{"body": "PensionBoard", "date": "2019-01-28", "page": 1, "text": "any\nOF\nTERKA\nORATED\nMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING\nOF THE\nPENSION BOARD OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA\nHELD 4:30 P.M., OCTOBER 29, 2018\nALAMEDA CITY HALL\n2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE, ALAMEDA\nCONFERENCE ROOM 110\n1.\nThe meeting was called to order by Trish Herrera Spencer at 4:33 p.m.\n2.\nROLL CALL:\nPresent: Chair Mayor Trish Herrera Spencer, Secretary Nancy Bronstein, Bill\nSoderlund, Nancy Elzig\nStaff: Edwin Gato, Financial Services Manager; Chad Barr, Administrative\nTechnician - Human Resources\n3.\nMINUTES:\nThe minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 30, 2018 were moved for approval by\nTrustee Soderlund and seconded by Trustee Elzig. Passed 3-0.\n4.\nAGENDA ITEMS:\n4-A. Pension Payroll and Financial Reports - Quarter Ending September 30,\n2018 and City of Alameda Police & Fire Pension Funds Financial Reports for the\nPeriod Ending September 30, 2018.\nFinancial Services Manager Gato explained the decrease in costs is due to the\npassing of Pensioner Norman Tousley, but the increase was due to the quarterly\npayment of the uniform allowance.\nTrustee Soderlund moved to accept the financial statement as presented and\nTrustee Elzig seconded. Passed 3-0.", "path": "PensionBoard/2019-01-28.pdf"}
{"body": "PensionBoard", "date": "2019-01-28", "page": 2, "text": "City of Alameda\nMinutes of the Regular Meeting of the\nPension Board - Monday, October 29, 2018\nPage 2\n5.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT):\nThere were no oral communications from the public.\n6.\nPENSION BOARD COMMUNICATIONS (COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARD):\nMember Elzig asked if we had been able to find qualified candidates for the\nPension Board Police representative. Secretary Bronstein replied we had tried\nbut not found anyone willing. Bronstein continued with the thought from\nAdministrative Technician Barr that posting on the Alameda Police Department's\nFacebook page might generate interest. Trustee Elzig suggested Frederick\nWilliam Leitz as a possible candidate and where he frequently visits to converse\nface to face.\n7.\nADJOURNMENT:\nThere being no additional items to come before the board, the meeting was\nadjourned at 4:38 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nme\nNancy Bronstein\nHuman Resources Director", "path": "PensionBoard/2019-01-28.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2019-01-28", "page": 1, "text": "APPROVED MINUTES\nREGULAR MEETING OF THE\nCITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD\nMONDAY, JANUARY 28, 2019\n1. CONVENE\nPresident Sullivan convened the meeting at 7:00pm\n2. FLAG SALUTE\nBoard Member Mitchell led the flag salute.\n3. ROLL CALL\nPresent: President Sullivan, Board Members Cavanaugh, Curtis, Mitchell, Rothenberg,\nSaheba.\nAbsent: Teague.\n4. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION\nPresident Sullivan said should would like to handle item 7-B first.\nBoard Member Curtis made a motion to swap the order of items 7-B and 7-A. Board\nMember Rothenberg seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0.\n5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n6. CONSENT CALENDAR\n*None*\n7. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n7-B 2019-6476\nPLN18-0564 - Lot Line Adjustment - 2607 Santa Clara Avenue. A proposal to reconfigure\nthe parcel lines between two existing properties. The project is exempt from the California\nEnvironmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15305 - Minor\nAlterations in Land Use Limitations\nStaff Member Thomas gave the staff report. The report and attachments can be found at:\n https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3838556&GUID=8D276246-\nAE7-48FD-803B-44246EB093F2&FullText=1\nBoard Member Curtis made a motion to approve the staff recommendation. Board\nMember Mitchell seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0.\n7-A 2019-6476\nApprove Meeting Minutes\nPage 1 of 7\nJanuary 28, 2019\nPlanning Board", "path": "PlanningBoard/2019-01-28.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2019-01-28", "page": 2, "text": "PLN18-0564 - Lot Line Adjustment - 2607 Santa Clara Avenue. A proposal to reconfigure\nthe parcel lines between two existing properties. The project is exempt from the California\nEnvironmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15305 - Minor\nAlterations in Land Use Limitations\nStaff Member Barrera gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found\nat:\nhttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3838556&GUID=8D276246\nE7-48FD-803B-44246EB093F2&FullText=1\nPaul Patel, applicant, said the project will be a win-win for everyone.\nBoard Member Mitchell noted that the applicant operates the Coral Reef Inn and asked\nwhat the plan was for operation of this hotel.\nMr. Patel said he will be the operator, but would have a whole new team that is different\nfrom the Coral Reef Inn.\nBoard Member Curtis asked who would own the new hotel.\nMr. Patel said he would be 100% owner. He said he has many partners at the Coral Reef.\nPresident Sullivan asked if there would be any food operations on site.\nMr. Patel said that because of the lot size and neighboring businesses that are available\nthey would only have a \"grab and go\" deli on site.\nPresident Sullivan asked how many employees would be at the hotel.\nMr. Patel said approximately 12.