{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -AUGUST 5, 2008- - -7:30 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 7:38 p.m.\nCouncilmember deHaan led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent : louncilmembers deHaan, Matarrese, Tam and\nMayor Johnson - 4.\nAbsent :\nCouncilmember Gilmore - 1.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nNone.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(08-321) - Presentation by East Bay Municipal Utility District\n(\nEBMUD ) Representative Doug Linney regarding drought.\nDoug Linney, EBMUD Ward 5 Representative, discussed the current\nwater shortage.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether Homeowner Associations are on board\nwith water conservations measures.\nMr. Linney responded all Associations have been encouraged to get\nin contact with EBMUD because they have better opportunities to\nsave more water.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated recycled water from the Davis plant is\nused at the Golf Course; inquired when landscaping grade recycled\nwater would be available.\nMr. Linney responded there are plans for recycled water to go to\nAlameda Point, but he is not aware of plans to go to the Golf\nCourse; that he has asked staff to look into the complaints about\nthe water causing some salinity; staff ensures him that they are\nworking on the matter and the issue can be solved without bringing\nin water from the other plant.\nVice Mayor Tam stated EBMUD requested Public Works staff to cease\nusing fire hydrants for street sweeping purposes, which is an\nessential service to meet water quality requirements; inquired\nwhether there is a way to allow Public Works to get recycled water\nat the Golf Course instead of having the trucks get water near the\nBay Bridge; further inquired whether an interim measure could be\nput in place until the matter is resolved.\nMr. Linney responded that he would be happy to work with the City\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 2, "text": "and EMBUD to find a solution.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether EBMUD would be providing a\nscorecard on whether the City is meeting a goal similar to waste\nand electricity savings.\nMr. Linney responded the idea is interesting and he would look into\nthe matter.\nMayor Johnson stated there are questions about whether recycled\nwater can be used on the City's par 3 course; Council was informed\nthat the proximity to residential areas prohibits the use of\nrecycled water; people have heard different answers.\nMr. Linney stated that he would get an answer.\nCouncilmember deHaan noted an adjacent playing field could use\nrecycled water, too.\nVice Mayor Tam stated the City Manager contacted EBMUD recycling\nstaff and learned that the quality of water would require an extra\nlevel of treatment that currently does not exist; the proximity to\nresidential homes requires potable water to be used for public\nhealth reasons.\nMr. Linney stated it might be possible to make improvements.\nMayor Johnson stated golfers need to be informed of the correct\nanswer.\n(08-322) - Presentation by the Library Foundation regarding public\nart at the new Main Library.\nLuzanne Engh, Alameda Free Library Foundation President, gave a\nPower Point presentation.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nVice Mayor Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 4. [Absent Councilmember Gilmore - 1. ] [ Items so\nenacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the\nparagraph number. . ]\n( *08-323) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings\nheld on July 1, 2008; and the Special City Council Meeting, Special\nJoint City Council and Public Utilities Board Meeting, and Regular\nCity Council Meeting held on July 15, 2008. Approved.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 3, "text": "(*08-324) Ratified bills in the amount of $9,112.893.30\n(*08-325) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of\n$511,680, including contingencies, to Golden Bay Construction, Inc.\nfor repair of Portland cement concrete sidewalk, curb, gutter,\ndriveway, and minor street patching, Fiscal Year 2008-2009 Phase\n9, No. P.W. 05-08-13. Accepted.\n( *08-326) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of\n$211,543, including contingencies, to D&D Pipelines, Inc. for\nWoodstock storm drain improvements, No. P.W. 06-08-18. Accepted.\n(*08-327) Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications and\nauthorize Call for Bids for pruning of City trees for Fiscal Year\nending June 30, 2009, No. P.W. 07-08-20. Accepted.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(08-328) - Resolution No. 14254, \"Appointing Leslie Krongold as a\nMember of the Commission on Disability Issues. Adopted; and\n(08-328A) Resolution No. 14255, \"Appointing Donna Milgram as a\nMember of the Economic Development Commission (Community-at-Large\nSeat) \" Adopted.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolutions.\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent : Councilmember Gilmore - 1. ]\nThe City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented Ms.\nKrongold and Ms. Milgram with certificates of appointment.\n(08-329) Public Hearing to consider an appeal of the Planning\nBoard's denial of a variance and Major Design Review to build first\nand second-story covered decks at the rear of an existing four-unit\napartment building located at 2243 Santa Clara Avenue within the R-\n6, Hotel Residential Zoning District; and\n(08-329A) Resolution No. 14256, \"Overturning the Planning Board's\nDecision to Deny Major Design Review and Variance (PLN07-0020) -\nAllowing the Construction of a Two-Story Covered Deck Located Seven\nFeet and Three Inches from the Rear Property Line at 2243 Santa\nClara Avenue. Adopted.