{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nTUESDAY--DECEMBER 19, 2017--5:00 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 5:02 p.m.\nRoll Call - Present:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie, Vella and\nMayor Spencer - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nThe meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider:\n(17-744) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Initiation of litigation\npursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code; Number of\ncases: Three (As Plaintiff - City Initiating Legal Action)\nFollowing the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and the City Clerk\nannounced direction was given to staff.\nAdjournment\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 6:35 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\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 2, "text": "MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE\nCITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY\nTO THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (SACIC)\nTUESDAY--DECEMBER 19, 2017--6:59 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers/Commissioners Ezzy Ashcraft,\nMatarrese, Oddie, Vella and Mayor/Chair Spencer -\n5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the Consent Calendar.\nCouncilmember/Commissioner Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by\nunanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk\npreceding the paragraph number.]\n(*17-745 CC/16 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the First Quarter Financial Report\nfor the Period Ending September 30, 2017. Accepted.\n(*17-746 CC/17 SACIC) Recommendation to Accept the Investment Report for the\nQuarter Ending September 30, 2017. Accepted.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 7:01 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLara Weisiger\nCity Clerk and Secretary, SACIC\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nSpecial Joint Meeting of the\nAlameda City Council and Successor Agency\nto the Community Improvement Commission\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 3, "text": "MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING\nESDAY--DECEMBER - - 19, 2017--7:00 P.M.\nMayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:01 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCouncilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese,\nOddie and Mayor Spencer - 5.\nAbsent:\nNone.\nAGENDA CHANGES\n(17-747) Mayor Spencer moved approval of moving up the referrals.\nCouncilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which failed by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmember Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 2. Noes: Councilmembers Ezzy\nAshcraft, Matarrese and Vella - 3.\nThe Consent Calendar was addressed prior to Special Orders and Oral\nCommunications.\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar, with recording his\nno vote for the cannabis ordinance [paragraph no. 17-760].\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, with recording her no vote on the\ncannabis ordinance, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or\nadopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.]\n(*17-748) Minutes of the Special City Council Meetings Held on November 21, 2017.\nApproved.\n(*17-749) Ratified bills in the amount of $1,384,702.24.\n(*17-750) Recommendation to Accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report for the Board of\nEqualization Period Ending September 30, 2017 (Funds Collected During the Period\nApril 1, 2017 to June 30, 2017). Accepted.\n(*17-751) Recommendation to Accept the 2013 Local Library Bond Measure Annual\nReport. Accepted.\n(*17-752) Recommendation to Accept the Police and Fire Construction Impact Fee\nAnnual Report. Accepted.\n(*17-753) Recommendation to Accept the Development Impact Fee and Fleet Industrial\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n1\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 4, "text": "Supply Center (FISC)/Catellus Traffic Fee Report. Accepted.\n(*17-754) Recommendation to Accept and File the Community Facilities District (CFD)\nNo. 03-1 (Bayport Municipal Services District) Report for the Fiscal Year (FY) Ending\nJune 30, 2017; the CFD No. 13-1 (Alameda Landing Public Improvements) Report for\nFiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017; the CFD No. 13-2 (Alameda Landing Municipal\nServices District) Report for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017; and the CFD District No.\n14-1 (Marine Cove II) Report for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017. Accepted.\n(*17-755) Recommendation to Accept the Annual Review of the Affordable Housing\nOrdinance and the City's Affordable Housing Unit Fee Consistent with Section 27-1 of\nthe Alameda Municipal Code and California Government Code Section 66001, and\nAccept the Annual Affordable Housing Unit Fee Fund Activity Report. Accepted.\n(*17-756) Recommendation to Award a Five-Year Agreement for an Amount not to\nExceed a Total Five-Year Expenditure of $276,285, to Turbo Data Systems for Parking\nCitation Processing and Collection Services. Accepted.\n(*17-757) Resolution No. 15334, \"Amending the 15-Year Concession Agreement, with a\n10-Year Renewal Option, with Dialemi, Inc. (known as Jim's on the Course), for the\nProvision of Food and Beverage Service at the Chuck Corica Golf Complex.\" Adopted.\n(*17-758) Resolution No. 15335, \"Declaring Results of Special Election in Community\nFacilities District No. 13-1 (Alameda Landing Public Improvements), Determining that\nAlteration of the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Taxes for the District is\nLawfully Authorized, and Directing Recording of a Third Amendment to Notice of\nSpecial Tax Lien.\" Adopted.\n(*17-759) Resolution No. 15336, \"Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a\nCooperation Agreement between Eden Housing, Inc., a California Corporation, and the\nCity of Alameda for Compliance with the Requirements of a Grant Application Under the\nAffordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Funding Program for the 70-Unit\nFamily Affordable Housing Project on Block 8 within Site A at Alameda Point and for the\nCross Alameda Trail Segment along Ralph Appezzato Memorial Parkway.