance from the public at the initial\nmeeting. He asked that the workshop be held at City Hall instead of City Hall West to\nencourage improved attendance.", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-09-28.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-09-28", "page": 3, "text": "Commissioner Parker moved to accept the staff recommendation. Commissioner Ratto\nseconded the motion. Motion carried by a unanimous vote - 5.\n7.\nNEW BUSINESS\n7A.\nI-880 Access Issues\nChair Knox White noted that there are projects being undertaken in Oakland which could\nhave a significant impact on Alameda's access to the regional transportation system, and\nhe is concerned that there have not been sufficient opportunities for input in the early\nstages of project development. Specifically, he mentioned the Broadway/Jackson\ninterchange project, and the Park Street Triangle project, both of which will impact on\nconnections between Alameda and I-880.\nChair Knox White stated that the process for providing input into a project can be\nconfusing, and that it would be helpful for elected officials and citizens to have a better\nunderstanding of how it works. He distributed a handout suggesting the development of\na task force to discuss these issues. Specifically, Chair Knox White suggested that the TC\nrecommend a process whereby staff from the cities of Alameda and Oakland, elected\nofficials and the public would develop an agreement which would define what projects\nwould be of mutual concern as well as a process for soliciting input on these projects\nearly on. He suggested that this approach would be proactive and would enable ideas to\nbe circulated early in the process before design decisions are made.\nChair Knox White emphasized that the proposed task force would have a limited life\nspan, meeting perhaps three or four times, to develop this agreement.\nCommissioner Parker asked what has already been done and what is being done to\ncoordinate efforts between the two jurisdictions.\nOpen Public Comment\nJon Spangler stated that Chair Knox White's handout does not address emergency\npreparedness issues, and that consideration of these issues at a regional level is important.\nHe suggested that a task force be established for the long term, so that the cities of\nAlameda and Oakland could continue to coordinate their efforts on projects that affect\nboth jurisdictions.\nBill Smith expressed his support for Mr. Spangler's comments regarding emergency\npreparedness, and noted the importance of enhanced access to I-880 for Alameda.\nClose Public Comment\nCommissioner Schatmeier suggested that the Interagency Liaison Committee (ILC),\nwhich the City of Alameda and AC Transit use as a way of addressing transit issues,\ncould serve as a model.", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-09-28.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-09-28", "page": 4, "text": "Chair Knox White acknowledged that the staff of both cities does communicate, but his\nconcern is that the concerns of the public are not aired early enough in the process, and\nthat important decisions are made before the input is solicited\nCommissioner Parker stated that she did not know enough about current coordination\nefforts between Alameda and Oakland. She moved that this item be tabled until the next\nmeeting.\nStaff Hawkins stated that there are a number of ways in which the two cities currently\nwork together. She noted that there is the ??? which meets quarterly, including staff\nrepresentation from Oakland, Alameda, Caltrans, the Coast Guard, and Alameda County.\nShe suggested that emergency response may be a good topic for this committee??? and\nnoted that the City is currently developing an emergency response program. She also\nnoted that several years ago, there were periodic meetings between the city managers and\nassistant city managers from both cities. She asked what are the most appropriate levels\nof government that should be getting together, since at the higher levels, the exchange is\nmore general\nStaff Hawkins stated that the Park Street Triangle project was developed as part of the\nestuary plan, which had a significant amount of public input. The current effort is\ncarrying forward a capital project that was identified in that plan.\nStaff Hawkins also noted that sometimes early input can be difficult for the public,\nbecause they are not familiar with the issues, and it is helpful to have some analysis done\nto give the something to respond to.\nShe noted that the ILC is somewhat different than dealing with Alameda/Oakland issues,\nsince AC Transit is a transit agency that operates in Alameda.\nCommissioner Ratto moved to accept Chair Knox White's recommendation. No one\nseconded the motion.\nChair Knox White tabled the discussion of the proposed task force to address input into\nselected Oakland projects until the October meeting.\n8.\nSTAFF COMMUNICATIONS\nThe TC had requested updates regarding the status of the Commission's\nrecommendations on three projects.\nBroadway-Jackson: Staff Hawkins stated that the TC's recommendations on the\nBroadway-Jackson interchange project will be forwarded to the City Council along with\ncomments from other stakeholder groups. She noted that additional presentations on the\nproject will be made to the League of Women Voters and the Alameda Chamber of\nCommerce, and that others may be interested in presentations as well. She indicated that", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-09-28.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2005-09-28", "page": 5, "text": "the recommendations should be presented to the Council in November or December, and\nthat December is also the scheduled date for the final stakeholders' meeting.\nAlameda Point Transportation Study: Staff Hawkins stated that the Alameda Point\nTransportation Study would be presented to the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment\nAuthority (ARRA) on October 5, but presentations are not scheduled for any City boards\nand commissions. She indicated that the intent is to clarify issues for the developer and\nthat ARRA will hopefully accept, not approve, the study.\nTheater/parking garage: Staff Hawkins stated that a use permit hearing is scheduled for\nSeptember 29. She noted that issues to be discussed include the conversion of angled\nparking to parallel parking on Central Avenue between Oak Street and Walnut Street and\ninstallation of a bike lane along this block once the main library building has been\ncompleted. To address the needs of bicyclists on Oak Street, the proposal is to add shared\nlane markings (or \"sharrows\") and signs. She stated that there will be discussions with\nthe Alameda Unified School District (AUSD) to address their parking needs in the area.\nStaff Hawkins also noted that the environmental document for the project has gone\nforward.\nChair Knox White said that the TC recommended the installation of sharrows from\nEncinal Avenue to Lincoln Avenue, not just to Central Avenue. Staff Hawkins responded\nthat this would be addressed in the implementation process.\nChair Knox White suggested that when the Commission makes recommendations to the\nCity Council, that it might be easier for the Council to review the recommendations if\nthey were presented in a different format. Currently the Council receives a copy of the\nTC minutes. Chair Knox White suggested preparing and sending to the Council a brief\nsummary of the main recommendations in addition to the minutes. Commissioner\nParker supported this recommendation.\n9.\nADJOURNMENT\nMeeting adjourned at 8:45 PM.", "path": "TransportationCommission/2005-09-28.pdf"}