\nThe Planning Services Manager gave a brief presentation.\nMayor Johnson opened the Public Hearing.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 4, "text": "Proponent : Ed Hirshberg, Appellant.\nThere being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public\nportion of the Hearing.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether decks are required now, to which the\nAppellant responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the proposed decks conform to the\nnew code.\nThe Appellant responded the size of the back yard is not quite in\nconformance and current code would require a deck for all four\nunits.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired how tenants access the yard\ncurrently.\nThe Appellant responded tenants walk through the Elk's property;\nthe yard is not used very much; the decks would improve access.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether tenants in the other two\nunits would be able to use the remaining portion of the yard, to\nwhich the Appellant responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the privilege has been\nextended to other properties, to which the Planning Services\nManager responded that he is aware of one other instance, a single-\nfamily dwelling with an unusually shaped lot.\nMayor Johnson inquired about the nature of the opposition to the\ndecks.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded the Planning Board was\nconcerned about future uses anticipated for the adjacent area.\nIn response to Mayor Johnson's inquiry about whether the adjacent\nproperty use would occur, the Planning Services Manager stated\nstaff believes so, but nothing has been submitted.\nVice Mayor Tam inquired how the decks would infringe upon the\nneighbors.\nThe Planning Services Manager stated the noise created from the\nadjacent building might disturb people using the decks.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the same noise issue would\napply with use of the backyard as it is now, to which the Planning\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 5, "text": "Services Manager responded staff came to the same conclusion.\nMayor Johnson read the findings stated the project is positive for\nthe tenants there are currently no negatives for the neighbor ;\ninquired why staff recommended approval of the variance.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded the project site would be\nbrought more into compliance with the zoning code; stated the\ncommon area would be reduced, but would still have 300 square feet\nof open space.\nIn response to louncilmember deHaan's inquiry regarding the lot\nline, the Appellant stated seven feet three inches would be\nremaining.\nVice Mayor Tam moved adoption of the resolution to uphold the\nAppeal and grant the variance.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion which carried by the\nfollowing voice vote: Ayes : Councilmembers Matarrese, Tam and Mayor\nJohnson - 3. Noes: Councilmember deHaan - 1.\n[ Absent :\nCouncilmember Gilmore - 1.]\nCouncilmember deHaan stated that he does not support the motion\nbecause the small strip left is totally inadequate.\n08-330) Recommendation to adopt the Alameda Free Library Strategic\nPlan, 2009-2014, and authorize staff to begin Neighborhood Library\nShort Term Improvements.\nRuth Metz, Ruth Metz Associates, and Kathy Page, Page & Morris LLC,\ngave a Power Point presentation.\nVice Mayor Tam stated the final document and process should be used\nas a model for other City facilities and assets; inquired whether\nor not the $2.5 million set aside is sufficient for the extreme\nmakeover.\nThe Library Director responded the $2.5 million would be used for\nthe building work and interior remodeling; stated the library\nsupport groups have pledged to pay for new furnishings.\nVice Mayor Tam stated the main library is one of the City's first\nLEED certified buildings; inquired whether the seal from the Green\nBuilding Counsel would be hung at the library.\nThe Library Director responded staff hopes to obtain the seal;\nstated the certification process is moving forward.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 6, "text": "Mayor Johnson requested that the Council be provided updates on the\nstatus of certification; stated the matter should be wrapped up and\nfinalized.\nIn response to Councilmembe: Matarrese's inquiry regarding the\ntimeline, the Library Director stated the Request for Proposals\n(RFP) process should take four months.\nCouncilmember Matarrese noted that the library service is not free;\nstated the survey indicated that people value the service and are\nwilling to pay for it; requested that the information on the LEED\ncertification include the estimated certification date.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated $16 million would be needed in the\nfuture; hopefully, $2.5 million would cover costs including the\nelectrical and heating systems; inquired whether there would be\nState level grants.\nThe Library Director responded the Strategic Plan puts the City in\na better position than most should there be a State construction\nbond.\nMs. Page stated that her calculations are that less than half of\nthe funding would be needed for the makeover; the infrastructure\nand Americans with Disabilities Act requirements are the big\nunknowns; another city had to install sprinkler systems, which\nadded costs; encouraged Council to go forward with an RFP as\nquickly as possible.\nProponents Honora Murphy, Alameda; Karen Butter, Library Board\nMember ; Luzanne Engh, Alameda Free Library Foundation.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether a prioritized list has been prepared\nin the event the $2.5 million is not sufficient, to which the\nLibrary Director responded not enough is known about the structural\nand system issues.