\" Adopted.\n(*17-760) Ordinance No. 3206, \"Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Repealing\nSection 30-5.15 (Medical Marijuana Dispensaries and Cultivation) in its Entirety and\nAdding a New Section 30-10 (Cannabis). Finally passed.\nNote: The ordinance was finally passed by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Oddie, Vella and Mayor Spencer. Noes: Councilmembers Ezzy\nAshcraft and Matarrese - 2.\nPROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS\n(17-761) Proclamation Declaring December 19, 2017 as Nick Pereira Day.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n2\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 5, "text": "Mayor Spencer read the proclamation and presented it to Nick Pereira.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft made brief comments.\nMr. Pereira made brief comments.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\n(17-762) Gaby Dolphin, Alameda, submitted information and discussed smart meters.\nMayor Spencer requested clarification on the role the City has with the Public Utilities\nBoard (PUB).\nThe City Manager responded the only role the City has is the appointment of the PUB\nmembers; stated the PUB removed the opt-out sunset provision; residents can opt-out\nindefinitely.\nMayor Spencer inquired what is the cost for consumers to opt-out.\nThe City Manager responded $100 to $125 is the initial cost and then, $10 a month;\nstated the cost is for a meter reader to physically come out to the property to read the\nmeter and can fluctuate.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether an informational report from Alameda\nMunicipal Power (AMP) can be agendized in the future, to which the City Manager\nresponded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer stated that she would like to list steps the community can take to be\nposted on the City's website.\nThe City Manager stated the Smart Meter program started with the intent of enabling\nAMP to become greener and allow citizens to monitor energy usage.\nVice Mayor Vella stated that she would like staff to inquire whether the opt-out fee is\nassessed on individual meters or the bank of meters in multi-family units.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n(17-763) Introduction of Ordinance Approving a Real Estate Exchange Agreement\nbetween the City of Alameda (\"City\") and PUR Atlantic LLC (\"PUR Atlantic\") to\nExchange Approximately 820 Square Feet of City Owned Property for Approximately\n2,173 Square Feet of PUR Atlantic Owned Property in Order to Facilitate Construction\nof the Cross Alameda Trail Project along Ralph Appezzato Memorial Parkway between\nMain and Webster Streets and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Documents\nNecessary to Implement Its Terms. Introduced.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n3\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 6, "text": "The Base Reuse Director gave a brief presentation.\nExpressed support for the project: Brian McGuire, Bike Walk Alameda.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved introduction of the ordinance approving a real\nestate exchange agreement between the City of Alameda and PUR Atlantic LLC to\nexchange approximately 820 square feet of City owned property for approximately\n2,173 square feet of PUR Atlantic owned property in order to facilitate construction of\nthe Cross Alameda Trail Project along Ralph Appezzato Memorial Parkway between\nMain and Webster Streets and authorizing the City Manager to execute documents\nnecessary to implement its terms.\nVice Mayor Vella seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n(17-764) Public Hearing to Consider the following Ordinances and Resolutions to\nGovern the Future Development of the Encinal Terminals Property:\nResolution No. 15337, \"Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR),\nAdopting Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation Measures,\nand a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Encinal Terminals Project.\"\nAdopted;\n(17-764 A) Introduction of Ordinance Approving a Development Agreement (DA) by and\nbetween the City of Alameda and Northern Waterfront Cove Partners, LLC Governing to\nEncinal Terminals Project for Real Property Located at 1521 Buena Vista Avenue\n(Authorizing a Public Trust Lands Exchange, Completion of the Clement Avenue\nExtension and Other Public Benefits). Not introduced;\n(17-764 B) Introduction of Ordinance Adopting the Encinal Terminals Master Plan and\nDensity Bonus Application for Redevelopment of the Property Located at 1521 Buena\nVista Avenue. Not introduced; and\n(17-764 C) Adoption of Resolution Approving a General Plan Amendment to Allow\nBuilding Heights Over 60 Feet. Not adopted.\nMayor Spencer inquired how the item will be handled.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director requested a total of 30 minutes for the\npresentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Council will be voting on the items.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded that he would like to do the\npresentations, Council questions, and then public speakers.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the EIR can be done last.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n4\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 7, "text": "The City Manager responded the EIR has to be done first to ensure the environmental\nimpacts associated with the projects have been reviewed.\nMayor Spencer requested clarification from the Assistant City Attorney whether the\ninformation is correct and the EIR has to be heard first.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated the first order of\nbusiness has to be the environmental findings.\nThe City Attorney concurred.\nThe Assistant City Attorney made brief comments regarding the sequence of business.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director gave a Power Point presentation.