{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - MARCH 15, 2016--6:00 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 6:01 p.m.\nRoll Call -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie\nand Mayor Spencer - 5.\n[Note: Councilmember Daysog arrived at 6:01 p.m. and Councilmember\nEzzy Ashcraft arrived at 6:05 p.m.]\nAbsent: None.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(16-124) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Initiation of Litigation\nPursuant to Subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code. Number of\nCases: One (As Plaintiff - City Initiated Legal Action).\nFollowing the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Spencer\nannounced direction was given to staff.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 7:02 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nSpecial Meeting\nAlameda City Council\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 2, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY- - -MARCH 15, 2016--7: P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:09 p.m. A member of Troup 73 led the\nPledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese,\nOddie and Mayor Spencer - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nNone.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(16-125) Mayor Spencer did a reading for the Season of Non-Violence.\n(16-126) Mayor Spencer announced the Water Emergency Transportation Authority\n(WETA) would be holding a meeting at City Hall on April 7th at 7:00 p.m.\n(16-127) Proclamation Declaring March 2016 as Women in Military History Month.\nMayor Spencer read and presented the proclamation to Army Veteran Julie Thelen.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(16-128) Former Councilmember Lil Arnerich, Alameda commended the former Interim\nCity Manager and welcomed the new City Manager.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nMayor Spencer announced that the Investment Policy [paragraph no. 16-131], the\nAnnual Report on Alameda Landing [paragraph no. 16-133], the Settlement Agreement\nwith Renewed Hope [paragraph no. 16-135], the Two Year Port Services Agreement\n[paragraph no. 16-136], and the Resolution Approving the Final Map [paragraph no. 16-\n138 were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph\nnumber.]\n(*16-129) Minutes of the Special Meetings and Regular City Council Meeting Held on\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 3, "text": "February 16, 2016. Approved.\n(*16-130) Ratified bills in the amount of $2,079,295.47.\n(16-131) Recommendation to Approve the City of Alameda Investment Policy.\nOutlined changes made to the Investment Policy: Kevin Kennedy, City Treasurer.\nMayor Spencer inquired what the changes are in the Section 3e.\nThe City Treasurer responded that the section reflects the City's objectives and\ncommunity desires, not just State Policy; the addition to the section is coal based\nindustries; any coal based companies will be excluded.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the policy prohibits 51% of gross revenues from\ncigarettes, gambling or alcohol products, yet 0% of any coal based products, to which\nthe City Treasurer responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the City currently invests in any coal based company.\nThe City Treasurer responded in the negative; stated the restriction will not have an\nadverse effect on the risk or return of the portfolio.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether CalPers has the same restriction.\nThe City Treasurer responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the changes to the Investment Policy are a good\nstatement for Alameda and impact climate change and global warming.\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote -\n5.\n(*16-132) Recommendation to Endorse the San Francisco Bay Clean Water, Pollution\nPrevention, and Habitat Restoration Program June 7, 2016 Ballot Measure. Accepted.\n[630-30]\n(*16-133) Recommendation to Accept the Annual Report on Alameda Landing\nTransportation Demand Management (TDM) Program and Review the\nRecommendation to Expand the Transportation Management Association (TMA).\nCouncilmember Daysog read a report on the upward trajectory of the number of people\ntaking the shuttle; stated there has been a lot of movement with regard to Citywide\ntransit.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 4, "text": "Councilmember Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(*16-134) Recommendation to Approve Revision of Underground Utility District Policy to\nHave Four Members of the Public Appointed to the Underground Utility District\nNomination Board Rather Than Three. Accepted.\n(16-135) Recommendation to Amend Section 4.1 of the 2001 Settlement Agreement\nwith Renewed Hope Housing Advocates, Arc Ecology, the Former Community\nImprovement Commission and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (now \"the\nCity\"), the Alameda Housing Authority, and Catellus Corporation to Allow Site A at\nAlameda Point to Move Forward with Building Senior Affordable Housing Units Where It\nHad Previously Been Restricted.