\nMayor Johnson suggested that the staff recommendation be modified\nto include language about beginning to develop a plan that would\ncome back to Council for review; stated the Council would need to\nset priorities.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the City should not over invest in\nthe West End library building since it is not the future West End\nlibrary; the plan for what would be executed to meet the short term\ngoal should come back to Council i that he would like an analysis of\nfunding streams, with the ability to extend Measure O being among\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 7, "text": "the options.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of adopting the Alameda Free\nLibrary Strategic Plan and authorizing staff to initiate working on\nshort-term improvements to the neighborhood libraries and bring the\n[implementation] plan back to Council for authorization to start.\nVice Mayor Tam seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Vice Mayor Tam stated there is no deadline for\nuse of Measure O money.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated Measure O has a finite period of\ntime; more revenue could be generated if the City asks for an\nextension from the voters.\nVice Mayor Tam inquired whether the RFP process would help generate\nestimates and establish various improvements that Council would\nreview and prioritize, to which the Library Director responded in\nthe affirmative.\nMayor Johnson inquired what would be asked in the RFP, such as\ninterior or structural work.\nMs. Page responded the list of short-term recommendations would be\nused as the basis for the RFP; stated the City could pick and\nchoose the items.\nThe Library Director responded the RFP would be for an\narchitectural firm with structural engineering, some historical\npreservation and interior space planning experience in libraries.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the RFP would include interior and\nstructural improvements.\nMs. Page responded the short-term goals involve very little\nstructural changes.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the electrical and HVAC system are\nincluded in the short term goals, to which Ms. Page responded in\nthe affirmative; stated said items are mechanical systems.\nThe Library Director stated the shell of the buildings would not\nchange.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether priorities would be set before going\nout with the RFP .\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 8, "text": "Ms. Page responded priorities should be set after costs are\nsubmitted.\nCouncilmember deHaan requested that the motion be restated.\nCouncilmember Matarrese restated the motion to adopt the Strategic\nPlan, authorize staff to go forward with the RFP and bring it back\nto Council.\nVice Mayor Tam stated that her second stands.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 4. [Absent Councilmember Gilmore - 1.]\n(08-331) - Resolution No. 14257, \"Opposing Fiscally Irresponsible\nState Budget Decisions That Would Divert Local Government,\nRedevelopment, and Transportation Funds. Adopted.\nThe Deputy City Manager gave a brief presentation.\nMayor Johnson stated that she does not like the term \"borrow\".\ninquired whether the resolution could be amended to \"divert\".\nThe Deputy City Manager responded in the affirmative.\nOpponents Gretchen Lipow, Alameda; David Howard, Action Alameda.\nFollowing Ms. Lipow's comments, Councilmember deHaan inquired\nwhether the City is not addressing Assembly Bill 1781, to which the\nDeputy City Manager responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the language could also include\nopposition to taking funds from school districts.\nThe Deputy City Manager responded the Council is on record asking\nthe State not to take school district resources.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution, with the\nrevised language to replace \"borrow\" with \"divert\".\nCouncilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote -4. [Absent : Councilmember Gilmore - 1.\n]\n(08-332) Resolution No 14258, \"Providing, as Official City\nReference Documents, the Alameda County Residential Green Building\nGuidelines for New Home Construction, Home Remodeling, and\nMultifamily Residential Development ; the U.S. Green Building\nCouncil's LEED Rating Systems for New Commercial Construction and\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 9, "text": "Remodeling; and Bay-Friendly Landscape Guidelines, and Recommending\nTheir Use in the City of Alameda. \" Adopted.\nThe Supervising Planner gave a brief presentation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired when the municipal code would be\nchanged to make green building requirements mandatory.\nThe Supervising Planner responded the requirements have been\nadopted for municipal projects; stated the Chief Building Official\nis reviewing the State green building code to determine if the City\ncan adopt it early; otherwise, the City might follow Alameda\nCounty's checklist process; the matter should come to Council\nbefore the end of the year.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he would like to ensure there\nis a due date for when binding code changes would be implemented;\nthat he would like the changes to be adopted fairly soon; the\nclimate would not get any better the longer the City waits; there\nwere comments at Peet's LEED gold certification award ceremony that\nmeeting the requirements did not contribute that much cost and was\nnot that difficult to do; the City should be more aggressive; there\nshould be a target date for adopting binding code changes.