\nMayor Spencer requested clarification on the terminology Mixed Use (MX), plus multi-\nfamily (MF) residential.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded MX is mixed use zoning\ndistrict and MF is multi-family residential zoning district.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Council decides what percentage is housing and what\npercentage is commercial in an MX zone.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Council will be determining the percentage tonight.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; continued\nthe presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Tim Lewis Communities (TLC) purchased the property\nin 2013, to which the Assistant Community Development Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether a timeline can be included for the public.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated the\npurchase took place in 2013.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether TLC is actually the Waterfront Cove, LLC, to which the\nAssistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; continued the\npresentation.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n5\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 8, "text": "Mayor Spencer inquired whether Council is being asked to approve a range between\n30,000 to 50,000 square feet of commercial and retail uses and when the uses is\ndecided.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the Master Plan requires\n30,000 square feet to be built whether there is a tenant or not; the entitlements allow the\ndeveloper to build up to 50,000 square feet.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Council could request a higher percentage of\ncommercial and retail space.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the percentage is Council's\ndiscretion.\nMayor Spencer inquired if the EIR is approved, will the range be automatically set at\n30,000 to 50,000 square foot.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the negative; stated the\nEIR is a document that discloses the impacts of the project; continued the presentation.\nCouncilmember Oddie requested clarification regarding the current status of the 9.5\nacres of improved wharf.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the improved wharf is 4\nacres.\nCouncilmember Oddie requested clarification regarding the current status of the wharf.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the existing wharf is\nunimproved and has not been maintained for years; stated a condition of the project\nrequires the property owner to improve the wharf to current standards.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired which portions of the unimproved wharf are on the City\nowned Tidelands.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded none.\nIn response to Councilmember Oddie's inquiry, the Assistant Community Development\nDirector stated to mitigate the risk, staff required the property owner to bring the wharf\nto current code standards.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired how the City can ensure the property owner does not\nrequest more money.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded staff is requiring the\nproperty owner to complete all improvements to the wharf prior to the sale of any land.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n6\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 9, "text": "Councilmember Oddie expressed concern with other projects not having enough funds\nto complete the project; inquired what staff can do to reassure there is not a pattern of\nprojects not having enough funds.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the requirement is up front,\nbefore any building permit is issued or any swap of land; the project will not move\nforward without the improved wharf.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether problems that arise will it fall on the City.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the negative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired what happens if a problem occurs ten years later.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded that after the wharf is\nbrought up to code, staff must assess how much money is needed to maintain the wharf\nin perpetuity; there is a risk involved.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the swap of land will prevent the shoreline\nfrom being privatized, to which the Assistant Community Development Director\nresponded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether public access would still need to be\nprovided to the shoreline, to which the Assistant Community Development Director\nresponded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the public would have access to the\nshoreline all around, to which the Assistant Community Development Director\nresponded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the requirement is in the project, to which the Assistant\nCommunity Development Director responded in the affirmative; continued the\npresentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired what the extra housing is that makes the total 589 units.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded market rate units.\nMayor Spencer inquired what the size of the market rate units will be.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded a variety.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the units can be single family homes.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n7\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 10, "text": "The Assistant Community Development Director responded the project is 100% multi-\nfamily homes.\nMayor Spencer requested clarification on the language \"up to.\"\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the \"up to\" refers to the\nmaximum.\nMayor Spencer stated some documents do not list a minimum, only \"up to.\"\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded that if the total number of\nunits of the project goes down, the percentage of affordable by design goes down as\nwell.