{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-09-15", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY - - SEPTEMBER 15, 2009- -7:30 P.M.\nMayor Johnson convened the regular meeting at 7:52 p.m.\nCouncilmember Gilmore led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers\ndeHaan,\nGilmore,\nMatarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(09-343) Mayor Johnson announced that the Resolutions of\nAppointment [paragraph no. 09-344] would be addressed first.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n09-344) Resolution No. 14384, \"Appointing Robert McKean as a\nMember of the Economic Development Commission. Adopted.\n(09-344 A) Resolution No. 14385, \"Appointing Bruce C. Reeves as a\nMember of the Economic Development Commission. Adopted and\n(09-344 B) Resolution No. 14386, \"Appointing Mathew D. Hoffman as a\nMember of the Historic Advisory Board. Adopted.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolutions.\nVice Mayor deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous\nvoice vote - 5.\nThe City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented\ncertificates of appointment to Mr. McKean, Mr. Reeves, and Mr.\nHoffman.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(09-345) - Presentation on the fiscal year 2008-2009 Fa\u00e7ade\nAssistance Program.\nThe Economic Development Director gave a brief presentation.\nMayor Johnson inquired what percentage of funding comes from\nprivate sources, to which the Economic Development Director\nresponded the percentage varies and depends upon the situation.\n(09-345) - Presentation by East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD)\non Measure WW.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nSeptember 15, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-09-15", "page": 2, "text": "Doug Siden, EBRPD Board of Directors Dave Collins, EBRPD Assistant\nGeneral Manager Finance and Administration; and Jeff Rasmussen,\nEBRPD Grants Manager, gave a brief presentation.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether or not Mr. Collins could say whether\nthe Boys & Girls Club would be eligible [for Measure WW funding]. .\nMr. Collins responded the City using a non-profit for a project\nwould not violate the terms of Measure WW funding.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether or not Mr. Collins could say whether\nthe project would be approved.\nMr. Collins responded that he cannot say because a full application\nhas not been submitted and California Environmental Quality Act\n(CEQA) requirements have not been addressed; stated EBRPD is not in\na position to accept applications at this point; applications are\naccepted in February and March of each year; $29 million of the $33\nmillion in applications received this year were accepted.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether Mr. Collins would know [whether or\nnot the project would be approved] by the end of May, to which Mr.\nCollins responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired whether an application for a joint\nproject with the City would fall within the universe of approved\napplications.\nMr. Rasmussen responded in the affirmative; stated EBRPD would not\nhave a relationship with the City's agent.\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired whether the project would not be\nautomatically excluded if the City contracts with a non-profit, to\nwhich Mr. Rasmussen responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Tam stated the City would submit an application on\nbehalf of the Boys & Girls Club; inquired whether the application\nwould not be in violation of Measure WW terms further inquired\nwhether the application would have no guarantee of approval next\nyear but would be eligible for submittal.\nMr. Rasmussen responded the project needs to be consistent with\nMeasure WW; stated a formal decision has not been made on the Boys\n& Girls Club project but it seems to be consistent with the\nguidelines.\nMr. Collins stated the proposal, as heard, appears to be consistent\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nSeptember 15, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-09-15", "page": 3, "text": "with Measure WW; a legally binding contract could not be provided\nuntil completion of a full review next year.\nMr. Rasmussen stated the number one question asked right now from\nother cities is whether projects are consistent with Measure WW.\nMayor Johnson stated knowing what can and cannot be done is\nimportant i that she has heard that there is more certainty about\nthe project funding.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the City would have to control\nand manage the project.\nMr. Rasmussen responded control and management would be the City's\nfiduciary responsibility.\nMr. Collins stated EBRPD would enter into a contract with the City\nand would look to the City to provide assurances that the project\nwould be properly constructed.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether EBRPD would require the City to\nmanage the project.