pages
2,108 rows where page = 2
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
date (date) >1000 ✖
- 2005-04-25 3
- 2005-05-12 3
- 2006-06-07 3
- 2006-11-01 3
- 2007-02-28 3
- 2007-07-18 3
- 2008-01-09 3
- 2008-01-28 3
- 2008-02-13 3
- 2008-04-28 3
- 2008-05-27 3
- 2008-06-04 3
- 2008-07-28 3
- 2008-09-10 3
- 2008-10-27 3
- 2008-11-12 3
- 2008-12-10 3
- 2009-01-26 3
- 2009-04-27 3
- 2009-07-27 3
- 2009-10-26 3
- 2010-01-06 3
- 2010-04-26 3
- 2010-07-07 3
- 2010-07-26 3
- 2010-10-06 3
- 2011-04-06 3
- 2011-07-25 3
- 2013-01-28 3
- 2013-07-24 3
- 2014-01-27 3
- 2014-10-27 3
- 2015-07-27 3
- 2015-10-26 3
- 2017-01-11 3
- 2018-01-03 3
- 2019-01-10 3
- 2005-01-05 2
- 2005-01-06 2
- 2005-01-18 2
- 2005-01-24 2
- 2005-01-31 2
- 2005-02-24 2
- 2005-02-28 2
- 2005-03-10 2
- 2005-03-28 2
- 2005-04-07 2
- 2005-04-19 2
- 2005-05-23 2
- 2005-05-26 2
- 2005-06-01 2
- 2005-06-23 2
- 2005-07-13 2
- 2005-07-14 2
- 2005-07-20 2
- 2005-07-25 2
- 2005-08-22 2
- 2005-09-28 2
- 2005-10-12 2
- 2005-11-16 2
- 2005-12-08 2
- 2005-12-12 2
- 2005-12-14 2
- 2006-01-11 2
- 2006-01-23 2
- 2006-02-22 2
- 2006-02-27 2
- 2006-04-24 2
- 2006-05-24 2
- 2006-07-12 2
- 2006-07-24 2
- 2006-07-26 2
- 2006-09-13 2
- 2006-09-25 2
- 2006-10-04 2
- 2006-10-23 2
- 2006-11-08 2
- 2006-11-15 2
- 2006-11-29 2
- 2006-12-11 2
- 2006-12-13 2
- 2007-01-02 2
- 2007-01-29 2
- 2007-01-31 2
- 2007-02-26 2
- 2007-03-08 2
- 2007-03-26 2
- 2007-03-28 2
- 2007-04-04 2
- 2007-04-18 2
- 2007-04-23 2
- 2007-04-25 2
- 2007-05-23 2
- 2007-07-11 2
- 2007-07-23 2
- 2007-08-07 2
- 2007-08-27 2
- 2007-09-04 2
- 2007-09-24 2
- 2007-11-08 2
- 2007-11-13 2
- 2007-11-26 2
- 2007-12-05 2
- 2008-01-02 2
- 2008-02-25 2
- 2008-03-12 2
- 2008-03-24 2
- 2008-04-01 2
- 2008-06-05 2
- 2008-06-11 2
- 2008-06-23 2
- 2008-07-01 2
- 2008-07-09 2
- 2008-08-13 2
- 2008-08-25 2
- 2008-09-22 2
- 2008-10-01 2
- 2008-10-02 2
- 2008-11-18 2
- 2008-11-19 2
- 2008-12-02 2
- 2008-12-08 2
- 2009-01-14 2
- 2009-02-03 2
- 2009-02-23 2
- 2009-03-23 2
- 2009-04-01 2
- 2009-04-15 2
- 2009-05-13 2
- 2009-05-19 2
- 2009-07-07 2
- 2009-09-10 2
- 2009-09-28 2
- 2009-10-07 2
- 2009-11-12 2
- 2010-01-25 2
- 2010-02-03 2
- 2010-02-22 2
- 2010-03-03 2
- 2010-03-22 2
- 2010-04-06 2
- 2010-05-06 2
- 2010-05-24 2
- 2010-06-24 2
- 2010-09-09 2
- 2010-09-27 2
- 2010-10-25 2
- 2010-11-03 2
- 2010-11-10 2
- 2011-01-05 2
- 2011-02-23 2
- 2011-02-28 2
- 2011-03-28 2
- 2011-04-25 2
- 2011-08-04 2
- 2011-09-26 2
- 2011-10-11 2
- 2011-10-12 2
- 2011-11-28 2
- 2011-12-01 2
- 2011-12-14 2
- 2012-01-04 2
- 2012-01-11 2
- 2012-02-23 2
- 2012-02-27 2
- 2012-04-23 2
- 2012-05-03 2
- 2012-06-06 2
- 2012-06-12 2
- 2012-06-25 2
- 2012-06-27 2
- 2012-07-11 2
- 2012-08-27 2
- 2012-08-28 2
- 2012-09-13 2
- 2012-10-01 2
- 2012-10-29 2
- 2012-11-08 2
- 2012-11-13 2
- 2013-01-09 2
- 2013-03-14 2
- 2013-04-11 2
- 2013-07-22 2
- 2013-10-28 2
- 2014-03-04 2
- 2014-04-01 2
- 2014-04-28 2
- 2014-07-28 2
- 2015-01-26 2
- 2015-03-11 2
- 2015-04-01 2
- 2015-04-27 2
- 2015-06-11 2
- 2015-07-07 2
- 2015-09-16 2
- 2015-10-07 2
- 2015-10-29 2
- 2015-11-18 2
- 2016-01-07 2
- 2016-01-25 2
- 2016-02-01 2
- 2016-02-10 2
- 2016-03-01 2
- 2016-04-25 2
- 2016-06-27 2
- 2016-07-06 2
- 2016-07-25 2
- 2016-09-20 2
- 2016-10-03 2
- 2016-11-16 2
- 2017-01-12 2
- 2017-02-06 2
- 2017-02-22 2
- 2017-04-24 2
- 2017-07-05 2
- 2017-07-12 2
- 2017-07-17 2
- 2017-07-18 2
- 2017-10-02 2
- 2017-10-11 2
- 2018-01-10 2
- 2018-02-05 2
- 2018-03-05 2
- 2018-04-04 2
- 2018-04-09 2
- 2018-05-09 2
- 2018-05-10 2
- 2018-07-10 2
- 2018-07-11 2
- 2018-07-23 2
- 2018-10-01 2
- 2018-10-25 2
- 2018-11-07 2
- 2018-11-13 2
- 2018-11-14 2
- 2018-11-27 2
- 2018-12-10 2
- 2018-12-17 2
- 2019-01-09 2
- 2019-01-23 2
- 2019-01-28 2
- 2019-02-04 2
- 2019-02-25 2
- 2019-02-27 2
- 2019-03-13 2
- 2019-04-22 2
- 2019-04-29 2
- 2019-05-15 2
- 2019-07-24 2
- 2019-09-09 2
- 2019-09-25 2
- 2019-10-28 2
- 2019-11-12 2
- 2019-12-18 2
- 2020-01-27 2
- 2020-03-10 2
- 2020-07-09 2
- 2020-07-14 2
- 2020-08-17 2
- 2020-10-26 2
- 2020-11-18 2
- 2020-12-14 2
- 2021-01-25 2
- 2021-03-24 2
- 2021-04-26 2
- 2021-07-26 2
- 2021-10-25 2
- 2021-11-10 2
- 2021-12-09 2
- 2022-01-11 2
- 2022-04-12 2
- 2022-04-28 2
- 2022-05-16 2
- 2005-01-04 1
- 2005-01-10 1
- 2005-01-12 1
- 2005-01-13 1
- 2005-01-19 1
- 2005-01-27 1
- 2005-02-01 1
- 2005-02-02 1
- 2005-02-03 1
- 2005-02-09 1
- 2005-02-10 1
- 2005-02-14 1
- 2005-02-15 1
- 2005-02-16 1
- 2005-02-23 1
- 2005-03-01 1
- 2005-03-02 1
- 2005-03-03 1
- 2005-03-09 1
- 2005-03-14 1
- 2005-03-15 1
- 2005-03-16 1
- 2005-03-22 1
- 2005-03-23 1
- 2005-03-24 1
- 2005-04-05 1
- 2005-04-06 1
- 2005-04-11 1
- 2005-04-13 1
- 2005-04-14 1
- 2005-04-20 1
- 2005-04-27 1
- 2005-04-28 1
- 2005-05-03 1
- 2005-05-04 1
- 2005-05-09 1
- 2005-05-11 1
- 2005-05-17 1
- 2005-05-18 1
- 2005-06-02 1
- 2005-06-07 1
- 2005-06-08 1
- 2005-06-09 1
- 2005-06-13 1
- 2005-06-15 1
- 2005-06-21 1
- 2005-06-27 1
- 2005-06-28 1
- 2005-06-29 1
- 2005-07-05 1
- 2005-07-11 1
- 2005-07-19 1
- 2005-08-02 1
- 2005-08-04 1
- 2005-08-08 1
- 2005-08-10 1
- 2005-08-16 1
- 2005-08-17 1
- 2005-08-25 1
- 2005-09-01 1
- 2005-09-06 1
- 2005-09-07 1
- 2005-09-12 1
- 2005-09-14 1
- 2005-09-15 1
- 2005-09-20 1
- 2005-09-21 1
- 2005-09-22 1
- 2005-09-26 1
- 2005-09-29 1
- 2005-10-04 1
- 2005-10-05 1
- 2005-10-06 1
- 2005-10-10 1
- 2005-10-13 1
- 2005-10-18 1
- 2005-10-19 1
- 2005-10-24 1
- 2005-10-26 1
- 2005-10-27 1
- 2005-10-31 1
- 2005-11-01 1
- 2005-11-03 1
- 2005-11-09 1
- 2005-11-10 1
- 2005-11-14 1
- 2005-11-15 1
- 2005-11-30 1
- 2005-12-06 1
- 2005-12-07 1
- 2005-12-20 1
- 2006-01-03 1
- 2006-01-05 1
- 2006-01-09 1
- 2006-01-12 1
- 2006-01-25 1
- 2006-01-26 1
- 2006-01-30 1
- 2006-02-01 1
- 2006-02-07 1
- 2006-02-08 1
- 2006-02-09 1
- 2006-02-13 1
- 2006-02-21 1
- 2006-02-23 1
- 2006-03-02 1
- 2006-03-07 1
- 2006-03-08 1
- 2006-03-09 1
- 2006-03-21 1
- 2006-03-22 1
- 2006-03-23 1
- 2006-04-04 1
- 2006-04-05 1
- 2006-04-06 1
- 2006-04-10 1
- 2006-04-12 1
- 2006-04-13 1
- 2006-04-18 1
- 2006-04-26 1
- 2006-05-02 1
- 2006-05-03 1
- 2006-05-04 1
- 2006-05-08 1
- 2006-05-10 1
- 2006-05-11 1
- 2006-05-16 1
- 2006-05-17 1