\nStated there is a need for senior housing; Renewed Hope supports the addition of more\nsenior housing: Laura Thomas, Renewed Hope.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\n(16-136) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute Documents\nNecessary to Implement the Terms of a Two Year Port Services Contract with Bay Ship\nand Yacht Company at Alameda Point.\nUrged acceptance of the contract with Bay Ship and Yacht; stated the company has\nbeen in Alameda for 22 years and employees 350 people: Leslie Cameron, Bay Ship\nand Yacht.\nStated Bay Ship and Yacht is a great contributor to the Maritime industry; urged\napproval of the Bay Ship and Yacht contract due to the experience and relationship with\nthe community: Michael McDonough, Chamber of Commerce.\nUrged approval of the Bay Ship and Yacht contract: Chad Peddy, Bay Ship and Yacht.\nUrged approval of the Bay Ship and Yacht contract: David Mik, Power Engineering.\nStated Bay Ship and Yacht is proactive in addressing environmental cleanup for the\nproperty they took over; they are committed to remediating the property and protecting\nhuman health and the environment: Amy Wilson, TRC Company.\nStated Bay Ship and Yacht has invested over $20,000,000 in the infrastructure;\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 5, "text": "managing the customers in the business is a part of their core structure; the company\nwould like to continue to work in Alameda: Allen Cameron, Bay Ship and Yacht.\nStated the decision making process for awarding the contract was not handled in a fair\nmanner; there is lack of transparency; the criteria described to him significantly differs\nfrom the final analysis; additional consideration is warranted before a final decision is\nmade: Kevin Krause, TKO Environmental and Marine Services.\nStated Bay Ship and Yacht does quality work and takes care of its customers; he\nstrongly supports the Bay Ship and Yacht contract: Robert Cullmann, Chamber of\nCommerce and eon Technologies.\nStated Bay Ship and Yacht has a contract with College of Alameda to train people to be\nin the industry and create jobs upon graduation; urged approval of the Bay Ship and\nYacht contract: Kari Thomson, Chamber of Commerce.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification on the issues raised by Mr.\nKrause.\nThe Assistant City Attorney listed the criteria itemized in the RFP; stated that Mr.\nKrause's issues are that TKO was the lowest bidder, Bay Ship and Yacht adjusted their\nprice before the interviews, and the price should have been weighted heavier than it\nwas; TKO has as much, or more experience than Bay Ship and Yacht; outlined the\nsteps in the bid dispute process; stated he is confident that staff followed the process;\nthe Request for Proposal (RFP) listed 7 criteria that the City uses in the decision\nmaking.\nMayor Spencer inquired what the 7 items in the criteria were.\nThe Assistant City Attorney read the 7 criteria.\nMayor Spencer inquired what responsiveness to the RFP means, to which the Assistant\nCity Attorney responded completeness.\nThe Assistant City Attorney stated that before the interviews of the bidders, the scope of\nthe RFP changed; Bay Ship and Yacht lowered their price, while TKO and a third bidder\nkept the price the same.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Bay Ship and Yacht's original price was $54,000 while\nTKO was $36,750, which is a $17,250 difference per month, 30% more, on a two year\ncontract, which equates to over $200,000 per year, to which the Assistant Community\nDevelopment Director responded in the affirmative.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded the price was not the determining factor in\nselecting Bay Ship and Yacht.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 6, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether staff took into consideration all 7\ncriteria, not just price, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Bay Ship and Yacht will be using a maintenance\nsoftware to keep track of all the maintenance and services requested and performed;\ninquired whether TKO will also be using maintenance software.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director stated TKO did not mention they would\nuse any special software; it was compelling for the Bay Ship and Yacht proposal; the\nCity thought the tracking device to be important.\nMayor Spencer inquired if the City spoke with TKO about providing the special software\nif it was a deciding issue.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director stated it was not the deciding factor, it\nwas one of many elements.\nMayor Spencer stated staff did not ask TKO if they could offer the special software.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director stated the applicant is responsible for\nproviding their qualifications and level of service; the City understands the sensitivity of\ncost; staff felt it was okay to go with the higher bidder because of the level of service;\nthe current port manager will be paying $530,000 annually for rent.\nMayor Spencer stated it does not mean that the City has an extra $200,000 to give\naway.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director stated the City is not giving the money\naway; the City is getting a service.