\nMr. Collins responded EBRPD would require the City to be the\nproject administrator stated EBRPD would be satisfied if the City\nelected to retain an agent to fulfill the requirements.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the City would be required to\ncomply with requirements imposed on projects that received public\nmoney, to which Mr. Collins responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the facility would have operating\nrequirements.\nMr. Rasmussen responded the facility would need to be available for\npublic use; stated school use after school hours would not be\nallowed.\nMayor Johnson requested an explanation of school use.\nMr. Rasmussen stated the facility would need to be available to the\npublic after 3:30 p.m. on week days and all day on Saturdays.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the City would have on-going\nobligations.\nMr. Rasmussen responded that he assumes operation would be turned\nover to the Boys & Girls Club; stated EBRPD would have to review\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nSeptember 15, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-09-15", "page": 4, "text": "operation details.\nMr. Collins stated the bond is for a twenty-five year period; the\nCity would be obligated to ensure public use during the twenty-five\nyear period; the City would have to have an agreement with the Boys\n& Girls Club for continued oversight.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether EBRPD has had any\napplications or projects where money was provided to a private\nentity through EBRPD, a City, or special park district; further\ninquired whether $2 million in Measure WW funds would require $2\nmillion in public equity.\nMr. Collins responded Measure WW is very similar to Measure AA;\nstated if $4 million comes from one source and $2 million comes\nfrom Measure WW, one third of the use would have to be public use;\nfunds would have a private business use restriction; EBRPD has not\nprovided funds to private entities because of potentially violating\nthe tax exempt nature of the bonds.\nCouncilmember Matarrese questioned whether anything similar to what\nis being proposed was ever done in all the years of Measure AA.\nMr. Collins noted non-profits are not private entities.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether EBRPD has any experience\nwith having an entity other than a public entity listed on the\ndeed, to which Mr. Collins responded that he would need to check.\nThe Interim City Manager stated everyone is struggling with whether\nor not the project meets the IRS rule for private activity bonds ;\nthe test is two fold: 1) who owns the asset, and 2) the amount of\nuse; bond counsel's opinion is vital.\nCouncilmember Tam inquired whether a Joint Use Agreement would meet\nthe criteria.\nMr. Collins responded in the affirmative; stated EBRPD is modeled\nafter the State Grant Program.\nMayor Johnson inquired how the final determination [ for approval]\nis made, to which Mr. Collins responded the [EBRPD] Board\nappropriates funding based on confirmation of completed\napplications.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether Measure WW requires that a\nproject be completed.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nSeptember 15, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-09-15", "page": 5, "text": "Mr. Rasmussen responded scoping the project has some flexibility;\nstated a project needs to build something of a capital nature.\nCouncilmember Gilmore inquired when bond counsel's opinion would be\nreceived, to which Mr. Collins responded a few days to a week.\nMayor Johnson called the public speakers.\nProponents (In support of using funds for Boys & Girls Club) : Karen\nBay, Alameda.\nOpponents (Not in support of using funds for Boys & Girls Club) :\nMike Cooper, Recreation and Park Commission; Jean Sweeney, Alameda\n(submitted document) ; former Councilmember Barbara Kerr, Alameda;\nHelena Lankel, Alameda; Rebecca Redfield, Alameda; Gretchen Lipow,\nAlameda; Debra Arbuckel, Alameda; Red Wetherill, Alameda; and\nRosemary McNally, Alameda.\nVice Mayor deHaan requested clarification on private versus non-\nprofit organizations.\nThe Interim City Manager responded the IRS code has specific\ndefinitions; stated IRS regulations for private activity bonds are\nvery grey.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether other [non-profit] organizations\nhave asked for funding, to which the Interim City Manager responded\nthe Miracle League has raised the issue.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the Beltline property, Estuary\nPark, and northern waterfront were discussed.\nThe Recreation and Park Director responded Estuary Park and the\nBeltline property are on the Recreation and Park Commission\nNovember 2008 list.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether other non-profits were considered,\nto which the Recreation and Park Director responded none were\nconsidered at that time.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Johnson announced that the Quarterly Sales Tax Report\n[paragraph no. 09-349 ] was removed from the Consent Calendar for\ndiscussion.