- 2006-05-22 1
- 2006-05-25 1
- 2006-05-30 1
- 2006-06-06 1
- 2006-06-08 1
- 2006-06-14 1
- 2006-06-20 1
- 2006-06-21 1
- 2006-06-26 1
- 2006-06-28 1
- 2006-07-05 1
- 2006-07-06 1
- 2006-07-07 1
- 2006-07-10 1
- 2006-07-18 1
- 2006-07-19 1
- 2006-07-31 1
- 2006-08-01 1
- 2006-08-03 1
- 2006-08-09 1
- 2006-08-14 1
- 2006-08-15 1
- 2006-08-16 1
- 2006-08-23 1
- 2006-08-30 1
- 2006-09-05 1
- 2006-09-06 1
- 2006-09-07 1
- 2006-09-11 1
- 2006-09-14 1
- 2006-09-19 1
- 2006-09-20 1
- 2006-09-21 1
- 2006-09-26 1
- 2006-09-27 1
- 2006-10-03 1
- 2006-10-05 1
- 2006-10-09 1
- 2006-10-11 1
- 2006-10-12 1
- 2006-10-17 1
- 2006-10-18 1
- 2006-10-25 1
- 2006-10-26 1
- 2006-10-30 1
- 2006-11-02 1
- 2006-11-13 1
- 2006-11-14 1
- 2006-11-21 1
- 2006-11-28 1
- 2006-12-05 1
- 2006-12-14 1
- 2006-12-19 1
- 2007-01-04 1
- 2007-01-08 1
- 2007-01-10 1
- 2007-01-11 1
- 2007-01-16 1
- 2007-01-24 1
- 2007-02-01 1
- 2007-02-06 1
- 2007-02-07 1
- 2007-02-08 1
- 2007-02-11 1
- 2007-02-12 1
- 2007-02-14 1
- 2007-02-20 1
- 2007-03-01 1
- 2007-03-06 1
- 2007-03-12 1
- 2007-03-14 1
- 2007-03-20 1
- 2007-03-21 1
- 2007-04-03 1
- 2007-04-11 1
- 2007-04-17 1
- 2007-04-30 1
- 2007-05-01 1
- 2007-05-03 1
- 2007-05-08 1
- 2007-05-09 1
- 2007-05-14 1
- 2007-05-15 1
- 2007-05-16 1
- 2007-05-21 1
- 2007-05-29 1
- 2007-06-05 1
- 2007-06-06 1
- 2007-06-07 1
- 2007-06-11 1
- 2007-06-13 1
- 2007-06-14 1
- 2007-06-18 1
- 2007-06-19 1
- 2007-06-20 1
- 2007-06-25 1
- 2007-07-03 1
- 2007-07-09 1
- 2007-07-12 1
- 2007-07-17 1
- 2007-07-25 1
- 2007-07-26 1
- 2007-07-30 1
- 2007-08-08 1
- 2007-08-15 1
- 2007-08-21 1
- 2007-08-22 1
- 2007-08-23 1
- 2007-09-06 1
- 2007-09-11 1
- 2007-09-12 1
- 2007-09-13 1
- 2007-09-18 1
- 2007-09-19 1
- 2007-09-26 1
- 2007-09-27 1
- 2007-10-02 1
- 2007-10-03 1
- 2007-10-04 1
- 2007-10-08 1
- 2007-10-10 1
- 2007-10-15 1
- 2007-10-16 1
- 2007-10-17 1
- 2007-10-22 1
- 2007-10-24 1
- 2007-10-25 1
- 2007-10-29 1
- 2007-11-01 1
- 2007-11-06 1
- 2007-11-07 1
- 2007-11-14 1
- 2007-11-20 1
- 2007-11-28 1
- 2007-11-29 1
- 2007-12-04 1
- 2007-12-06 1
- 2007-12-10 1
- 2007-12-12 1
- 2007-12-18 1
- 2008-01-03 1
- 2008-01-10 1
- 2008-01-14 1
- 2008-01-15 1
- 2008-01-16 1
- 2008-01-23 1
- 2008-02-05 1
- 2008-02-06 1
- 2008-02-07 1
- 2008-02-11 1
- 2008-02-19 1
- 2008-02-20 1
- 2008-02-27 1
- 2008-03-04 1
- 2008-03-05 1
- 2008-03-06 1
- 2008-03-13 1
- 2008-03-18 1
- 2008-03-19 1
- 2008-04-02 1
- 2008-04-03 1
- 2008-04-09 1
- 2008-04-10 1
- 2008-04-14 1
- 2008-04-15 1
- 2008-04-16 1
- 2008-04-23 1
- 2008-04-24 1
- 2008-05-01 1
- 2008-05-06 1
- 2008-05-07 1
- 2008-05-08 1
- 2008-05-12 1
- 2008-05-14 1
- 2008-05-20 1
- 2008-05-21 1
- 2008-05-22 1
- 2008-05-28 1
- 2008-06-03 1
- 2008-06-09 1
- 2008-06-12 1
- 2008-06-17 1
- 2008-06-18 1
- 2008-06-25 1
- 2008-06-26 1
- 2008-07-02 1
- 2008-07-03 1
- 2008-07-10 1
- 2008-07-14 1
- 2008-07-15 1
- 2008-07-16 1
- 2008-07-23 1
- 2008-08-05 1
- 2008-08-07 1
- 2008-08-11 1
- 2008-08-14 1
- 2008-08-19 1
- 2008-09-02 1
- 2008-09-04 1
- 2008-09-08 1
- 2008-09-11 1
- 2008-09-16 1
- 2008-09-17 1
- 2008-09-24 1
- 2008-09-25 1
- 2008-10-07 1
- 2008-10-08 1
- 2008-10-09 1
- 2008-10-13 1
- 2008-10-15 1
- 2008-10-21 1
- 2008-10-22 1
- 2008-10-23 1
- 2008-11-05 1
- 2008-11-06 1
- 2008-11-13 1
- 2008-11-20 1
- 2008-11-24 1
- 2008-12-03 1
- 2008-12-04 1
- 2008-12-11 1
- 2008-12-16 1
- 2008-12-17 1
- 2009-01-06 1
- 2009-01-07 1
- 2009-01-08 1
- 2009-01-12 1
- 2009-01-20 1
- 2009-01-21 1
- 2009-01-22 1
- 2009-01-28 1
- 2009-02-05 1
- 2009-02-07 1
- 2009-02-09 1
- 2009-02-12 1
- 2009-02-17 1
- 2009-02-18 1
- 2009-02-25 1
- 2009-03-03 1
- 2009-03-04 1
- 2009-03-05 1
- 2009-03-09 1
- 2009-03-11 1
- 2009-03-12 1
- 2009-03-17 1
- 2009-03-18 1
- 2009-03-26 1
- 2009-04-02 1
- 2009-04-07 1
- 2009-04-09 1
- 2009-04-21 1
- 2009-04-22 1
- 2009-04-23 1
- 2009-05-05 1
- 2009-05-11 1
- 2009-05-14 1
- 2009-05-27 1
- 2009-06-02 1
- 2009-06-08 1
- 2009-06-10 1
- 2009-06-11 1
- 2009-06-16 1
- 2009-06-17 1
- 2009-06-25 1
- 2009-06-29 1
- 2009-07-01 1
- 2009-07-08 1
- 2009-07-09 1
- 2009-07-13 1
- 2009-07-15 1
- 2009-07-21 1
- 2009-08-03 1
- 2009-08-06 1
- 2009-08-13 1
- 2009-08-20 1
- 2009-08-24 1
- 2009-08-26 1
- 2009-08-27 1
- 2009-09-01 1
- 2009-09-09 1
- 2009-09-15 1
- 2009-09-16 1
- 2009-09-24 1
- 2009-10-05 1
- 2009-10-06 1
- 2009-10-12 1
- 2009-10-14 1
- 2009-10-20 1
- 2009-10-21 1
- 2009-10-22 1
- 2009-11-03 1
- 2009-11-04 1
- 2009-11-05 1
- 2009-11-09 1
- 2009-11-17 1
- 2009-11-18 1
- 2009-11-23 1
- 2009-12-01 1
- 2009-12-02 1
- 2009-12-03 1
- 2009-12-09 1
- 2009-12-14 1
- 2009-12-15 1
- 2009-12-16 1
- 2010-01-05 1
- 2010-01-11 1
- 2010-01-13 1
- 2010-01-14 1
- 2010-01-19 1
- 2010-01-21 1
- 2010-01-26 1
- 2010-02-04 1
- 2010-02-08 1
- 2010-02-11 1
- 2010-02-16 1
- 2010-02-17 1
- 2010-02-25 1
- 2010-03-02 1
- 2010-03-04 1
- 2010-03-08 1
- 2010-03-10 1
- 2010-03-11 1
- 2010-03-16 1
- 2010-03-17 1
- 2010-03-25 1
- 2010-04-01 1
- 2010-04-07 1
- 2010-04-08 1
- 2010-04-12 1
- 2010-04-14 1
- 2010-04-15 1
- 2010-04-20 1
- 2010-04-21 1
- 2010-05-04 1
- 2010-05-10 1
- 2010-05-18 1
- 2010-05-19 1
- 2010-06-01 1
- 2010-06-03 1
- 2010-06-09 1
- 2010-06-10 1
- 2010-06-14 1
- 2010-06-15 1
- 2010-06-16 1
- 2010-06-19 1
- 2010-06-21 1
- 2010-06-28 1
- 2010-07-06 1
- 2010-07-08 1
- 2010-07-14 1
- 2010-07-20 1
- 2010-07-21 1
- 2010-07-27 1
- 2010-08-05 1
- 2010-08-09 1
- 2010-08-12 1
- 2010-08-18 1
- 2010-08-19 1
- 2010-08-23 1
- 2010-09-01 1
- 2010-09-07 1
- 2010-09-08 1
- 2010-09-13 1
- 2010-09-21 1
- 2010-09-22 1
- 2010-09-23 1
- 2010-09-25 1
- 2010-10-05 1
- 2010-10-07 1
- 2010-10-11 1
- 2010-10-13 1
- 2010-10-14 1
- 2010-10-19 1
- 2010-10-20 1
- 2010-10-28 1
- 2010-11-04 1
- 2010-11-08 1
- 2010-11-16 1
- 2010-11-17 1
- 2010-12-01 1
- 2010-12-02 1
- 2010-12-06 1
- 2010-12-07 1
- 2010-12-08 1
- 2010-12-15 1
- 2010-12-21 1
- 2010-12-28 1
- 2011-01-04 1
- 2011-01-06 1
- 2011-01-10 1
- 2011-01-12 1
- 2011-01-13 1
- 2011-01-18 1
- 2011-01-19 1
- 2011-01-24 1
- 2011-01-25 1
- 2011-01-26 1
- 2011-01-27 1
- 2011-01-31 1
- 2011-02-01 1
- 2011-02-02 1
- 2011-02-03 1
- 2011-02-09 1
- 2011-02-10 1
- 2011-02-15 1
- 2011-03-01 1
- 2011-03-02 1
- 2011-03-03 1