\nVice Mayor Matarrese inquired whether only Bay Ship and Yacht adjusted their price\nwhen the scope of work was changed, not the other two bidders.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director stated after interviews with the three\napplicants, the City decided to remove the Bilge Oily Water Treatment System\n(BOWTS) in the scope of work and Bay Ship and Yacht adjusted their cost.\nVice Mayor Matarrese inquired if Patriot kept their cost the same.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded that Patriot elected not to\nbid on the project.\nVice Mayor Matarrese inquired whether the $36,750 was the same price that was bid\nprior.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded that Bay Ship and Yacht's\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 7, "text": "bid is still higher than TKO.\nVice Mayor Matarrese inquired what the total budget is for maintaining the piers and the\nport.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded $325,000 annually for the\nport management services and $100,000 for maintaining the piers as a line item.\nVice Mayor Matarrese inquired what is the value of the revenue that comes to the port.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the Maritime Administration\n(MARAD) ships pay over $2 million a year to the City.\nVice Mayor Matarrese inquired whether Power Engineering is also present at the port.\nThe Community Development Director responded Power Engineering will be moving\ntheir barge to Pier 1 and paying the City $11.00 per linear foot.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of authorizing the City Manager to\nexecute documents necessary to implement the terms of a two year port services\ncontract with Bay Ship and Yacht Company at Alameda Point.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion.\nUnder discussion, Mayor Spencer stated the difference between the two bids is\nsignificant and staff should justify spending the difference prior to bringing it to Council.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated Bay Ship and Yacht's proposal appears to be more\nthorough; he is confident that the City is making the right decision with Bay Ship and\nYacht and the quality of service they provide; it is important to look at the quality of the\nproposal, not just the dollars and cents.\nMayor Spencer stated what Bay Ship and Yacht does for the community needs to be\nseparate from the contract.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese and Oddie - 4. Noes: Mayor\nSpencer - 1.\n(*16-137) Recommendation to Accept the Work of MCK, Inc. for Repair and\nResurfacing of Certain Streets, Phase 34, No. P.W. 04-15-07. Accepted.\n(16-138) Resolution No. 15132, \"Approving the Final Map and Bond, Authorizing\nExecution of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement, and Accepting the Dedications\nand Easements for Tract 10305 (2100 Clement Avenue). Adopted.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 8, "text": "Councilmember Daysog stated that he voted no on the project and would remain\nconsistent.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 4. Noes:\nCouncilmember Daysog - 1.\n(*16-139) Resolution No. 15133, \"Confirming the Terms and Conditions for\nCompensation for Alameda Fire Department Responses Away from their Official Duty\nStation and Assigned to an Emergency Incident (Mutual Aid).\" Adopted.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(16-140) Resolution No. 15134, \"Appointing Michaela Tsztoo as a Member of the\nCommission on Disability Issues.\" Adopted;\n(16-140A) Resolution No. 15135, \"Reappointing Arthur Kurrasch as a Member of the\nHousing Authority Board of Commissioners.\" Adopted;\n(16-140B) Resolution No. 15136, \"Appointing Tina Landess Petrich as a Landlord\nMember of the Rent Review Advisory Committee; and\n(16-140C) Resolution No. 15137, \"Appointing Robert Schrader as a Landlord Member\nof the Rent Review Advisory Committee.\" Adopted.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved adoption of the resolutions.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice\nvote - 5.\nThe City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented certificates of\nappointment to Ms. Tsztoo, Mr. Kurrasch and Mr. Schrader.\n(16-141) Introduction of Ordinance Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Documents\nNecessary to Implement the Terms of a Ten-Year Lease with Two Ten-Year Renewal\nOptions and an Option to Purchase with Alameda Point Redevelopers, LLC for Building\n8, Located at 2350 Saratoga Street at Alameda Point. Introduced.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director and Ted Anderson, Cushman and\nWakefield, gave a Power Point presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the market rate calculation is market rate after the\nmoney has been put into the building during the lease.\nMr. Anderson responded that the calculation assumes a shell cost.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 9, "text": "Mayor Spencer stated the calculation is not the money that is being put in during the\nlease, to which Mr. Anderson responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired why the property is not currently leased; questioned why the\nCity is doing an option to purchase.