\nVice Mayor deHaan moved approval of the remainder of the Consent\nCalendar.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nSeptember 15, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-09-15", "page": 6, "text": "Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5. [An asterisk preceding the paragraph\nnumber indicates Items so enacted or adopted. ]\n(*09-347) - Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held on\nSeptember 1, 2009. Approved.\n(*09-348) Ratified bills in the amount of $9,772,654.72.\n(09-349) Recommendation to Accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report\nfor the Period Ending March 31, 2009.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated Alameda and Albany are the only two\nAlameda County cities that have positive sales tax growth; sales\ntax increased for the business-to-business segment; the automobile\nsegment has lost major sales tax revenuel other areas have\nstabilized.\nVice Mayor deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Tam seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Councilmember Tam stated every area, with the\nexception of Harbor Bay Business Park, lost sales tax revenue; the\nnorth of Lincoln Avenue area had a -62.2% change because of the\nauto dealership loss; Alameda is ranked next to last [in sales tax\nrevenue] in Alameda County cities.\nMayor Johnson stated there is a lot of room for improvement.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(*09-350) - Recommendation to Accept the Alameda Fleet Industrial\nSupply Center/East Housing Residential Phase II Infrastructure\nImprovements for Interim Emergency and Vehicle Access to the Storm\nWater Treatment Pump Station and for the Storm Drain Outfall\nProject and Authorize the City Clerk to Record Notices of\nCompletion for the Improvements. Accepted.\n(*09-351) Recommendation to Adopt Specifications and Provisions for\nTow Contract for Vehicles Identified as Abandoned by the Police\nDepartment. Accepted.\n(*09-352) Recommendation to Adopt Plans and Specifications and\nAuthorize Call for Bids After Receipt of the State Water Resources\nControl Board Approval Letter for the Installation of Mechanical\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nSeptember 15, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-09-15", "page": 7, "text": "Trash Racks at Storm water Pump Stations, No. P.W. 08-09-23.\nAccepted.\n(*09-353) Recommendation to Adopt Plans and Specifications and\nAuthorize Call for Bids After Receipt of the State Water Resources\nControl Board Approval Letter for the Rehabilitation of the\nStructural Stability of Approximately 3,000 Linear Feet of the\nSouthshore Lagoon Seawalls Adjacent to City Streets, No. P.W. 08-\n09-24. Accepted.\n*09-354) Recommendation to Award a Contract in the Amount of\n$221,136, to J.J. R Construction, Inc. for Repair of Portland\nCement Concrete Sidewalk, Curb, Gutter, Driveway, and Minor Street\nPatching, Fiscal Year 2009-2010, Phase 10, No. P.W. 06-09-15.\nAccepted.\n(*09-355) Recommendation to Accept the Work of Golden Bay\nConstruction, Inc. for Repair of Portland Cement Concrete Sidewalk,\nCurb, Gutter, Driveway, and Minor Street Patching, Fiscal Year\n2008-2009, Phase 9, No. P. W. 05-08-13. Accepted.\n( *09-356) Recommendation to Adopt a Revised Proposition 1B Local\nStreets and Roads Funding Proposal for Fiscal Year 2008-2009 to\nthe State Department of Finance, and Appropriate $425,000 in\nProposition 1B and $54,000 in Sewer Funds for Additional Work\nUnder the Pavement Management Program, Phase 29, and Authorize the\nInterim City Manager to Execute All Necessary Documents. Accepted.\n( *09-357) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal\nCode by Adding Section 59 at Article IV to Chapter II Pertaining to\nContracts in Writing. Introduced.\n(*09-358) Ordinance No. 3000, \"Amending Ordinance No. 1277, N.S. to\nRezone Approximately .23 Acres Located at 3236 and 3238 Briggs\nAvenue, APN 069 007604601, From R-4, Neighborhood Residential\nZoning District, to R-4, PD Neighborhood Residential Planning\nDevelopment District Zoning Designation. Finally passed.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(09-359) Telephone Contract Update. Continued.\n(09-360) Council Referral Policy. Addressed under Boy's & Girls\nClub. The Interim City Manager addressed the Council Referral\nPolicy as part of the Boys & Girls Club Request for Funding\ndiscussion. [paragraph no. 09-361]\n(09-361) Boys & Girls Club Request for Funding.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nSeptember 15, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-09-15", "page": 8, "text": "The Interim City Manager provided a handout and gave a brief\npresentation.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether firm bids have been received.\nRich Sherrat, Boys & Girls Club, responded Nibby Construction\nsubmitted a firm bid.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired how $700,000 in annual operating funds\nis generated.