- 2011-03-08 1
- 2011-03-09 1
- 2011-03-14 1
- 2011-03-15 1
- 2011-03-16 1
- 2011-03-23 1
- 2011-03-29 1
- 2011-04-05 1
- 2011-04-07 1
- 2011-04-12 1
- 2011-04-13 1
- 2011-04-14 1
- 2011-04-19 1
- 2011-04-20 1
- 2011-04-28 1
- 2011-05-03 1
- 2011-05-05 1
- 2011-05-11 1
- 2011-05-12 1
- 2011-05-17 1
- 2011-05-18 1
- 2011-05-19 1
- 2011-05-23 1
- 2011-05-26 1
- 2011-05-31 1
- 2011-06-01 1
- 2011-06-02 1
- 2011-06-07 1
- 2011-06-08 1
- 2011-06-09 1
- 2011-06-13 1
- 2011-06-21 1
- 2011-06-22 1
- 2011-06-27 1
- 2011-06-28 1
- 2011-07-05 1
- 2011-07-06 1
- 2011-07-07 1
- 2011-07-11 1
- 2011-07-12 1
- 2011-07-13 1
- 2011-07-14 1
- 2011-07-19 1
- 2011-07-28 1
- 2011-08-11 1
- 2011-09-01 1
- 2011-09-06 1
- 2011-09-07 1
- 2011-09-08 1
- 2011-09-14 1
- 2011-09-20 1
- 2011-09-21 1
- 2011-09-22 1
- 2011-09-28 1
- 2011-10-04 1
- 2011-10-05 1
- 2011-10-06 1
- 2011-10-10 1
- 2011-10-13 1
- 2011-10-18 1
- 2011-10-24 1
- 2011-10-25 1
- 2011-10-27 1
- 2011-10-31 1
- 2011-11-01 1
- 2011-11-02 1
- 2011-11-08 1
- 2011-11-09 1
- 2011-11-14 1
- 2011-11-15 1
- 2011-12-06 1
- 2011-12-07 1
- 2011-12-08 1
- 2011-12-12 1
- 2011-12-13 1
- 2011-12-20 1
- 2012-01-03 1
- 2012-01-05 1
- 2012-01-09 1
- 2012-01-10 1
- 2012-01-17 1
- 2012-01-23 1
- 2012-01-25 1
- 2012-01-26 1
- 2012-01-30 1
- 2012-02-02 1
- 2012-02-07 1
- 2012-02-09 1
- 2012-02-13 1
- 2012-02-21 1
- 2012-02-22 1
- 2012-03-01 1
- 2012-03-06 1
- 2012-03-07 1
- 2012-03-08 1
- 2012-03-12 1
- 2012-03-13 1
- 2012-03-14 1
- 2012-03-19 1
- 2012-03-20 1
- 2012-03-22 1
- 2012-03-26 1
- 2012-03-28 1
- 2012-04-02 1
- 2012-04-03 1
- 2012-04-05 1
- 2012-04-09 1
- 2012-04-10 1
- 2012-04-17 1
- 2012-04-18 1
- 2012-04-25 1
- 2012-04-30 1
- 2012-05-01 1
- 2012-05-07 1
- 2012-05-08 1
- 2012-05-09 1
- 2012-05-10 1
- 2012-05-14 1
- 2012-05-15 1
- 2012-05-22 1
- 2012-05-23 1
- 2012-05-29 1
- 2012-05-30 1
- 2012-06-07 1
- 2012-06-11 1
- 2012-06-14 1
- 2012-06-19 1
- 2012-06-26 1
- 2012-07-03 1
- 2012-07-05 1
- 2012-07-09 1
- 2012-07-10 1
- 2012-07-17 1
- 2012-07-23 1
- 2012-07-24 1
- 2012-07-25 1
- 2012-07-30 1
- 2012-07-31 1
- 2012-08-08 1
- 2012-08-14 1
- 2012-08-16 1
- 2012-09-04 1
- 2012-09-06 1
- 2012-09-10 1
- 2012-09-11 1
- 2012-09-12 1
- 2012-09-18 1
- 2012-09-24 1
- 2012-09-26 1
- 2012-10-02 1
- 2012-10-08 1
- 2012-10-09 1
- 2012-10-10 1
- 2012-10-11 1
- 2012-10-16 1
- 2012-10-18 1
- 2012-10-22 1
- 2012-10-30 1
- 2012-11-07 1
- 2012-11-14 1
- 2012-11-20 1
- 2012-11-26 1
- 2012-11-28 1
- 2012-12-03 1
- 2012-12-04 1
- 2012-12-05 1
- 2012-12-10 1
- 2012-12-11 1
- 2012-12-17 1
- 2012-12-18 1
- 2013-01-02 1
- 2013-01-07 1
- 2013-01-08 1
- 2013-01-10 1
- 2013-01-14 1
- 2013-01-15 1
- 2013-01-23 1
- 2013-01-31 1
- 2013-02-04 1
- 2013-02-05 1
- 2013-02-11 1
- 2013-02-12 1
- 2013-02-19 1
- 2013-02-26 1
- 2013-02-28 1
- 2013-03-05 1
- 2013-03-12 1
- 2013-03-13 1
- 2013-03-19 1
- 2013-04-02 1
- 2013-04-03 1
- …
Link | body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-01-05.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-01-05 | 2 | 5. ORAL REPORTS 5-A. Oral report from APAC. Chair Lee Perez noted that they did not hold a business meeting during December, although a very nice social gathering was held. He noted that there was no discussion, and that the next meeting would be held on January 19, 2005. He noted that they would decide how to carry out the ARRA's wishes at that time. Member DeHaan noted that while he was not part of the decision made at the last ARRA meeting, he supported that decision. He was concerned that the process took much longer than anyone could have anticipated, and that when he was Chair of EDC, he ensured that they were up to speed on Alameda Point issues. He recalled several team members (Al Clooney and Dan Meyers) who had passed away during this process. Mayor Johnson noted that she and Member Daysog had been members of the BRAG as well. Chair Perez noted that three active former BRAG members sat on the City Council, and that hoped that their dedication would reach Sacramento and Washington, D.C. He noted that it had been an honor to serve in this capacity, and acknowledged that change was necessary. 5-B. Oral report from Member Matarrese, RAB representative. There was no report. 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 7. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member Matarrese recalled previous discussions to bring the redevelopment of the Point to the mainstream consciousness of Alameda. He noted that the very light turnout at the ARRA meetings did not meet that goal. He requested that the regular meeting time be changed to 7:30 p.m. in order to encourage more community participation. He noted that the closed session could be held before the regular meeting. Mayor Johnson suggested agendizing that item for the next meeting, and noted that a 7:00 start time could be tried. A special meeting would be held on Thursday, January 20, 2005, at 7:30 p.m. Member DeHaan requested an update on the Consultant Agreement to be placed on the next agenda. Chair Perez did not anticipate that there would be any fu… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-01-05.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-02-02.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-02-02 | 2 | On Saturday, Jan 22nd we had a tour with the Alameda Architectural Preservation. The group came out and we toured around the base, specifically focusing on historic preservation issues. We had an excellent turn out with well over 15 members attending, along with Page and Turnbull. Two upcoming community workshops: the first one is March 3rd with the planning board; at that one we will focus largely on land use options, a continuing dialogue of what's happening at our first two community workshops. The next would be on Mar 23rd with the transportation commission where we would focus more on transportation related issues obviously and specifically on some of the discussions that we had at our last workshop for estuary crossings. Our goal is take all of those transit options and try and funnel them down to a couple that we can really study in depth as we move