\nCouncilmember Oddie requested clarification regarding the details of the $1 million\ndown payment assistance program.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the City has a down\npayment assistance program through the Housing Authority.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the program is only available to first time\nhomebuyers and has an income requirement.\nMayor Spencer noted there are different categories of first time homebuyers.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Housing Authority would have the guidelines.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director continued the presentation.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether a clipper card could be offered for all\ntypes of transportation, not only Alameda County (AC) Transit.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the money for transit can\nbe used for any form of transportation; continued the presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired how many floors is 60 feet.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the number of floors would\ndepend on the design; stated if there is parking in the structure, there could be 4 to 5\nstories.\nMayor Spencer inquired why the Panomar was allowed to be so high.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded that he is unsure; stated the\nbuilding has been around a long time.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n8\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 11, "text": "Mayor Spencer inquired whether the Panomar is the highest building.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; continued\nthe presentation.\nMayor Spencer requested a definition of the Quimby Act.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the Quimby Act is a State\nlaw mandating the ratio between the number of residents being added and the amount\nof open space the developer is required to provide; on the current project, the ratio is\n3.5%.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the information could be listed in the report for the\npublic, to which The Assistant Community Development Director responded in the\naffirmative; continued the presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the housing units would be reduced to meet the\ncommercial requirements.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded when the matter comes\nback to Council, more commercial can be requested; the requirements state housing\ncannot be reduced.\nMayor Spencer inquired when the City rezoned the site in 2012, did the rezoning\nincrease the required amount of housing.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated the\nrezoning increased the requirement from 21 units per acre to 30 units per acre to be in\ncompliance with State law.\nIn response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Assistant Community Development Director\nstated the City picked the site; a total of 10 sites are zoned multi-family to meet the\nState requirement.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the property was already zoned MX, to which the\nAssistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether staff considered where the commercial would go when\nthe property was rezoned to increase the housing requirement.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the site is MX, so the City is\nstill requiring commercial; stated the State gives the City credit for 60% of the housing\nrequirement due to the MX zoning.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the State is requiring only 60% for housing and 40%\nfor commercial.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n9\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 12, "text": "The Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired if an area is zoned for housing, will it receive 100% credit from\nthe State.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the State will give 90%\ncredit.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the developer is entitled to build 589 units\nwhether or not the swap is approved.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired would the developer have to submit a design under the\ncurrent configuration if the swap is not approved, to which the Assistant Community\nDevelopment Director responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired which way the developer would build if they cannot build\non the ground.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded they would build up.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired why the site was zoned MX.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the decision was made in\nthe General Plan to do commercial and residential on large waterfront sites; stated the\nCity wants more jobs on the Island in addition to residential; a fundamental reason is to\naid traffic impacts.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired where the financial analysis contains the valuation\nof the land prior to the swap versus after the swap, to which the Assistant Community\nDevelopment Director responded there is no valuation.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the Tidelands parcel currently has no\naccess to the water and whether the parcel is next to other Tidelands property on the\nWest End, to which the Assistant Community Development Director responded in the\naffirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired why there is no answer to the question regarding the\nvaluation of the property; stated he asked the question last summer.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the developer sent a letter\ntoday.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n10\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 13, "text": "Councilmember Matarrese stated the letter talks about the developer's value, but does\nnot address the specific question; inquired how much the City is adding to the\ndeveloper's land; stated the conditions should match the value the City is giving.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated that he would have appreciated an answer before the day\nof the vote; inquired whether there might be a Statewide policy regarding sea level rise\nand developments built next to the water.