\nMr. Sherrat responded funds are generated through fundraising,\ngrants, general sponsorships, the annual auction, and a variety of\nother means.\nIn response to Vice Mayor deHaan further inquiry, Mr. Sherrat\nstated California State University East Bay has dedicated interns\nto work at the facility; in-kind work significantly reduces\noperation costs.\nMayor Johnson inquired how much is raised for operations annually,\nto which Mr. Sherrat responded approximately $500,000.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether $8,198,867 is the construction cost,\nto which Mr. Sherrat responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Johnson inquired how the facility would be available to the\npublic.\nMr. Sherrat responded the Boys & Girls Club has always participated\nin joint programs stated the School District would have the option\nto use the facility; the facility would be a community facility.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether adult leagues would have access to\nthe facility, to which Mr. Sherrat responded absolutely.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether the public would not have any\nrestrictions after 3:30 p.m.\nMr. Sherrat responded adults could not just walk in and start\nplaying stated everyone has to be screened by the Police\nDepartment ; adult basketball would be available in the evenings\nwhen children are not at the facility; the facility would provide a\nhealth clinic; structured programs would be available to the\ngeneral public; no child would be turned away.\nGeorge Phillips, Boys & Girls Club, stated all programs, including\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nSeptember 15, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-09-15", "page": 9, "text": "the Recreation and Park programs, are age restricted; the facility\nwould not be like a park that someone could walk through.\nCouncilmember Tam stated there could be some duplication between\nthe Boys & Girls Club and Recreation and Park Department; inquired\nwhether the facility would be an expansion of capacity for the City\nand would fill a gap.\nMr. Sherrat responded the Boys & Girls Club is the only program\navailable for children in the evening; stated very few programs are\noffered to teenagers or middle school aged children; many programs\nare outsourced, such as tumbling and karate; a Tiny Tot program\ncould be done at the facility.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated the Recreation and Park Department has\nwonderful programs that require fees; inquired whether the Boys &\nGirls Club programs are fee based.\nMr. Sherrat responded 99% of the programs are part covered under\noperational expenses; stated scholarship opportunities are\navailable for those who cannot afford to pay a fee; the membership\nfee is $20 per year.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether Chipman Middle School has a gym,\nto which Mr. Sherrat responded the school has a multi-purpose room.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the Boys & Girls Club has\nsatellite facilities.\nMr. Sherrat responded in the affirmative; stated field trips are\nalso provided.\nMayor Johnson called the public speakers.\nProponents (In support of using funds for Boys & Girls Club) :\nGeorge Phillips, Boys & Girls Club; Duke Campbell, Alameda; and\nJudge Robert McGuiness, Alameda.\nOpponents (Not in support of using funds for Boys & Girls Club) : Jo\nKahuanui, Recreation and Park Commission; Dorothy Freeman, Alameda ;\nJoseph Woodard, Alameda; Jean Sweeney, Alameda; Rebecca Redfield,\nEstuary Park Action Committee; former Councilmember Barbara Kerr,\nAlameda; Helena Lenkel, Alameda; Roberta Rockwell, Alameda; Debra\nArbuckle, Alameda.\nNeutral Michael John Torrey, Alameda.\nFollowing Mr. Phillips comments, Vice Mayor deHaan inquired about\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nSeptember 15, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-09-15", "page": 10, "text": "the funding timeline.\nMr. Sherrat responded the funding requires that the shovel be in\nthe ground by the end of the year; that he does not want to go back\nand ask for an extension again; the designated building fund is\nrestricted; the Boys & Girls Club has interim financing to bridge\nthe gapi Measure WW funds would not need to be drawn upon until\nMay.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired what would happen if funding does not\nmaterialize.\nMr. Sherrat responded the project would not go forward unless\nCouncil commits to supporting the application.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the Boys & Girls Club has a fall\nback position.\nMr. Sherrat responded the Boys & Girls Club would only move forward\nwith a commitment from the City.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired what would happen if less than a $2\nmillion commitment is made.\nMr. Sherrat responded most likely, the Boys & Girls Club would not\nbe able to move forward.\nMayor Johnson inquired whether money could be taken from the [Boys\n& Girls Club] endowment.