forward thru the process. So this is the continuing dialogue on that issue with the transportation commission, again hosted with the APAC as well. Member DeHaan asked how we are planning to get feedback from the Historic Preservation Society on the tour and if they be part of the community workshop. Stephen Proud replied that they were invited to participate in those meetings as an opportunity to make sure their comments came through the workshop format and they were also invited to solicit and give us comments independent of those workshops. Member Matarrese requested minutes of that meeting to give us at least some indication of what they might have said. Stephen Proud began discussions on the ARRA led predevelopment budget: The ARRA has $3.5 million that is available to lead the predevelopment planning period. There was a slight increase on Navy conveyance and on the land use planning side. At this point through the process we've spent @ 45% of what we had budgeted and we' re about 12 mo. into an 18 mo. process. Councilmember DeHaan asked if we were anticipating any contract amendments. Stephen Proud replied that at this point, we don't expect there would be… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-02-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-03-02.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-03-02 | 2 | stated the community expressed a desire to receive information in smaller quantities rather than two much, too fast. Mr. Thomas discussed estuary crossing and long term planning, not only for Alameda Point but for the entire City of Alameda and that we will be presenting to the public the various transportation possibilities: light rail connections to the Fruitvale BART along the regional outline alignment to the aerial tram from the west end to the west Oakland BART and a number of different options. Chair Johnson mentioned the interagency liaison committee with AC Transit and talked about transportation solutions. She would like to look at a system that uses the same tracks that are currently in place in Alameda. She stated that this would dramatically cut down the costs of that kind of transportation solution. Andrew Thomas agreed and explained the difference between heavy gauge and light gauge rail. The new street car systems are typically on light gauge, yet the old belt line was a heavy gauge system. The issues with the solution of using the existing rails are on the Oakland side and the ability to cross the Union Pacific lines at grade. The PUC rarely grants those kinds of approvals. Chair Johnson pointed out that no matter what gauge rail system was used, that issue would have to be dealt with. She believed the rail system alternative that should be looked at should be focused on using the existing infrastructure in place and we should not spend a lot of money and time looking at rail systems that don't fit our current infrastructure. Chair Johnson asked if there were any costs estimates using the current rail and gauge. Andrew Thomas stated that not all costs estimates were available but did have good costs estimates for what it would take to put in a new system. Chair Johnson would like a cost estimate using existing rails and Andrew Thomas explained the issues relating to costs savings for existing rail system and creating cars that are designed for light gauge rail. Chair Johnson mentioned that the Sa… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-03-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-04-06.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-04-06 | 2 | Walter Rask: Our agenda for this evening is two parts. The first part is to give an overview of the preliminary development concept including the next steps. Part 2 - Fehr and Peers will be presenting an overview of the transportation strategy focusing largely on the off base transportation issues having to do with capacity of tubes and bridges and the major street network. We'll be doing more work later internally on the base itself and their presentation will conclude with discussion of the next steps in that process. Land Use Slide Presentation Mr. Rask presented the history of the Reuse Plan the ARRA adopted in 1996, which set forward a basic framework for development not only of Alameda Point but also of the FISC and Annex properties on the East side of Main Street. He discussed that we are only dealing with the area west of Main Street. In 2003, the City Council adopted an amendment to the General Plan that refined the Reuse Plan for mostly for the areas west of Main although there was a small area on the northeast of Main and this set the basic framework for redevelopment of the base and the targets for build out, the framework for the larger transportation system and perhaps most importantly it set forth seven goals for redevelopment of the base: 1) to seamlessly integrate Alameda Point with the rest of the community, 2) that Alameda become a vibrant new neighborhood with a variety of uses in it; 3) to maximize the waterfront accessibility, 4) to deemphasize the auto and to make new development compatible with the transportation capacity that is available, and 5) to insure economic development, 6) provide a mixed use environment and finally, 7) to promote neighborhood centers. Mr. Rask discussed the challenges, including contractual commitments, large Historic district area, ground water contamination, the Tidelands Trust places restrictions on the use of lands under state tidelands and specifically excludes housing, the Wildlife Refuge, the green area, as the effect of constraining development on the blo… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-04-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-04-19.