\nMayor Johnson stated the matter is especially important for new\nconstruction; perhaps existing buildings and remodeling could be\nseparate from new construction; the City should be able to move\nforward with new construction on a shorter timeframe any new\nconstruction in Alameda should be subject to the new ordinance.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated there are LEED items that need to be\ndone out of necessity now, such as diverting renovation or site\nclearing materials from landfill and using renewed and reused\nmaterials. there is a distinction between new construction and\nrenovation; binding, not optional, code provisions need to be put\nin place.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether there are new requirements\nthat move toward LEED compliance.\nThe Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative; stated the\nCity has a debris ordinance that requires 50% diversion; the goal\namount was increased to 75%; the landscape ordinance includes water\nconservation measures; that she does not have the schedule for\nbringing items forward.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated setting target dates is very\nimportant; then, priority decisions can be made about how to use\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 10, "text": "resources to meet the dates.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated the matter is coming to Council: the\nICLEI committee [Climate Protection Task Force] would be coming to\nCouncil with recommendations that would get the City to that point\n[adoption of binding green requirements) ; inquired when the ICLEI\nreport would come to Council.\nThe Supervising Planner responded the ICLEI report was folded into\nthe City's Local Action Plan.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the effort he is discussing is\nadoption of codes that were recommended by the ICLEI committee.\nThe Supervising Planner stated one of the priorities in the Local\nAction Plan is the sustainable design and green building standards,\nwhich Planning is working on.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether there are model ordinances; stated\npriority should be given to adopting regulations for new home\nconstruction, new multi-family residential development and new\ncommercial construction; any new construction should be built with\nthe new standards remodels and landscaping can be dealt with\nlater; brand new construction should be built to the [green\nbuilding] standards.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the matter is fairly urgent because\nthere is potential for new commercial and residential construction\nin the foreseeable future; requirements should be locked down\nsooner to have builders adjust accordingly.\nCouncilmember deHaan stated Planning is going through the exercise\nto bring something forward.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he wants a date.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the matter is being considered by\nthe Building Official or Planning Board.\nThe Supervising Planner responded the Building Official is looking\nat the Building Standards adopted [by the State] on July 17; stated\nthe standards are voluntary at the State level. the City would be\nmaking the regulations mandatory Building Codes do not go to the\nPlanning Board; mandatory checklists added to the Zoning Ordinance\nwould go to the Planning Board.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether StopWaste has model ordinances.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 11, "text": "The Supervising Planner responded in the negative; stated StopWaste\ndoes not have anything mandatory, but has the voluntary standards\nthat are being considered tonight.\nMayor Johnson inquired how the State code and StopWaste's model of\nvoluntary guidelines differ.\nThe Supervising Planner responded the State code looks at building\nefficiency; stated currently, Title 24 requires certain energy\nstandards to be met; the new regulations increase Title 24; LEED\nand Build It Green are checklist approaches that look at the entire\nsite, including landscaping and transit as well as construction;\n15% above Title 24 is one requirement, however, the approach is\nmore holistic.\nMayor Johnson stated the Council could set a timeframe for a report\nback from the Building Official.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the report should include an\nestimated date for implementation.\nMayor Johnson inquired what timeframe should be set.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the Building Official should have a\nmonth to conduct a review; the review should tell Council the\ndifferences between the State's standards and the City's standards\nand the target date for going from optional to mandatory.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether the direction is the motion.\nCouncilmember Matarrese responded the direction is the motion along\nwith adoption of the resolution.\nMayor Johnson stated the direction should include prioritizing new\nconstruction.\nCouncilmember Matarrese agreed to include said direction in the\nmotion.\nCouncilmember deHaan inquired whether a month is adequate time.\nThe Acting City Manager responded a month is an adequate amount of\ntime for the Building Official to inform Council how long the full\nreview would take; stated the full review might be completed in a\nmonth.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated Council should be informed if there\nis difference.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 12, "text": "Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent: Councilmember Gilmore - 1. ]\nCouncilmember deHaan noted that drought resistant landscaping at\nHaight School is outstanding.