\nMr. Sherrat responded having funds available for on-going\noperations is critical.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated losing 65% in [Measure ww] funding in one\nshot is concerning; projects would have to be funded by a different\nsource such as the General Fund, which is in a weak position.\nMr. Sherrat questioned whether resurfacing the Washington Park\ntennis courts would cost $350,000. stated the Harbor Bay tennis\ncourts were resurfaced for $17,000 and $20,000 the Woodstock Park\nRecreation Center renovation project would not need to be done if\nthe new [Bays & Girls Club] facility is available.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated the list needs to be revisited; the model\nin place for the past fifteen years has been fee-type recreation.\nMr. Sherrat stated Little League, the soccer program, and Alameda\nYouth Basketball are run by non-profits on City facilities.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nSeptember 15, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-09-15", "page": 11, "text": "Following Mr. Woodward's comments, the Interim City Manager stated\nthe City would have no obligation to float the cash; the Boys &\nGirls Club would bear the risk if the $2 million were not approved ;\nthe application has a good chance of success.\nAfter the public comment, the Interim City Manager stated with\nrespect to the Council Referral policy, standard operation has been\nthat a vote of three Councilmembers refers the item to staff;\nhowever, the original policy included that Council has an\nopportunity to take an action on a Council Referral; unfortunately,\nthe Boys & Girls Club item went through the referral process under\nthe old process, so staff will come forward with an action item to\namend the priority list on October 6 as long as EBRPD bond\ncounsel's opinion about eligibility under the tax exempt status is\nreceived.\nMayor Johnson inquired who would own the property, to which the\nInterim City Manager responded the non-profit.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated programs are not the issue; the\npolicy question is how to use money generated by a tax assessment;\nthe exact wording of the ballot measure should be included as an\nattachment [ on October 6]; taking money away from one of the\nprojects recommended by the Recreation and Park Commission would\nresult in projects not getting done; $500,000 allocated for the\nWoodstock Recreation Center renovation could be used for the Boys &\nGirls Club project if the City would have the same access in\nperpetuity; the Alameda Point gym belongs to the Navy and project\nfunds should be generated from lease revenues; the IRS tax issue\nmay make the proposed project moot.\nCouncilmember Tam stated the Recreation and Park Commission\ndiscussed eleven projects; that she would like to have a matrix\nnoting whether projects are shovel ready and whether money would be\ntaken from a project; the City has funding to acquire the Beltline\nProperty; questioned whether the project is shovel ready; stated\nthat she is trying to understand how Measure WW funds are applied\nto projects.\nMayor Johnson inquired what is the life of Measure WW, to which Mr.\nRasmussen responded spending the money, would need to be spent in\nten years.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired how much money the City has provided for\nthe Boys & Girls Club, to which the Interim City Manager responded\napproximately $220,000 for design.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nSeptember 15, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-09-15", "page": 12, "text": "The Economic Development Director stated approximately $230,000 for\nconstruction would come from the Community Development Block Grant\nprogram this fall.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether EBRPD would provide information\nabout whether similar projects have been done in the past, to which\nMr. Collins responded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired the question about the life of the\nagreement and reverting back to the Boys & Girls Club after thirty\nyears needed to be addressed on October 6.\nCouncilmember Gilmore responded that she asked about public access\nbeing required for twenty-five years; stated that her question is\nwhether programs with age restrictions are still constituted as\npublic.\nMayor Johnson stated that she would like more information on the\noperating budget perhaps the agreement could be structured to have\na portion of the gym belong to the City; the Alameda Point gym is\nan asset that the City should keep.\nCouncilmember Gilmore stated that she does not feel a process has\nbeen defined as to who could apply for funds; inquired whether non-\nprofits were informed and whether the Recreation and Park\nCommission meetings were publicized; stated a process needs to be\nestablished; that she does not want to punish the Boys & Girls Club\n[ for requesting funds]\nThe Recreation and Park Director responded staff keeps a list of\nprojects; input is received from the community and sports leagues;\nthe Recreation and Park Commission reviews and ranks the list which\nis then forwarded to Council for final approval; non-profits were\nnot specifically recruited.