\nMr. Anderson responded the building is not leasable in its current condition.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether a tenant could lease the building and make the\nimprovements.\nMr. Anderson responded it is possible, stated the building was marketed to everyone\npossible; a lessee's focus is typically to run their business, not to take on a renovation\nbefore they can even start their business.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the City had tried to lease the building.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the building has been on\nthe market since the Base closed without any bites because of the investment required;\nbuildings now have the purchase options to allow tenants to get the money to make\nimprovements; tenants want to own the buildings; ownership is used to leverage\nfinancing; in order to move difficult buildings, people want to own them to get financing;\nthe building is in the adaptive reuse zoning area, which gives the future end user\nflexibility; the old buildings need a lot of money to restore them; it is imperative to offer\nthe opportunity to own to allow people to get money and invest.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether in the scenario the City currently owns the property\nand is now providing an option to purchase, to which the Assistant Community\nDevelopment Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the City has not had the money to\nrehabilitate the building.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the buyer would pay into the master\ninfrastructure program if the option to purchase was exercised.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the City set the price of the\nbuilding to cover the fair share of infrastructure cost; the price has gone up to capture\nthe infrastructure investment on waterfront properties and buildings that are desirable;\nthe money goes into an infrastructure fund; the owner can use the money to make\noffsite improvements that the City would have to make anyway.\nMr. Anderson responded the owner needs to use the money in the first 24 months after\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 10, "text": "they purchase or the money goes into the General Fund.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired on the amount of the infrastructure fund.\nMr. Anderson responded the amount is $1.8 million.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired what is the developer's commitment for making repairs\nto the infrastructure of the building.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded that the tenant is putting\n$10 million in the purchase price and $8.5 million worth of improvements into the\nbuilding; the total investment in the building is $36.5 million.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if the building is just leased and not purchased what\nwould be the price.\nMr. Anderson responded the lease would be $1 million as the lessee completes repairs\nthe first year; another $1 million year 2, and another $1 million year 3.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the total would be\napproximately $3.4 million dollars.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired what it would cost the City to bring the building up to a\ntenantable situation.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded to make the building\nhabitable, would cost $8.5 million.\nMayor Spencer inquired what the lessee has to put in as a part of the lease.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the $3.4 million is only the\ninfrastructure burden; the lessee would have to pay rent and the Citywide Development\nFee.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the money to make the building habitable is a\nrequirement of the lease, to which the Assistant Community Development Director\nresponded in the negative.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded there are benchmarks in\nthe lease stating the lessee would have to spend $3.4 million; the aggressive rent\nincreases are designed make the lessee make the necessary improvements.\nMr. Anderson stated as time goes on, it will be more expensive for the lessee to have a\nbuilding that cannot be occupied.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director continued the presentation.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 11, "text": "Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if work/live spaces are currently a part of the\nzoning for the area, to which the Assistant Community Development Director responded\nin the affirmative and continued the presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether there is anything to encourage the 500 employees to\nuse public transportation or bike to work.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded Alameda Point is part of a\nTransportation Demand District; stated there are a limit number of parking spaces\navailable; tenants will pay into a TDM program and will be encouraged to use public\ntransit.