\nPresident Sullivan said that if half of the employees drive it would severely reduce the\navailable parking on site.\nPresident Sullivan opened the public hearing.\nGretchen Pearson said she supports the project. She said it would keep visitors on the\nisland.\nRich Krinks said they like what he and his client have come up with. He said he thinks the\nparking issues can be addressed. He said the city can use the tax revenue.\nArthur Mercado said he is in full support of the project.\nApprove Meeting Minutes\nPage 2 of 7\nJanuary 28, 2019\nPlanning Board", "path": "PlanningBoard/2019-01-28.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2019-01-28", "page": 3, "text": "Janet Magleby, Downtown Alameda Business Association, said they support the project\nand that it would be a good amenity for the area.\nMichael McDonough, Chamber of Commerce, said this project will be a big improvement\nfor the gateway district. He said TOT tax will go a long way towards addressing our long\nterm budget issues.\nAlex Bretow said his family never has a place they want to stay on the island until now.\nHe said this hotel would be a major benefit for the island.\nAlicia Shu said that this hotel can help business grow in Alameda.\nSteve Busse, DABA, said he rents out a cottage regularly and more than half the time they\ndo not have a vehicle when they stay at his property.\nBill Phua said he is happy to see this project coming.\nBrooke Abbasi said she supports the project.\nDonna Layburn said it is exciting that this project is finally coming to their downtown. She\nsaid when they host people they have to stay in Jack London Square. She said our\ndowntown needs to be a destination.\nSam Patel said he brings clients to Alameda often and this hotel would be the perfect\nplace to house them.\nLeonard Goode who owns the property said this is an opportunity to do something great\nfor the gateway and leave a good legacy for Alameda.\nGreg Barron said this project is not the best use or design for the location. He said there\nis no parking in the area and this will make that problem worse. He said the project would\nlook directly into his backyard.\nKari Thompson, Chamber of Commerce, said she supports the project.\nTy Hudson, UNITE HERE, said he opposes the project. He said the parking study is not\nsatisfactory. He said this is one of the few housing opportunity sites in Alameda and create\nonly low wage jobs.\nJohn Frangoulis said the positives of this project far outweigh the negatives. He said it will\nprovide customers to all the businesses in the area.\nJoe LoParo said we need to improve the north of Lincoln area. He said the hotel parking\nlots are never full anymore. He said he strongly supports the project.\nApprove Meeting Minutes\nPage 3 of 7\nJanuary 28, 2019\nPlanning Board", "path": "PlanningBoard/2019-01-28.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2019-01-28", "page": 4, "text": "occupancy tax be dedicated to our public art fund to draw people to Alameda.\nPresident Sullivan closed the public hearing.\nBoard Member Mitchell asked why the Oak and Clement intersection was not studied.\nThe applicant's traffic consultant said they looked at the trip generation and distribution\nwhich indicated that only 10% of the trips would go towards Oak St. so they did not study\nthat intersection.\nBoard Member Curtis asked if they studied traffic that includes build out of the northern\nwaterfront.\nThe consultant said they did study the future build out in their study.\nBoard Member Curtis noted the study used counts from August, a vacation month, for the\nstudy.\nPresident Sullivan said the height, setbacks, tree count, and accessible parking\nrequirements do not appear to be met.\nApprove Meeting Minutes\nPage 4 of 7\nJanuary 28, 2019\nPlanning Board", "path": "PlanningBoard/2019-01-28.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2019-01-28", "page": 5, "text": "Staff Member Thomas said it does meet the height requirement of 50' and the architectural\nfeatures can go higher under the code with design review.\nStaff Member Barrera said that accessory structures can be on the property line if more\nthan 75' from the front of the building. She said there was an error in the landscape plan\nand they are required to have 16 trees. She said the CA building code bases the number\nof ADA spaces on the actual number of spaces constructed, not on the parking\nrequirement.\nBoard Member Saheba said it is an appropriate use and will generally improve the area.\nHe said he is working on several hotel projects and demand for parking is decreasing. He\nasked if there were any sustainability features included in the project.\nStaff Member Barrera said they can include things like EV charging spaces if the board is\ninterested in that.\nBoard Member Saheba said he is worried about back of house windows along Clement\nbeing covered with blinds and becoming blank windows.\nStaff Member Barrera said they flipped the layout to have the corridor activity be visible.\nBoard Member Saheba suggested moving one of the vertical elements to not fall on a\nwindow. He said it might make sense to spend the public art funds on the blank facade\neven if there is a chance that it would get covered up at some point in the future by an\nadjacent building. He said the steel canopy and the anodized aluminum are in conflict and\nthey should be the same material or same color. He recommended smooth plaster instead\nof textured because of the gateway location. He said he would be good approving the\nproject with a condition that the elevations come back for review one more time. He\nsuggested a darker color for the base and upper accent bands.