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the same process was followed for\nyears under Measure AA.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired when was the last Measure AA draw, to\nwhich the Recreation and Park Director responded four to five years\nago.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated the Alameda Point gym is unique; having\nimprovements paid by the developer would be nice.\nThe Recreation and Park Director stated money generated from fees\nhas been put into improvements.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nSeptember 15, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-09-15", "page": 13, "text": "Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether or not the indoor pool would be\nopened again, to which the Recreation and Park Director responded\nrehabilitation costs would be more than the cost of a new facility.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated the City has made a commitment to the\nMiracle League that he would like to have the Miracle League\nincluded in the discussion.\nMayor Johnson stated the list needs to be reviewed; a price needs\nto be placed on the projects; parks cannot be let goi the Boys &\nGirls Club project is not the type of project that voters had in\nmind when voting on Measure WW; a long-term impact could be that\nfuture EBRPD bond measures might be a hard sell.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the Measure AA process needs to be\nevaluated because Measure AA delivered what was expected.\nMayor Johnson recessed the meeting at 10:50 p.m. and reconvened\nthe regular meeting at 11:20 p.m.\n***\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(09-362) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance\nAmending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Subsection 30-5.14\n(Barriers and Fences) of Article I (Zoning Districts and\nRegulations) of Chapter XXX (Development Regulations) by Adding\nSubsection 30-5.14 ( e) to Require Administrative Use Permits in\nNon-Residential Districts for Temporary or Permanent Barriers or\nFences Within a Required Setback or Along a Property Line that\nFaces a Public Street or a Public Access Easement. Applicant: City\nof Alameda. Continued.\n(09-363) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinances\nAmending Ordinance No. 1277, N.S. to Rezone Approximately : 4.7\nAcres Located at 1 Singleton Avenue, APN 074-0905-010-01 from M-2-\nPD, General Industrial (Manufacturing) Planned Development\nDistrict, to R-4-PD, Neighborhood Residential Planned Development\nDistrict Zoning Designation; 5 Acres Located at 2189 and 2201\nClement Avenue, APNs 071-0289-007-03 and 074-0289-004-00, from M-2,\nGeneral Development Residence District, to R-2-PD, Two-Family\nPlanned Development District Zoning Designation; 4.14 Acres Located\nat 2015/2025 Grand Street, APN 072-0381-002-00 and 072-0381-001-00,\nfrom M-2, General Industrial (Manufacturing) District to R-4-PD,\nNeighborhood Residential Planned Development District; 2.78 Acres\nLocated at 2100 Clement Avenue/1924 Willow Street, APN 071-0228-\n001-02 from M-1, Intermediate Industrial (Manufacturing) District\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nSeptember 15, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-09-15", "page": 14, "text": "to R-2-PD, Two Family Residence Planned Development District Zoning\nRegulation; 1.9 Acres Located at 1913 Sherman Street, APN 074-0906-\n031-08, from M-1-PD, - Intermediate Industrial (Manufacturing)\nPlanned Development District to R-2-PD, Two Family Residence\nPlanned Development District Zoning Designation; 2.1 Acres\n1590/1616 Fortmann Way, APN 072-0381-018-00 from M-2, General\nIndustrial (Manufacturing District to R-4-PD, Neighborhood\nResidential Planned Development District Zoning Designation to\nBring Zoning Designations for Six Properties into Conformance with\nthe General Plan and Housing Element. Applicant City of Alameda.\nThe Planning Services Manager gave a brief presentation.\nMayor Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing.\nSpeakers Tom Dailey, owner of 1913 Sherman Street; former\nCouncilmember Barbara Kerr, Alameda.\nThere being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public\nportion of the hearing.\nFollowing Mr. Dailey's comments, the Planning Services Manager\nstated the self storage use at 1913 Sherman Street would be\nconsidered a legal, non-conforming use as long as the property is\nnot vacant for more than a year and not more than 75% is destroyed\nin the event of a fire or act of nature.\nIn response to Mr. Dailey's inquiry, the City Attorney stated the\nPlanning Services Manager's explanation is correct.\nFollowing former Councilmember Kerr's comments, Mayor Johnson\ninquired whether staff is in agreement that the Beltline Property\noutline is incorrect and that the Sherman Street entrance was\ndecided by the Northern Waterfront Specific Plan Committee.