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-04-19 | 2 | exhausted some time around Sept and October; there are a number of deferred costs, or capital costs, that are expected would be part of the developer's pro forma; and the debt payments that began to come due in 2006. Also included in the presentation was the current ARRA staff load on the existing ARRA budget. Ms. Little continued to discuss some challenges to the ARRA budget. She explained that by 2006 and 7 we will have spent down our fund balance and, by 2008, we won't have enough to balance our budget. She discussed how a large part of the ARRA budget is contributed to municipal services -- about 1/2 of what we take in annually, $10M in revenue. She stated that the presentation is intended to start the conversation about the need to either increase general fund revenue opportunities to tackle some of the costs, or decrease the general fund expenditures out at Alameda Point because we don't have the resources to continue to support them. Ms. Little discussed the current pro forma and its assumptions regarding new public revenues, primarily in property tax pass thru, the sales taxes, property transfer taxes, etc. with the sale of the homes (new development) = revenues coming into the general fund. She concluded the presentation, summarizing that staff is preparing for APCP to move forward in the next two months and that we will need to transition quickly negotiate a disposition and development agreement at 18 months and move into an implementation mode; subsequently, if APCP does not move forward, there are implications regarding dealing with long term costs over time. Ms. Little mentioned a subsequent "phase 2" ARRA Budget workshop. Councilmember de Haan expressed concern with the Navy's inability to fulfill the commitment to the 18 mos. transition period. Stephen Proud addressed his concern by explaining that we are trying to expedite the time line as much as possible, to the extent that the Navy would be able to make the property available to us sooner. He discussed various issues on the timeline that we (AR… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-04-19.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-05-12.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-05-12 | 2 | 5. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 5-A. Provide Direction to the Acting Executive Director regarding the term of the lease extension for Building 613 Sublease Agreement between the ARRA and Alameda Point Collaborative. Debbie Potter requested direction on a sublease between the ARRA and APC for building 13 which is currently being used as an office to house the Red Cross. She gave a brief history of the lease and requested extension thru Dec 31, 2006 SO that it coincides with the overall development plan for Alameda Point. Several representatives from APC spoke in support of a lease extension until 2012, including Doug Biggs and Jim Franz. In response to Member Matarrese regarding the time frame for development of that parcel, Bill Norton replied that plans are for the Navy to turn that property over to the City at the end of 2006. Stephen Proud, Alameda Point Project Manager, also noted that if we reach an agreement with the Navy and the developer at the end of 2006, infrastructure and geotechnical work would start in 2007 After discussion from Boardmembers regarding the timing of development, Chair Johnson advised that it would make more sense to have the shorter term now and consider a longer term when we know more at the end of Dec 2006, supporting staff recommendation. Staff recommendation accepted and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes-5; Noes-0 Abstentions-0 5-B. Study Session of the FY 2005-06 ARRA Budget Bill Norton, acting Executive Director, introduced this item with an overview of Part 1 of the Budget Study Session. Leslie Little, Development Services Director, presented Part 2 - a summary of the FY 2005-06 ARRA Budget - by walking the Board through the staff report. She discussed overriding issues: the pro forma and the development assumptions at Alameda Point. Member DeHaan raised the question regarding $1.8M that should be absorbed back into the general fund. Bill Norton confirmed Member DeHaan's comments and advised the Board of a new proposed budget for 05-06 for all city funds, including the general … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-05-12.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-06-01.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-06-01 | 2 | Member deHaan asked when we're expecting the Navy to respond. Mr. Proud stated that we asked for a response from the Navy by June 30th, which corresponds to the date in the conditional acquisition agreement with Alameda Point Community Partners for there election to proceed. 3-B. Video presentation by the Alameda Naval Air Museum (ANAM). Marilyn York from the Alameda Naval Museum gave a brief (4 minutes) video presentation of the Alameda naval Air Museum (ANAM). Marilyn York and Barbara Bach were two public speakers, both requesting a long term lease with the right of renewal and the same terms for the ANAM. Member deHaan thanked them for the effort they put in it and remarked that the video was extremely informative. He commended them for the effort to get the shell improvements which were over $700,000. 4. REGULAR AGENDA ITMES 4-A. Report authorizing the Acting Executive Director to Execute a two year lease renewal (1- year with 1-year owner option) with Alameda Naval Air Museum (ANAM) for Building 77 at Alameda Point. In response to Member deHaan's question regarding why the agreement is in front of the Board if it's already been signed, Bill Norton explained that the agreement has not been signed by the museum association, as they indicated they want at least a 5 year and probably a 20 year lease. So they have not signed it. Mr. Norton further explained that the ANAM did have a 5 year lease. However, there were performance criteria in the lease, but they did not have the ability to perform over a 3 year period because they did not have time to actually occupy the structure until they got a certificate of occupancy in March 2004, it's not reasonable to expect them evaluated on the performance measure that they were required to. The original thought was to give them this prior year plus 2 years upcoming, so that we could review the performance criteria during that period of time. Mr. Norton advised, based upon some of the concerns that ANAM has, to modify the item to authorize the Executive Director to enter in… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-06-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-07-14.