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the potential future\nlegislation has not been considered.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether there is discussion that the City will undertake\nits own requirements regarding sea level rise.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the City is reviewing the\nClimate Action Plan.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired if the land swap is not approved, will the Master Plan still\nreturn to Council and can the issues of climate action and the legislation coming down\nbe addressed at a later date.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether there are any appraisals of the land to determine the\nvaluation.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded in the negative; stated the\nCity is exchanging 5 acres for 8.5 to 9 acres.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the Tidelands property is owned by the State but in the\nCity's care.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the City owns the land in\ntrust.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether there is an appraisal for the property the City is\nswapping, to which the Assistant Community Development Director responded in the\nnegative.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the City would receive an appraisal of the property.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the City currently owns 6.5\nacres of Tidelands that cannot be used for residential; stated the City is receiving 8.5\nacres of Tidelands in the swap, which also cannot be used for residential.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n11\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 14, "text": "Mayor Spencer stated the market value would include any risks; inquired why the value\nis not being disclosed to the public.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the risks also needs to be\nassessed.\nMayor Spencer stated Council does not have the fiscal analysis to be able to assess the\nrisks.\nCouncilmember Matarrese questioned what value the City is adding to the privately\nowned property.\nCouncilmember Oddie concurred with Councilmember Matarrese.\nMayor Spencer inquired about the figures listed in the letter received from the\ndeveloper.\nThe City Manager responded the developer could describe the letter to the Council and\nthe public.\nMayor Spencer requested the letter be displayed for the public's view.\nThe City Clerk noted the letter is available online.\nTim O'Hara, Tim Lewis Communities (TLC), gave a Power Point presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired how the disabled would access the area.\nMr. O'Hara responded the disabled parking would be on ground level and meet\nrequirements; continued the presentation.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether there is a guarantee that the tax increase will not affect\npeople outside Encinal Terminals in the event of a shortage of funds.\nMr. O'Hara responded in the affirmative; continued the presentation.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the down payment assistance program will go\naway if the $15 million is not achieved.\nMr. O'Hara responded in the affirmative; stated the value created by the proposed plan\nallows the developer to provide the benefits to the City.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated Council has not been given the value of the project in its\ntotality with the land swap and without it; inquired how the City will know if it is receiving\nthe value.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n12\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 15, "text": "Mr. O'Hara responded real estate is a risky business; stated there will be a downturn in\n15 years; there are a lot of costs for a developer to take on the project.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the developer is investing in the land without a\nproforma.\nMr. O'Hara responded that proformas are subject to assumptions; stated the City is still\nreceiving an increase in value.\nCouncilmember Oddie expressed concern over the Del Monte project taking years to\neven begin construction.\nMr. O'Hara stated the building is very old; the developer is close to permit ready; there\nhave been rampant cost increases.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether Encinal Terminals would be subject to the\nsame pressures as the Del Monte building.\nMr. O'Hara responded the pressures are different; stated construction costs increase all\nthe time.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether the Bay Conservation and Development\nCommission (BCDC) engineering approval is yet to be had.\nMr. O'Hara responded the subsequent approval is a BCDC permit; the developer is\ncurrently working with BCDC.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired what not doing the swap does to the accessibility of the\nparcel in terms of transit.\nIn response, Mr. O'Hara reviewed areas of the map that would allow access to the\nshoreline.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired if the plan would change if the swap does not go through,\nrelative to shoreline access and usage.\nMr. O'Hara responded possibly.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether there would still be a marina.\nMr. O'Hara responded in such a scenario, the land would not be City owned, it would be\ndeveloper owned; stated the developer would envision the marina would stay.\nMayor Spencer inquired how the City would guarantee that other parts of the Island\nwould not pay for extra services such as Police and Fire for the Encinal Terminal area.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n13\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 16, "text": "The Assistant Community Development Director responded the City has a consultant\nstudy that shows the City in the positive; stated a special assessment district would\nensure fiscal neutrality.