\nMayor Spencer inquired if tenants will need to provide public transportation alternatives\nto their employees.\nMr. Anderson responded the building resides on 3.4 acres; the employees will need to\nfind alternate means of transportation to work.\nMayor Spencer inquired how the City would know the employees will not be parking in\nsurrounding neighborhoods.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded that every tenant or property owner will have to\nprepare a TDM Plan Compliant Strategy and comply with the Alameda Point TDM; they\nwill have to pay per square foot; tenants will be required to pay annually into the\naccount; the fund will provide shuttles in the peak hours and provide bus passes to all\nemployees; tenants will be required to submit a compliance strategy to the City.\nMayor Spencer stated they do not have to buy a bus pass, they can bike or walk; she\ndoes not want to have 600 more cars on the road and related parking.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded the overall TDM Plan is designed to encourage trip\nreduction goals and meet the requirements of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR).\nMayor Spencer inquired if anything requires the employees to not drive a car to work.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded the TDM provides frequent and reliable\ntransportation services so that people get out of their cars; stated the land is leased to\nthe tenants by the City so the parking could be enforced; the TDM makes sure people\nhave options for transportation.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated there is good evidence that the shuttle system is\nworking; the 15 minute headway turnaround will be good for commuters.\nCouncilmember Oddie questioned where the 600 new cars figure came from; stated\nthere would be only be 480 new jobs and 110 temporary; the temporary jobs will expire\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 12, "text": "before the new jobs; a portion of the jobs will be jobs work/live units with tenants living\non the premises; a portion may take the ferry into Alameda; a portion may walk; for\nthose coming into the Island, it will be a reverse commute.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded the strategy is to provide more jobs and balance\nthe housing on the Island.\nMayor Spencer inquired how many work/live units will there be.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded that the work/live housing is highly restrictive;\nstated the tenants would have to obtain a commercial license; the building is\ncommercial use under the zoning.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether people will be living there; requested an estimate on\nhow many units will be work/live units.\n***\nCouncilmember Oddie left the dais at 9:00 p.m. and returned at 9:02 p.m.\nJonah Hendrickson, Alameda Point Redevelopers, gave a Power Point presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired how many housing units will be in the building.\nMr. Hendrickson responded the current work/live zoning would allow for 100 units based\non the Alameda Municipal Code and the square footage; stated the issue of use will be\nfurther discussed by the Planning Board during the master use permit process.\nMayor Spencer stated it is appropriate to discuss the number of units; inquired how\nmany people per unit.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the term work/live means that tenants\nwould live and work in the same place and a commute would not be a part of the\nequation, to which Mr. Hendrickson responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired if a couple lives in the unit do both occupants need to work\nthere or only one.\nVivian Kahn, Alameda Point Redevelopers, stated the work/live ordinance was\nspecifically crafted to ensure the units are commercial spaces; it allows a maximum of\n30% of the floor area to be devoted to residential uses and be no more than 400 square\nfeet; at least one of the people occupying the space must have a business license and\nbe conducting business; the ordinance is very strict and explicitly states the work/live\nunits are for commercial use.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the tenants would be working in Building 8; inquired\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 13, "text": "whether the tenants have to work in Building 8 or if they would be allowed to work in the\nCity.\nMs. Kahn responded that a business license goes with the address and cannot be\ncarried to another address.\nStated the project will benefit the Alameda Point; the developers will be putting $8\nmillion into the building before the lights can even be turned on; selling the building is\nthe best option for the City; the tenants would like to give back to the community with\napprenticeships and internships for youth: Michael McDonough, Chamber of\nCommerce.\nStated Building 8 is an adaptable building; he has worked on many large buildings like\nBuilding 8 and it takes a while to rehabilitate the large buildings: Dick Rutter, Alameda.\nStated that she is a banker and the option to purchase makes sense from a finance\nstandpoint; it is creating jobs, which creates an economic engine for the City and tax\nrevenues; urged Council to approve the project: Kari Thompson, Chamber of\nCommerce.