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-07-14 | 2 | all the other members of APAC contributed toward the planning efforts of Alameda Point. Members Daysog, Matarrese, and Chair Johnson (who just arrived at this point) also expressed their gratitude. 5. CONSENT CALENDAR 5-A. Approval of the minutes of the Regular meeting of March 2, 2005. 5-B. Approval of the minutes of the Special meeting of April 6, 2005. 5-C. Approval of an Amendment to Agreement with Russell Resources extending the term for 90- days and adding $54,000 to the budget for environmental consulting services. 5-D. Report from the Acting Executive Director recommending the approval of Subleases at Alameda Point. 5-E. Recommendation to amend the approved FY 2005-2006 ARRA Budget to include $225,000 for repairs to the Al Dewitt O'Club. Member Gilmore motioned to approve the Consent Calendar. The motion was seconded by Member Matarrese and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes - 5; Noes - 0; Abstentions - 0. 6. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 6-A. Presentation of the Preliminary Development Concept (PDC) for Alameda Point establishing land use goals, transportation strategy and historic preservation strategy. Steven Proud, Alameda Point Project Manager, discussed the updates on the Conveyance process with the Navy and the status of the budget. The key topic discussed was the progress with planning efforts regarding the PDC and introduced the document to the Board for their review. Mr. Proud advised that there are continuing discussions with the Navy on disposal strategies and constraints with the property; and that we're moving forward with the Navy regarding a conveyance agreement. He discussed the community meetings and the success in each of the workshops to tackle specific topics that helped produce this draft document (the PDC). He further discussed issues at Alameda Point (AP) about Navy conveyance and the land planning process. Andrew Thomas, Supervising Planner, focused on the Community Reuse Plan and the draft PDC. He discussed what the community's expectations for the development of AP and what the rea… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-07-14.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-09-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-09-07 | 2 | Mr. Thomas announced that we received a $250,000 grant Metropolitan Transportation Commission Grant, a land planning grant to help with next phases of the planning for Alameda Point, particularly around the transit center. There is also progress toward a memorandum of agreement with BART on a $485,000. grant, a federal earmark that was received over a year ago We have been meeting with representatives from the Navy and the Local Historic Preservation Community to continue the discussion on the Historic Preservation issues that were generated by the PDC, and that is in the context of the Section 106 consultation which is really a Navy lead effort. A briefing to discuss the PDC and the 106 consultation process with the Historical Advisory Board on Alameda Point is planned for October 6th. City Staff has also been invited to attend a League of Women's Voters workshop on September 29th and November 15th Member Daysog called 2 speakers, Bill Smith, who spoke about various topics, and Neil Garcia Sinclair of Cybertran who gave a quick update on the Cybertran/University of California/BART coalition and the proposal of establishing a research center in transportation energy at Alameda Point. 4. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS None. 5. ORAL REPORTS 5-A Oral report from Member Matarrese, RAB representative. Councilmember Matarrese was unable to attend last week's RAB meeting, so there is no report. 6. ORAL COMMUNICAITONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There was one speaker slip, Bill Smith, who spoke about various topics, including the VA, development at Alameda Point; and various unrelated topics as well. 7. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member Daysog welcomed the new City Manager, Debra Kurita, who is also the Executive Director of the ARRA, to her first ARRA meeting. 8. ADJOURMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary 2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-09-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-10-05.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-10-05 | 2 | - a representative from AAPS requested a reuse study be included in the PDC for the historic buildings - a representative from the APC expressed their interest in continuing to be involved in the development plan process - a representative from Operation Dignity expressed concerns about the Board accepting the PDC in draft form - representatives from HOMES and the Sierra Club expressed their appreciation and support with the progress of the PDC compared to other developments. Member Matarrese thanked the staff for providing the input and revisions. He agreed with the speaker who mentioned that the Board should not approve a draft document; and rather, approve a final document. He would like to see more information on a green standards plan and a plan for sustainable communities and expressed concern about the word "feasibility study", afraid it might be dismissed because it does not "comply" with the PDC. He further stated that the PDC document is still conceptual. Members Gilmore and Daysog agreed with Member Matarrese's statements. Member Daysog would like to see more information on the fiscal implications of the PDC, especially on Phase II and Phase III. Member deHaan reminded folks that there was a community reuse plan prior to this PDC, which included the development of commercial and industrial spaces to maximize transportation. Member Matarrese motioned for Council to direct staff to simulate the comments that were made and produce a final document for approval. He requested the document be in red-line/strikeout format so that revisions are clearly seen in the document. City Manager, Debra Kurita, recommended that the draft revisions be text-only to save cost. It was agreed by all Boardmembers to just bring back the document at the regular ARRA Board meeting in November; there was no need to make a motion for this action. Steven Proud, Alameda Point Project Manager, clarified some points to the Board. He stated that the PDC is a component of the conditional acquisition agreement (CAA) that we have with APC… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-10-05.