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\nNone.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(08-333) Consideration of Mayor's nomination for appointment to the\nTransportation Commission.\nMayor Johnson nominated Jane. Q. Lee.\n(08-334) Mayor Johnson requested that the Fire and Police\nDepartments provide a report describing the type of calls they\nrespond to which are outside their scope and recommendations for\nappropriate fees; said report should be presented under Council\nReferrals at the next City Council meeting stated the Fire\nDepartment responds to calls for elevator problems within\ncommercial buildings and people locked out of their houses; she is\nsurprised that fees for such calls were not included when revenue\nenhancing recommendations were made.\n(08-335) Councilmember Matarrese stated that he and Vice Mayor Tam\nparticipated in a structured bicycle ride around the City on\nSaturday; the event was presented by Bike Alameda.\n( 08 - 336) Mayor Johnson stated that Alameda could be getting three\nor four new Coast Guard cuttersi current cutters are forty years\nold.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nRegular Meeting at 10:07 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 13, "text": "Agenda for meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 14, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND\nCOMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING\nTUESDAY- -AUGUST 5, 2008- - -7:25 P. M.\nMayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 10:08\np.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent : Councilmembers/Commissioners\ndeHaan,\nMatarrese, Tam, and Mayor/Chair Johnson -\n5.\nAbsent :\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Gilmore - 1.\nMINUTES\n(08-41 - CIC) Minutes of the Special Community Improvement Commission\nMeeting held on July 15, 2008. Approved.\nVice Mayor/Commissioner Tam moved approval of the minutes.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which\ncarried by unanimous voice vote - 4. [ Absent Councilmember/\nCommissioner Gilmore - 1. ]\nAGENDA ITEM\n(08-319CC/08-42CIC) Recommendation to approve Affordable Housing\nAgreement with Warmington Homes for the Grand Marina Project.\nThe Development Services Director gave a presentation.\nlouncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the City has\nan Affordable Housing Agreement with Warmington, to which the\nDevelopment Services Director responded in the negative.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether Warming has\ncommitted to building 10 units at Grand Marina.\nThe Development Services Director stated the Agreement is being\nconsidered tonight and has to be approved before Warmington can\npull building permits.\nThe Development Services Director continued her presentation.\nMayor/Chair Johnson stated tonight the Council/Commission is\nconsidering an Agreement that would allow a project at Island High\nas an option; inquired what public input opportunities would exist\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and\nCommunity Improvement Commission\n1\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 15, "text": "should the Agreement move forward.\nThe Development Services Director responded Warmington would\nrespond to community input, follow the normal process, and work\ntoward a project that the School Board and Planning Board would be\ncomfortable with; if Warmington does not build on the site, the\nCIC, working with School District, would go through the same public\nprocessi if the Alameda Unified School District (AUSD) and the CIC\ndo the project, there would be less opportunity to construct\nmoderate income units on the site because both the CIC and AUSD\nmoney and tax credits support low and very low income, but not\nmoderate units; the Guyton Agreement restricts both AUSD's housing\ndollars and most of the CIC's housing dollars.\nMayor/Chair Johnson inquired whether approval of a project is not\nbefore the Council/Commission tonight, but that the Agreement,\nwhich does not give any entitlements to any particular project, is\nbeing considered.\nThe Development Services Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner deHaan stated the City had an Agreement\nwith Warmington for Veteran's housing; inquired how many units were\nconstructed.\nThe Development Services Director responded the 39 units at\nOperation Dignity were part of the Catellus project.\nlouncilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired how much money Catellus\nput into the project.\nThe Development Services Director responded Catellus was not\nobligated to money into the project; stated the project was an\nobligation of the CIC under the Development Agreement.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired where the funding came\nfrom.\nThe Development Services Director responded the deal was leveraged\nwith Multifamily Housing Program (MHP) funds and tax credits\nstated about 20% of the equity contribution came from the CIC; the\nCIC removed the units and was obligated to replace the units under\nthe law; the entire transaction assigned certain costs to the\npublic; Catellus loaned funds to the CIC.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired how much Warmington\nwould invest in the project.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and\nCommunity Improvement Commission\n2\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 16, "text": "The Development Services Director responded the amount would depend\non the number of units; stated an appraisal was done in the last\nsix months lump sum lease payments, which total approximately $1\nmillion, would be paid by Warmington; there would be a [funding]\ngap depending on the number of units.