\nStated Epic Middle School is a stem school; all the students take engineering design\nand fabrication; there is a need for space in Alameda for students to work with skilled\ncraftsmen as they prepare themselves for the workforce; read a letter from Florine\nRoper urging Council to support the project: Francis Abbatatatuono, Epic Middle\nSchool.\nStated that he leases a space from Mr. Hendrickson why he transformed and cleaned\nup a once dilapidated building; Mr. Hendrickson will apply the same dedication to his\nwork and tenants for the adaptive reuse of Building 8: Brandon Canchola, Treasure\nIsland Woodworks.\nRead different statements from tenants and community members of Berkeley regarding\nthe Berkeley Kitchen Project; urged Council to support the project; stated Mr.\nHendrickson will apply the same vision at Alameda Point: Adan Martinez, City of\nBerkeley, Economic Development Manager.\nStated that he works on behalf of landlords and tenants; he supports the project\nbecause warehouse and manufacturing space is needed; velocity and demand are\npresent in the marketplace, the product is absent: Jeff Starkovich, Cushman and\nWakefield.\nRead a letter from Greg Harper with AC Transit Board who supports the project; stated\nthe adaptive reuse of Building 8 will be a greatly designed makerspace; strongly urged\nsupport of the project: Vivian Kahn, Alameda Point Redevelopers.\nRead a letter from Mayor Tom Bates of Berkeley in support of the project; discussed the\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 14, "text": "rehabilitation Mr. Hendrickson did on the Berkeley Kitchen Project; stated the adaptive\nreuse of Building 8 will surpass the success he achieved with Berkeley Kitchen: Kiran\nShenoy, Berkeley Landmark Preservation Commission.\nStated allowing the project at Building 8 will attract more small businesses and allow\nthem to have commercial success; urged Council approval of the project; read a letter\nfrom owner of Mission: Heirloom, Berkeley Kitchens; stated Berkeley Kitchen has\nallowed him to grow his business: Alain Shocron, La Noisette Sweets.\nRead a letter from Berkeley Councilmember Darryl Moore; stated Mr. Hendrickson\ntransformed a once vacant, landmark designated building into Berkeley Kitchens; the\nadaptive reuse of Building 8 will meet or exceed the success of Berkeley Kitchens; the\nCity of Alameda will be greatly enriched by the development genius of Mr. Hendrickson:\nRyan Lau, Legislative Aide, Councilmember Darryl Moore.\nStated Mr. Hendrickson's designs enliven community and are very accessible to the\ncommunity; the City needs someone who can take the massive scale and bring it down\nto make it accessible to the community: Elisa Mikiten, Architect.\nStated Mr. Hendrickson is a developer who equally prioritizes profit, people and the\nplanet; science, technology, engineering and math are used adding arts, innovation and\nentrepreneurship; read a letter of support from Janet Smith-Heimer, President of Bay\nUrban Economics; stated Mr. Hendrickson has a strong and effective reuse\nentrepreneurship and will create a lively makerspace community which will foster the\nCity's goals for reuse and economic development in creative industries: Emylene\nAspilla.\nStated that he is a tenant in one of Mr. Hendrickson's buildings; Mr. Hendrickson turned\na\nrundown old machine shop into a sleek, clean hub of studios and workspaces for\nartists and small business owners; Mr. Hendrickson is a great developer; he strongly\nsupports the project; Alameda providing a place for artists to go would be great so that\nthey do not have to move to other places in the country: Patrick Dooley, Shotgun\nPlayers Theater.\nStated Mr. Hendrickson is a developer that follows through on projects; Mr. Hendrickson\ndid a great job on Berkeley Kitchens; urged support of the project: Carrie Olson,\nBerkeley.\nSpoke in support of Mr. Hendrickson and the work he did on Berkeley Kitchens; stated\nhe will do the same for the Alameda project and the tenants will be happy because the\nproject fills a need: Craig Boon, Nuthouse Granola.\nRead a letter from Wendy Ross; urged support of Alameda Point Redevelopers creating\nan environment that supports the needs for small businesses in the community; stated\nthat she has the upmost confidence they will do an extraordinary job on the project:\nDalia Juskys, President of the Bank of San Francisco, Wendy Ross.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 15, "text": "Stated that he is the owner of a makerspace in Oakland where kids and families can\ncome and do large projects; he supports the project and hopes to be a tenant in\nBuilding 8: Parker Thomas, Steam Factory.\nRead two letters from tenants of Berkeley Kitchens: Christy Kovacs, Muffin Revolution\nowner, stated Mr. Hendrickson is a great manager and would be a great candidate for\nthe project in Alameda; stated the Berkeley Kitchens created a collaborative working\nenvironment for all the tenants; stated Mr. Hendrickson's vision for Building 8 is\nunsurpassed: Leslie Jacobowitz.