\nBoard Member Mitchell said the amount of hotel seems oversized for the lot which results\nin being under parked. He said he is concerned about ongoing maintenance after walking\nthrough the Coral Reef Inn. He said he is unsupportive at this point. He said if it moves\nforward, the signage should be minimized, a public art mural should be required,\nsustainability features should be included, and reduce the row of compact spaces by one\nto make them slightly wider, the number of accessible spaces should be based on the\nrequired number of parking spaces, not the waiver amount.\nBoard Member Rothenberg said she concurred with her fellow board members'\ncomments. She said the design guidelines would be consistent with Board Member\nSaheba's feedback regarding items such as smooth plaster and window features. She\nsaid the project should be able to affordably reach LEED Silver standards if building\nmethods are thoughtfully considered. She said she supports the use, but thinks there are\ntoo many rooms with only one 700 square foot conference room.\nApprove Meeting Minutes\nPage 5 of 7\nJanuary 28, 2019\nPlanning Board", "path": "PlanningBoard/2019-01-28.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2019-01-28", "page": 6, "text": "Board Member Cavanaugh said he does want to see planning for electric vehicles. He\nsaid he would like to see what the building will look like at night. He said he would like to\nsee as much reuse of water as possible. He said he would like to see what it looks like on\nthe west side from the neighbor's house.\nBoard Member Curtis said he liked the design. He said his one concern is the parking and\nworries that it could affect the success of the hotel.\nPresident Sullivan asked what was making the ground floor not seem harmonious with the\nupper floors, pointing to the many small transom windows.\nBoard Member Saheba said the transom windows were a part of the problem, but so is\nthe busyness created by the metal at the base. He said the whole floor could benefit from\nsome simplification.\nPresident Sullivan said the look of the first floor should turn the corner. She said the fake\nwindows used at the Walgreens could work well for the blank wall. She suggested that the\nparking be reviewed in two years to see if additional arrangements need to be made.\nStaff Member Thomas said they want to incorporate all of the excellent design feedback\ninto this gateway project. But, he said they need to answer the threshold question about\nwhether the parking situation is acceptable or not with the room count. He said there is a\npossibility to add a condition of approval to secure additional remote valet parking spaces.\nBoard Member Saheba said that if the need is there to valet, you can do it on site by using\nthe drive aisles. He said the CBC is clear on how the ADA parking requirements are\ncalculated and that there is not really flexibility.\nPresident Sullivan said she does not like the trash facility being on the property line and\nwould like to move that. She said she would like to reduce the height and size of the green\nsign.\nBoard Member Mitchell said he would support the valet parking suggestion.\nStaff Member Thomas asked if the board could approve the project with conditions: that\nthe architecture come back; meet LEED Silver; moving of the trash enclosure; electric\nvehicle charging, or just to continue the item.\nBoard Member Curtis made a motion to approve the project with the conditions: the\naddition of a valet parking plan, incorporate the architectural suggestions made\ntonight, LEED Silver, public art on the blank wall, electric charging stations, and\nmoving the trash enclosure. Board Member Saheba seconded the motion.\nApprove Meeting Minutes\nPage 6 of 7\nJanuary 28, 2019\nPlanning Board", "path": "PlanningBoard/2019-01-28.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2019-01-28", "page": 7, "text": "Board Member Mitchell asked if the motion would include reducing the row of compact\nspaces by one in order to widen the remaining.\nPresident Sullivan said she did not want to see the parking reduced any further.\nThe motion passed 6-0.\n8. MINUTES\n8-A 2019-6477\nDraft Meeting Minutes - November 13, 2018\nBoard Member Curtis made a motion to approve the minutes. Board Member\nCavanaugh seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0.\n9. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS\n9-A 2019-6473\nPlanning, Building and Transportation Department Recent Actions and Decisions\nThe staff report can be found at:\nhttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3838553&GUID=EFE96E9E-\n9F84-422D-BCFB-8394889D32CF&FullText=1\n9-B 2019-6474\nFuture Public Meetings and Upcoming Planning, Building and Transportation Department\nProjects\nStaff Member Thomas previewed future agenda items. The schedule can be found at:\nhttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3838554&GUID=820E1999-\n68A5-48C2-AC5B-A4FCF12O0DAE\nPresident Sullivan said the Alameda Marina Boatyard RFQ was not approved before going\nout and was written in a manner than seemed to be seeking a marine developer more\nthan a boatyard operator.\n10. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n11. BOARD COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n12. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n13. ADJOURNMENT\nPresident Mitchell adjourned the meeting at 9:29pm.\nApprove Meeting Minutes\nPage 7 of 7\nJanuary 28, 2019\nPlanning Board", "path": "PlanningBoard/2019-01-28.pdf"}