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the houses that\nwould be constructed would be market rate if the [affordable]\nhouses are moved out of the development, to which the Development\nServices Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the money that\nthe developer would make [off of additional market rate houses)\nwould be a wash with the money that would go into the Island High\nsite.\nThe Development Services Director responded it would depend upon\nthe number of units; stated the more units that are put on the\nIsland High site, the less cost per unit.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired what percentage set\naside would have to be for sale and what percentage would have\nto\nbe rental units, to which the Development Services Director\nresponded specific percentages of for sale units and rental units\nare not required.\nlouncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the decision\ntonight is not how many units or how much units would cost, rather\nthe Council/Commission is simply deciding whether all 10 units\nwould be at the project site, whether the developer could consider\nother sites for five units and whether nine units would be required\nif five units are off site.\nThe Development Services Director responded in the affirmative;\nstated if the units are constructed at the Island High site, there\nis an outside limit of 36 units.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired where the number [36\nunits] came from.\nThe Development Services Director responded the number uses the\nGuyton exception to get as many units as possible. stated a Measure\nA compliant project would be between 16 and 18 units.\nlouncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated Warmington needs to\nhave an Affordable Housing Agreement for the Grand Marina project\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and\nCommunity Improvement Commission\n3\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 17, "text": "to go forward: inquired whether the Agreement would not have to\ninclude language about where the off site units would be placed.\nThe Development Services Director responded the Planning Board\nacknowledged that if Island High, which was previously identified\nin the Housing Element, was the off site location, it would be an\nokay location because it meets other requirements.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the nine\nunits could be built at Island High without going up to the maximum\nnumber of units, to which the Development Services Director\nresponded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether Warmington\nwould simply be concerned with building nine units somewhere other\nthan the Grand Marina site, to which the Development Services\nDirector responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether the City\ncould authorize the Affordable Housing Agreement to either require\nten units on site or allow five units off site as long as four\nadditional units would be constructed.\nThe Development Services Director responded said explanation stops\nshort of allowing future credit for additional units; stated if\nadditional units are not going to be constructed, the [Island High]\nsite should be retained by the CIC and AUSD for construction of 16\nto 18 units.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he is trying to separate out\nwhat happens with the off site units; the developer needs to know\nwhether five or ten units would be on site [Grand Marina] in order\nto get the project started; the City is requiring nine units if\nfive units are moved off site; questioned why the Agreement could\nnot stop there to get the project going; then, the Island High site\nor any other site would go through the routine, normal planning\nprocessi 36 units is an absurd number for the [Island High] site;\nthe site could carry multiple family units; teachers and School\nDistrict employees would have first shot at the units; a project\nshould not be predicated on putting as many units as possible on\nthe site, which is not the City's approach; the City's approach has\nalways been to develop a quality product, such as Shinsei Gardens\nand the Breakers; that he would like to cut the Agreement down to\nwhat is needed to get the Grand Marina project started; then, the\nprocess could work for the Island High site or any site where the\nunits might end up.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and\nCommunity Improvement Commission\n4\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 18, "text": "Mayor/Chair Johnson stated that the normal process would be\nfollowed whatever site is selected.\nThe Development Services Director stated the Agreement would have\nto be amended to give Warmington credit if additional units are\nconstructed.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated the credit question is\nwithin the envelope; the Agreement should address the number of\nunits; where the [off site) units would end up is another matter.\nMayor/Chair Johnson stated Councilmember Matarrese is not saying\nthe Agreement should stop at nine units, rather the matter should\nbe left up to the future process; the Developer could raise the\nissue once a site is selected; the [off site] location is not\nneeded to move the Grand Marina project forward.\nThe Development Services Director stated the Agreement would have\nto be amended if the Developer came back to get credit for a\nproject over nine units.\nMayor/Chail Johnson stated the Agreement would not have to be\namended; there could be a separate Agreement to give credit towards\na different project.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner deHaan stated the City is going though\nthe Coast Guard housing process which will be no less than 284\nhouses that could easily be in the affordable range; inquired\nwhether said houses could be included.