\nRead two letters from supporters of the project: Steven Camarretto and Jesse Rosalles;\nurging approval of the lease for Building 8 which will fit the character and needs of the\ncommunity; stated the inclusion of Mr. Hendrickson and his team would only benefit the\nresidents of Alameda; Mr. Hendrickson will be an excellent landlord and the project will\nwork: Ira Jacobowitz.\nStated his company is a diverse operation, which hosted 35,000 people in their tasting\nroom last year alone; the Building 8 project can host food producers, artists, makers and\nthere is room for a lot of success stories in Alameda: Chris Jordan, St. George.\nRead letters from tenants of Berkeley Kitchens: Shrub and Co. owner Juan Garcia\nstated: since moving into Berkeley Kitchens their business has grown; Mr. Hendrickson\nwill do the same in Alameda; the City and citizens will be lucky to have him; Kathleen\nFrumkin stated: Mr. Hendrickson created such a positive use of space in Berkeley that\nis extremely rare to find; urged Council to support the project: Barbara Hendrickson.\nRead two letters urging Council to go forward with the project; one from a very happy\ntenant at Berkeley Kitchens and the secretary of the landmarks preservation committee;\nstated Mr. Hendrickson has a track record of rehabilitating buildings into spaces that\nprovide local artisans and makers an opportunity to run their businesses; urged Council\napproval of project: Alex Orloff, Berkeley.\nMayor Spencer called a recess at 10:10 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:16 p.m.\n***\nMayor Spencer inquired where the presentation speaks of the work/live discussion.\nThe Community Development Director responded that the work/live discussion is not in\nthe presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether there is a potential of 270 work/live units; inquired\nwhat is allowed in the building; stated the building can be sold for anything within the\nzoning.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n14\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 16, "text": "The Base Reuse Director responded the tenant could submit an application for a\nconditional use permit and say they want to do 270 work/live units; the current project\nstates the tenant does not want to do any more than 100 work/live units.\nMayor Spencer stated the 100 work/live units is not in the presentation.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded 100 units is a land use decision that the City has\nnot discussed yet; stated the City has left open the flexibility for the developers to do a\nnumber of commercial uses; when the developer gets into the design, there is flexibility\nto come up with a plan and submit an application; ultimately, the City Council will make\nthe decision.\nMayor Spencer stated there is a potential of 270 housing units; inquired if 270,000\nsquare feet is allowed within the zoning.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded the zoning does not give the developer the right or\nability to build work/live units; a conditional use permit is required.\nMayor Spencer inquired if there is the potential in Building 8.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded only if the Planning Board approves the request\nand the City Council upholds the Planning Board approval.\nMayor Spencer inquired if the person who arrived at the sales price valued the price at\nthe potential of having 270 work/live units.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded the building has been valued as commercial use\nbecause work/live is commercial use; stated the building is not financed as residential;\nthe project is restrictive in the way that it is structured; it is priced and zoned as\ncommercial use.\nMayor Spencer stated it is zoned for work/live; the City's zoning states that every unit\nmust be up to 1,000 square feet and Building 8 is 270,000 square feet.\nThe Base Reuse Director responded approval of work/live units would have to go to the\nPlanning Board and could be called for review by Council.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether a sale price is being agreed upon, to which the Base\nReuse Director responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the price includes the value of work/live units, to which\nMr. Anderson responded in the negative; stated basing the value on work/live is not\nappropriate.\nMayor Spencer inquired how many buildings in the area allow work/live.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n15\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 17, "text": "The Base Reuse Director responded work/live is a conditionally permitted use for the\nadaptive reuse area.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Base Reuse Director stated the use is\nallowed on 1/3 of Alameda Point.\nMayor Spencer stated with all the community discussions regarding housing at the\nPoint, the potential of the buildings being flipped has not been discussed.\nThe City Manager responded that a condition of approval could be added limiting the\namount of work/live units.\nMayor Spencer stated work/live should have been included in the presentation and\ntaken into consideration in the pricing; there has not been transparency with the\ncommunity; there it is a potential impact on the community.