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether the City would be responsible for the costs of\nmaintenance of the wall or sea level rise in the future.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded staff has to ensure\nsufficient maintenance costs guarantee there will be enough money on an annual basis\nto maintain the wharf when the special assessment district is set up.\nThe City Manager stated the applicant also suggested a Geological Hazard Assessment\nDistrict (GHAD) and a Community Facilities District (CFD) to allow a District that is\nseparate from the City Council or allow City Council to sit on the District; stated the\nDistrict would plan for anything that is unforeseen; the District board would assess the\npeople within the District, separate from the City Council and the City Council's budget.\nMayor Spencer inquired how the City could do something greener than a sea wall.\nThe City Manager responded that would be a totally different project.\nMayor Spencer stated people have expressed concern regarding marine permaculture.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director stated creating wetlands is different\nthan creating maritime commercial leasing opportunities.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether adding a hoist and more permanent parking spaces for\nboats would be part of a different plan and whether Council could suggest modifications.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the plan can be adjusted to\ninclude a boat hoist.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether dry boat storage could be added.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded doing so would be a\nCouncil decision.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Council would have input on the type of commercial\nand retail.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the proposal guarantees\n30,000 square feet of commercial space; stated the types have not been determined.\nMayor Spencer inquired if Council increasing the amount of commercial or retail would\nsignificantly change the plan.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n14\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 17, "text": "The Assistant Community Development Director responded it would be an adjustment\nto the Master Plan and would depend on the changes.\nMayor Spencer inquired if the project is accessible to the disabled.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the project is completely\naccessible.\nMayor Spencer inquired whether Council could make the project more accessible, to\nwhich the Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative.\n***\n(17-765) Mayor Spencer inquired whether Council would consider hearing the referrals\ntonight.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval of tabling the referrals to a later meeting.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion and clarified that additional items\nwould not be considered after 10:30 p.m.\nUnder discussion, Mayor Spencer noted her nominations would be heard.\nOn the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5.\n***\nMayor Spencer called a recess 9:23 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:34 p.m.\nDiscussed speaker time limits; urged the Council to say no to developers; stated that he\nopposes the development: Former Councilmember Lil Arnerich, Alameda.\nStated an appraisal is required; the DA is missing exhibits; the City should receive $42\nmillion for the Tidelands; discussed the red brick building; reviewed requirements in the\nCity Charter, General Plan, Municipal Code and Northern Waterfront Plan; stated that\nshe would provide her remaining comments in Court: Former Councilmember Barbara\nThomas, Alameda.\nSubmitted and read his comments opposing the project: Paul Foreman, Alameda\nCitizens Task Force (ACT).\nDiscussed the number of housing units, the jobs to housing ratio and building height;\nurged the Council to return the project to the Planning Board: Dorothy Freeman,\nAlameda.\nExpressed concern over public safety; urged the matter return to the Planning Board or\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n15\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 18, "text": "be denied tonight: Jim Sweeney, Alameda.\nStated enough housing is not being built; stated there is a sense of urgency to address\nthe homelessness caused by the economic crisis: Angela Hockabout, Alameda Home\nTeam.\nExpressed concern over being misled; urged the Council to deny the project or send it\nback to the Planning Board: Ken Peterson, Alameda.\nUrged approval of the project; stated the biggest problem in the Bay Area is the housing\nshortage: Denise Trepanier, Alameda.\nStated AC Transit appreciates partnering with the City; discussed proposed AC Transit\nservices: Steven Jones, AC Transit.\nExpressed support for the project; stated the developer has done a lot of due diligence;\nread Tina Blain's letter of support: Kari Thomson, Chamber of Commerce.\nAddressed the Master Plan section on sea level rise, which proposes a sea wall on top\nof the wharf; questioned approval of the master plan: Richard Bangert, Alameda.\nExpressed concerns about the City benefit with transit funding, Clement being rebuilt\nwithout the project, and job guarantees to afford the housing; stated the City is being\nsold short on benefits; questioned the project getting homeless in housing; cautioned\nabout the value of public land and public benefits: Andrew Slivka, Carpenters Union.\nOffered for her company to be used as a resource; stated infill is the right thing to do;\noutlined environmental benefits: Sarah Sieloff, Center for Creative Land Recycling.\nSubmitted and read his comments outlining environmental concerns: Damian Mason,\nAlameda Backyard Growers and Community for a Sustainable Alameda.\nExpressed concern over the development, especially for first responders: Melvin Lim,\nAlameda.\nStated that he does not believe the developer is entitled to 589 units; urged the Council\nto push back; stated bus passes are an inadequate solution: Former Councilmember\nTony Daysog, Alameda.\nSubmitted a letter; urged Council to build the housing: Victoria Fierce, California\nRenters Legal Advocacy and Education Fund.