\nThe Development Services Director responded that she has no idea\nwhat said number would be; stated providing accommodations to\nformerly homeless people is a federal government requirement; it is\na whole different product type and is a federal disposition\nprocess.\nThe Acting City Manager responded the site is a homeless site, not\nan affordable housing site under the McKinney Act.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether none of the\nunits could be used [for affordable housing], to which the Acting\nCity Manager responded not for inclusionary needs, but there are\nother sites that potentially could be used.\nLouncilmember/Commissioner deHaan stated other developers would ask\nto move units off site if the Agreement is approved the additional\nunits would land somewhere.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and\nCommunity Improvement Commission\n5\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 19, "text": "Spencer, Alameda.\n(08-320 CC/08-4 CIC) Following Gerry Torres's comments,\nCouncilmember/Commission Matarrese moved approval of continuing the\nmeeting past midnight.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which\ncarried by unanimous voice vote - 4. Absent : Councilmember\n/\nCommissioner Gilmore - 1. ]\nThere being no further speakers, Mayor/Chair Johnson closed the\npublic comment period.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner deHaan stated the City set a 60%\nhomeownership goal; the recommendation tonight is out of character;\nthe Planning Board and Economic Development Commission (EDC) have\nalways wanted to have a balanced community; that he would support\nkeeping the inclusionary housing within the development.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated there are two goals: 1)\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and\nCommunity Improvement Commission\n6\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 20, "text": "provide affordable housing homeownership opportunities, which would\nbe accomplished by including ten units at the Grand Marina\ndevelopment; 2) allowing the Island High site to be developed into\naffordable housing for teachers and AUSD employees, which is a\nworthwhile project that needs to be included in the North of\nLincoln Street plan; there needs to be a discussion about the most\neffective way to provide affordable housing, which might include\ncondominium conversions; that he would like the Island High project\nto be separate and follow its own processi that he would like to\nmove the Warmington project forward.\nlouncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of adopting an\nAffordable Housing Agreement which includes the ten units on site\nas inclusionary as was defined in the site plan.\nVice Mayor/Commissioner Tam inquired whether the motion is that all\naffordable and moderate units remain on the [Grand Marina] site, to\nwhich Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese responded in the\naffirmative.\nVice Mayor/Commissioner Tam seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Vice Mayor/Commissioner Tam stated one\nneighborhood's requirements should not be shifted to another\nneighborhood; other developers would begin to make the same request\nif the City started allowing affordable unit to be built off site;\nState MHP funds are available for rental units; inquired whether\nthe Warmington project could subsidize five rental units on the\nGrand Marina site without using MHP funds.\nThe Development Services Director responded that she could not\nunequivocally state that the funds could not be used; stated the\nparameters to qualify for MHP funds are that there be an on-site\nmanager and that the project meets certain conditions\ncompetitively, the projects have to rank against other projects\nacross the State; nobody has seen success with small projects;\nother requirements with MHP funds and tax credits are amenities,\nsuch as community centers and computers.\nVice Mayor/Commissioner Tam inquired whether the Developer could\nturn units into rentals to meet the low-income requirement even\nwithout access to MHP funds.\nThe Development Services Director stated the inclusionary ordinance\nallows it (construction of rental units] ; that she does not know\nwhether or not the developer would manage five units.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and\nCommunity Improvement Commission\n7\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2008-08-05", "page": 21, "text": "Councilmember/Commissioner Matarrese stated the City still\nmaintains the goal of increasing homeownership the School District\nsurplused Island High to create very affordable rental units as a\ntool for recruiting teachers and employees; there is opportunity to\ndo a lot of great things, such as meeting green standards and\ncreating a transit village; dropping the highest number of units\non\nthe community, rather than talking about what should be there, is\nnot in the context of what the School District and City have talked\nabout for years.\nMayor/Chair Johnson stated that she agrees that the Council needs\nto visit the issue of the best way to provide affordable housing\nseparately; the Economic Development Commission should review the\nissue and make recommendation: to Council.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 4. [Absent Councilmember/Commissioner Gilmore - 1. ]\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the\nSpecial Joint Meeting at 12:20 a.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and\nCommunity Improvement Commission\n8\nAugust 5, 2008", "path": "CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf"}