\nThe Planning Services Manager responded in the affirmative stated\nthe map would be corrected for the second reading of the ordinance.\nVice Mayor deHaan moved introduction of the ordinances.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\n(09-364) Recommendation to Accept the Report of the Economic\nDevelopment Commission's Business Retention Subcommittee.\nContinued.\n(09-365) Recommendation to Accept the Estuary Crossing Feasibility\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nSeptember 15, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-09-15", "page": 15, "text": "Alameda and Oakland would bear the incremental costs of adding a\nstop while maintaining the same level of service at other\nlocations; costs would be significant.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the Posey Tube modification\noption would have a good funding stream.\nMr. Eddy responded possibly; stated there is a process for\nmodifying a CalTrans facility.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated the Posey tube modification would need to\nbe done regardless.\nThe Public Works Director stated CalTrans sat on the policy\nadvisory committee; the first step would be to get concurrence from\nCalTrans that the project is important; the next step would be to\npursue funding.\nVice Mayor deHaan inquired whether staff considered having one-way\npedestrian and bike access in the Webster Street Tube.\nThe Supervising Civil Engineer responded there would be issues with\nthe Oakland end connectivity.\nVice Mayor deHaan stated the alternative is one of the cheapest.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nSeptember 15, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-09-15", "page": 16, "text": "The Supervising Civil Engineer stated the public did not support\nthe idea.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated the study's value is in seeing what\nitems cost; that he is impressed with the graphics of the removable\nbridge more people are utilizing bike racks on buses; additional\nbike racks could be a cheap solution and would be less expensive\nthan a water taxi; the issue is a reality check more than anything\nelse and forces everyone to look at something more practical.\nCouncilmember Tam moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\nNone.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(09-366) Consideration of Mayor's nomination for appointment to the\nHousing Commission.\nMayor Johnson nominated Cullen Jones for appointment to the Housing\nCommission.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the\nmeeting at 11:49 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nSeptember 15, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-09-15", "page": 17, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND\nCOMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -SEPTEMBER 15, 2009- -7:31 P.M.\nMayor/Chair Johnson convened the joint meeting at 11:49 p.m.\nROLL CALL - Present : Councilmembers/Commissioners\ndeHaan,\nGilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor/Chair\nJohnson - 5.\nAbsent :\nNone.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the Consent\nCalendar.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Tam seconded the motion, which carried\nby unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are\nindicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. ]\n(( *09-367CC/*09-33CIC) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council,\nAlameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and CIC Meeting, and the\nSpecial CIC Meeting held on September 1, 2009. Approved.\n(*09-34 CIC ) Recommendation to Award a Contract in the Amount of\n$171,414 to Moreno Trenching, Ltd. for Park Street and Buena Vista\nAvenue Utility Undergrounding. Accepted.\nAGENDA ITEMS\n(09-368 CC) Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance\nAmending Municipal Code by Adding Subsection 30-17 (Density Bonus\nRegulations) to Article I (Zoning Districts and Regulations) of\nChapter XXX (Development Regulations) to Allow Density Bonus Units\nand Incentives or Concessions to Developers that Voluntarily\nProvide for Affordable Housing Units as an Element of Their\nResidential Development Project and\n(09-35 CIC) Adoption of Resolution Amending Resolution No. 04-127\nto Reduce the Inclusionary Unit Requirement Policy for Residential\nDevelopments in the Business and Waterfront and West End Community\nImprovement Project Areas from at Least 25% to at Least 15%.\nContinued.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and\nCommunity Improvement Commission\nSeptember 15, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2009-09-15", "page": 18, "text": "ADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned\nthe joint meeting at 11:50 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger, City Clerk\nSecretary, CIC\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown\nAct.\nSpecial Joint Meeting\nAlameda City Council and\nCommunity Improvement Commission\nSeptember 15, 2009", "path": "CityCouncil/2009-09-15.pdf"}