\nStated the project is well thought out and addresses availability at all levels; the swap\nprovides more community benefit; urged approval: Laura Thomas, Renewed Hope\nHousing Advocates.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n16\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 19, "text": "Stated the land is currently concrete; the land swap makes sense and will bring in\nongoing annual revenue; the City has State obligations: Michael McDonough, Chamber\nof Commerce.\nDiscussed financial and housing issues impacting the next generation of children; urged\nCouncil to open doors: Phillip James, Alameda.\nUrged approval of the project; discussed the adjacent Wind River property; summarized\nthe community benefits; noted the developer has been good to seniors: Karen Bey,\nAlameda.\nStated that she supports the project; housing and waterfront access are needed;\nabandoned and blighted sights should be improved; 14 stories does not worry her;\nexpressed concern over traffic: Michelle Button, Alameda.\nResponded to legal concerns raised, including density bonus, California Environmental\nQuality Act (CEQA), GHAD, and the Beverly Act: Applicant's Attorney, Alicia Guerra,\nBuchalter.\nDiscussed Community Facilities Districts (CFDs): Applicant's Representative Chris\nAustin, Development Planning and Financing Group.\n***\n(17-766) Mayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to continue past 11:00 p.m.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved approval.\nMayor Spencer seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes:\nCouncilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Vella and Mayor Spencer - 4. Noes:\nCouncilmember Oddie - 1.\n***\nShowed pictures and discussed the boat lift: Brian McGuire, Alameda.\nExpressed concern over the building height; stated the units can be accommodated\nwithin height limits; expressed concern over the Design Review loophole in Table 3.2:\nChristopher Buckley, Alameda.\nStated market rate housing should not be done at the expense of impacts on the City's\nspecial qualities; expressed concern over high-rises; discussed housing needs,\nincluding for seniors: Janet Gibson, Alameda.\nExpressed concern over the jobs being created; urged the developer be required to put\nmoney towards a real transit solution: Kelly Marx, Alameda.\nDiscussed access to the project, transit, building heights, the Clement Avenue\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n17\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 20, "text": "extension, and age restricted buildings: Jessica Grossman, TLC.\nStated traffic is the main issue; more ways off and on the Island are needed: Marilyn\nBowe, Alameda.\nCouncilmember Matarrese requested clarification regarding entitlement over the\nnumber of units and what is required by law.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded State law says when\ncalculating a density bonus project, the applicant is allowed a bonus on the property\nabove the maximum number allowed by the current zoning; stated the City can add\nmore commercial but cannot reduce the number of housing.\nCouncilmember Matarrese inquired whether Council has discretion to set the\npercentage of commercial but cannot reduce the number of housing units based on the\nacreage owned by the applicant at the time an application is submitted.\nThe City Attorney responded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired about recent changes to the California Housing Accountability\nAct (HAA) and the City's legal exposure.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded the HAA changes state\ncities cannot use zoning requirements to try to change the number of units with one\nexception: if there is evidence on the record of a health or safety problem; the change\nalso states if you violate State law you will pick up the petitioner's attorney fees.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether there are mandatory attorney fees if the City loses\nand the petitioner wins, to which the Assistant Community Development Director\nresponded in the affirmative.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether there is also a fine associated with the changes.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded that he is unsure.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired whether an analysis has been done regarding the impact.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded that he would have to get back to Council on the\nanswer to Vice Mayor Vella's question.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if the swap does not go through, can the developer still\nbuild 589 units, to which the Assistant Community Development Director responded in\nthe affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the City's legal staff concurs with the Assistant\nCommunity Development Director.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n18\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 21, "text": "The City Attorney responded in the affirmative.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether the City is forced to do the swap, to which the\nAssistant Community Development Director responded in the negative.\nMayor Spencer expressed concern with the percentages in the MX zoning.\nThe Assistant Community Development Director responded that changes to the State\nlaw have affected the MX zoning requirements.\nMayor Spencer expressed concerns over the way staff has presented the percentages\nfor MX zoning in the past; stated that she will not be supporting the project; experts\nhave not looked at liquefaction for safe housing; Alameda is an Island and the needs\nare different; Alameda needs higher paying jobs.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she believes the swap is best for the City due\nto the benefits the City will receive; Alameda needs housing and development;\nrequested staff delete footnote 6 of Table 3.2 of the Master Plan; requested that\nprevailing wages be paid even on the residential portion; stated Council has a moral\nobligation to balance the needs of more housing in the area along with the impacts of\ntraffic; she would like to move forward with the project.