\nVice Mayor Matarrese stated there is a housing parameter at the former Base; the fact\nthat the building is being adaptively reused is an important factor to consider; the\nbuilding currently has negative value and is costing the City money; he is ready to vote\nto support the project; one reservation is the cost to rehabilitate the building; another\nreservation is that Building 8 is ten times the size of Berkeley Kitchens; urged\naccelerating selling the building; proceeding is worth taking the risk to get the revenue\nstream.\n***\n(16-142) Mayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to consider the remaining agenda\nitem on the wetlands mitigation bank [paragraph no. 16-143].\nCouncilmember Oddie moved approval of considering the remaining item.\nVice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried unanimous voice vote - 5.\n***\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the testimony from the people who have worked\nwith the developer is great feedback; the project will be creating jobs; the development\nis needed; there are safeguards regarding the housing and work/live units; she is ready\nto support the project.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired what the Assistant Community Development Director's\nrole is in these types of situations.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded that she took an active role\nin investigating the financials of the applicant, going on site visits, and looking at other\nprojects done by the applicant; stated she wants to ensure the City would get something\nout of the deal if it fails.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n16\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 18, "text": "Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the Assistant Community Development\nDirector's job is to get the best possible deal for the City.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated\nwith leases at Alameda Point, the fund is very delicate and in demand.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the deal is the best possible the City could get\nfor Building 8.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated the\nCity was able to get a deal with more infrastructure for the building.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the Assistant Community Development Director's job is to\nmaximize what the City can get from any deal; any implication that the Assistant\nCommunity Development Director is not looking out for the best interest of the City is\nfrustrating; one of the priorities of the Alameda Point Master Plan is to generate new\neconomic development and employment opportunities; read some of the City's goals\nfrom the Master Plan; stated that he supports the project.\nCouncilmember Daysog stated the cost for developing Building 8 is doubled; each\nproject should contribute towards major infrastructure; Alameda values the historic\ncharacter of the site and wants to reuse the sites; these are the types of businesses and\nindustries the City wants in Alameda; he supports the project; in terms of the\neconomics, the City has done its due diligence; the traffic generation from the work/live\nhousing would be less than typical housing.\nMayor Spencer stated according to the staff report, the work/live spaces are not\nconsidered residential and are not considered housing under the Navy's residential\ndevelopment cap; it is important to be transparent for the community.\nVice Mayor stated the debate over the number of work/live units can be done at the use\npermit stage.\nVice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of staff executing the lease [introduction of the\nordinance].\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by the following\nvoice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese and Oddie - 4.\nNoes: Mayor Spencer - 1.\n(16-143) Response to City Council Referral Regarding a Possible Wetlands Mitigation\nBank at Alameda Point.\nThe Base Reuse Director began her presentation.\nMayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to continue the meeting past 11:00 p.m.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n17\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2016-03-15", "page": 19, "text": "The City Clerk stated the previous meeting went past 11:00 p.m., and the agenda for\nthe April 5th meeting is full and the meeting might go past 11:00 p.m., which would\nrequire the Council to add meetings.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if the matter could be adjourned to the next meeting.\nThe City Attorney stated the Council is not continuing the item, it will be re-agendized.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\nNot heard.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNot heard.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\nNot heard.\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\nNot heard.\nADJOURNMENT\nIn order to not continue past 11:00 p.m., Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 10:59\np.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n18\nMarch 15, 2016", "path": "CityCouncil/2016-03-15.pdf"}