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he is prepared to vote for the EIR; the value is\nless if the swap does not happen; he would like to know how much value the City\nshould be receiving; he questions whether affordable by design will provide affordable\nhousing in a high value market like Alameda; he will vote no on the Development\nAgreement (DA); he would like the DA to go back to the Planning Board.\nVice Mayor Vella stated there is a lot of work to be done on the Master Plan; projects\nhave to be approved in accordance with the HAA; she does not support the DA but\nunderstands the housing number will not change; the public deserves to know why the\nCity's hands are tied relative to the housing number requirement; she will support the\nEIR; substantial analysis needs to be done on the sea level rise.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if Councilmember Matarrese is requesting the\nmatter return to the Planning Board for refinement based on Council's comments, which\nis the same as voting no on the item.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired whether there is any other way the land can be\ntransferred.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded the only way to transfer the land out of the public\ntrust would be through a swap; stated the State would not approve selling the land for\nmoney; the swap does not need to be attached to a DA.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n19\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 22, "text": "Councilmember Oddie inquired who has jurisdiction over the land.\nThe Assistant City Attorney responded the State has already transferred the property in\ntrust to the City.\nCouncilmember Oddie inquired if Council votes no can the concerns from Council be\naddressed by the developer and the developer return with a revised proposal.\nMayor Spencer stated that she does not support the matter returning to the Planning\nBoard; she supports having a workshop with the developer to discuss the issues.\nCouncilmember Matarrese stated that he will vote no on the current DA before Council;\nhe supports negotiating other terms.\nCouncilmember Oddie stated the binary choice is which project will go forward since the\ndeveloper is entitled to build the housing by State law; expressed concern over the\nother housing project not being completed years later; stated that he would like to\nanalyze the project to ensure the costs will be covered; he is prepared to support the\nEIR.\nThe City Manager requested direction from Council for the item to return with the\nfinancial analysis to allow for the swap to happen.\nThe City Attorney stated the Council should vote and the developer can determine how\nthey want to proceed.\nCouncilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the Council could return to discuss the\nconcerns instead of voting no.\nMayor Spencer stated the City Attorney requested a vote from Council.\nThe City Attorney stated the developer has already signed a document that is before\nCouncil; if the document is rejected, the developer is not preclude from returning with a\ndifferent proposal.\nVice Mayor Vella inquired if Council votes no, could the developer return with the same\nproposal just with more information or does it have to be an entirely new proposal.\nThe City Attorney responded said decision would be up to the developer.\nCouncilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution accepting the EIR as\npresented in the staff report.\nCouncilmember Vella seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote:\nAyes: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Vella - 4. Noes: Mayor\nSpencer - 1.\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n20\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 23, "text": "The Assistant City Attorney clarified the revised resolution is up for consideration.\nThere was no motion on the DA Ordinance and subsequent items.\nCITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS\n(17-767) Update on Tracking of Council Direction through the Referral Process.\n(17-768) The City Manager stated the Council will receive the Comprehensive Annual\nFinancial Report (CAFR) report between now and the end of the year; the report will\nalso be available on the City website.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nCOUNCIL REFERRALS\n(17-769) Consider Directing Staff to Draft an Ordinance Requiring the Licensure of\nTobacco Retailers, Including a Ban on the Sale of Menthol Cigarettes and Other\nFlavored Tobacco and Enacting an Annual Fee. Not heard. (Councilmembers\nMatarrese and Oddie)\n(17-770) Consider Directing Staff to: 1) Determine Whether Council Can Enact City of\nan Ordinance to Pass Through a Portion of the Housing Program (Rent) Fee to\nTenants; 2) Clarify the City's Collection Efforts for Landlords who do not Pay the Fee by\nDecember 31, 2017; and 3) Clarify that the Fee May be Passed Through as Part of a\nRent Increase. Not heard. (Mayor Spencer and Vice Mayor Vella)\n(17-771) Consider Directing Staff to Provide Information on the Citywide Dockless Bike\nSharing Program and Return to Council with Additional Safety Requirements. Not\nheard. (Mayor Spencer and Vice Mayor Vella)\nCOUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\n(17-772) Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she attended the memorial service\nfor San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee.\n(17-773 Consideration of Mayor's Nominations to the Commission on Disability (CD)\nand Housing Authority Board of Commissioners (HABOC).\nMayor Spencer nominated Jennifer Roloff to the CD and Brad Weinman to the HABOC.\nADJOURNMENT\nRegular Meeting\nAlameda City Council\n21\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}
{"body": "CityCouncil", "date": "2017-12-19", "page": 24, "text": "(17-774) There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting in\nmemory of Ed Lee at 12:28 a.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\n22\nDecember 19, 2017", "path": "CityCouncil/2017-12-19.pdf"}