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-12-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-12-07 | 2 | Changes were made in the Introduction, Land Use and the Next Steps chapters emphasizing that it is the City's goal to have a sustainable environmentally sensitive development at Alameda Point. The Next Steps chapter outlines the key issues that are still going to require additional study, particularly the compromises and trade-offs. There is more description about how the non-Measure A alternative will be evaluated in the EIR process; and further exploration of maintaining historical preservation, as well as financial possibilities surrounding the historic buildings. Also included are the next steps to implementing the Transportation Strategy. Two appendices, the Transportation Strategy (Appendix A) and the Financial Feasibility and Fiscal Neutrality (Appendix E), were also revised. Member Gilmore allowed the several speakers to make their statements prior to the Board making their comments. The speakers discussed various PDC-related topics, including Historic Preservation concerns regarding the Big Whites and the Hangars; requests for additional buildings identified for Historic Preservation be placed on the HAB agenda/study list for February, and to request and Historic Preservation Master Plan and an Adaptive Reuse Study to be done soon, or as part of the Navy's Section 106 process. Also discussed concerns about the Seaplane Lagoon development encroachments and non-measure A alternatives. Consideration of Building 3 for the Neptune Beach Amusement Museum was discussed. Alameda School Board representative thanked staff and the ARRA board for including the issues of school facilities in the PDC. Alternatives in Action representative discussed issues regarding the early termination of their lease and the ARRA's request of them for removal of a portable building. Member Daysog asked what were the major changes to Appendix E (Financial Feasibility and Fiscal Neutrality). Stephen Proud, Alameda Point Project Manager, explained that there was clarity added to the language and that the financial feasibility study done… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-12-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2006-02-01.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2006-02-01 | 2 | Page 2 As described in the plan, the PDC does not represent the FINAL development plan for Alameda Point. It is a planning study with the basic message that to get through an entitlement process and a planning process, and to actually see implementation will require some tough compromises and decisions that have not yet been made. The PDC clarifies that when the important decisions are made, all the necessary information will be available to the public and to ARRA. Important issues are emphasized in the Next Steps chapter. The plan for the redevelopment of Alameda Point will continue to evolve as we move through the entitlement process. Member Daysog thanked staff for the memo provided by Darin Smith of Economic Planning Systems (EPS) detailing the assumptions. He requested further sources, methodologies and assumptions regarding information in Table 3 and in Table 4 - property taxes, assumptions in terms of housing values, industrial and commercial, property transfer taxes. Member Daysog explained that this information would be helpful for future generations of Alamedans to track the fiscal health of this project. There were several speakers on this item: Birgitt Evans - represents the Alameda Architecture Preservation Society (AAPS). Thanked staff and Andrew Thomas for the PDC. Discussed concerns with removal of two seaplane lagoon hangars (Bldgs. 11 & 12). Recommended construction of height-limited buildings to preserve vista for future generations. Elizabeth Krase, AAPS - thanked Andrew Thomas. Discussed concerns regarding the timetable for the Preservation and Adaptive Reuse Studies, and the potential loss of the BOQ, Big Whites, etc. Joan Konrad - discussed importance of examining Measure A non-compliant alternative plan for Alameda Point redevelopment and safe and easy walking distance to destinations - schools, work and shopping. Diane Lichtenstein - concerns about the constraints of Measure A. Reiterated that the PDC is only a draft and wanted to emphasize the flexibility of the plans. Helen Sause - comm… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2006-02-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2006-06-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2006-06-07 | 2 | Page 2 Recreation. In response to member deHaan's question regarding the value of the dredge materials, should the golf course project NOT go forward, Elizabeth Johnson explained that we would be paid a Tipping Fee for the dredge materials. Member Daysog questioned the delay in having an economic analysis. In response, Chair Johnson reminded the Board that there was a several-year process where this consideration was going on - we had a Hotel expert and even had an RFP on hotel complexes. At that time, however, the downturn in the economy left the only people willing to propose a project was that we owned a five-star hotel and paid them to manage it, and that was something the ARRA wasn't willing to do. Elizabeth Johnson further discussed that the ARRA, in 2004, directed staff to go ahead with preparation of the EIR in anticipation of the Hotel market coming back. Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, concurred with this discussion, adding that the hospitality industry has taken a while to bounce back since 9/11. She further explained that once the EIR is certified, and we negotiate a Tipping Fee with the Army Corp and the Port of Oakland that makes sense, then we can restudy the issue of the economic viability of the project. There was one speaker on this item, David Kerwin, who asked when and how often soil testing will be done, expressing concern about loosened toxic materials if the property is not used for a golf course. Elizabeth Johnson responded that there will be a site-testing protocol in place. Approval to certify the final EIR was motioned by Chair Johnson and seconded by Member deHaan and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes - 4; Noes - 1 (Member Daysog); Abstentions - 0. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, RAB representative. Member Matarrese stated that he was unable to attend the last meeting and has no report. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speaker slips. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 7. ADJOURNMEN… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2006-06-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2006-09-06.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2006-09-06 | 2 | Member Gilmore asked for an explanation of why we did not go out to bid. Ms. Little explained that, since Trident was the inaugural port service provider, we tried very hard to work something out with them that was less expensive than what would have been charged historically. Staff also recommends that at the end of this three year contract that we do go out to bid. Member Matarrese requested that the Board receive the policy on bidding and what the contract is, recognizing that it is a legacy and wants to make sure, going forward, we eliminate that uncertainty. Approval was motioned by Member Gilmore and seconded by Member Matarrese and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes - 4; Noes - 0; Abstentions - 0 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, RAB representative. Member Matarrese stated that the next RAB meeting is tomorrow (9/7) and will have a report in October. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There was one speaker, Elected East Bay Regional Park representative, Doug Siden, Alameda resident. Mr. Siden discussed as background that the EBRPD has been participating with the City of Alameda in the planning process for the former Naval Air Station over the last 10 years. EBRPD's concern has been to see parkland included at Alameda Point located at what has been called Triangle Park (between the Hornet and the City's mini park along the shoreline). It has always been shown in the studies that this property was going to be a parkland. In support of the City's process, the EBRPD has applied to the State of California for a grant from Prop. 12 monies, and EBRPD has received $250,000, which is designated for the Triangle Park. Mr. Siden expressed the concern of the EBRPD that under the provisions of Measure 12, land tenure has to be secured by the end of this year, and the project has to be completed and the money expended by the end of next year. So there will be another planning process, but the money will be lost in terms of the City of Alameda using it at the Triangle Park, if… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2006-09-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2006-10-04.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2006-10-04 | 2 | Page 2 There was one speaker on this item, Diane Lichtenstein, who praised the four workshops outlined in the contract and requested that after each workshop a summary report to be generated (perhaps in the local newspaper as well as the City's website). She also recommended expanding the scope of the ferry analysis beyond the half-mile radius of the station as presently indicated. She also requested that all drafts of the report be available electronically. Approval of 2-C was motioned by Member Matarrese, seconded by Member deHaan and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes - 4; Noes - 0; Abstentions - 1. 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3-A. Status Report on East Bay Regional Park District Request for Long-Term Lease. Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, stated that, at the September ARRA meeting, East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) representatives Doug Siden and Mike Anderson indicated that EBRPD is ready to begin funding improvements at the 26-acre Enterprise Park through the use of Measure AA and Proposition 12 money (totaling $500,000). A portion of the Proposition 12 funds ($100,000) specify that land must be secured by the end of this year, and the project must be completed and the money expended by the end of next year. It also requires a 20-year lease on the land. According to the staff report, there could be a smaller, Phase 1 lease or a lease for the entire 26 acres. There are several other leases in place that encumber some portions of the 26 acres, including Alameda Soccer Club (until 2008) and the Hobby Shop (until 2010). Member Daysog mentioned that 11 years ago, there was concern that EBRPD wanted an RV parking lot as part of their plan for this land. Ms. Potter confirmed that this is no longer an option. Doug Siden, elected EBRPD representative, reiterated the funding and timing requirements. He introduced Mike Anderson, Assistant General Manager, who presented a map of the proposed area and plans. It consists of 10.6 acres and excludes current leased properties. Ultimately,… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2006-10-04.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2006-11-01.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2006-11-01 | 2 | Page 2 accompanied by a $20,000 non-refundable filing fee. The responses received will be evaluated and brought back to the ARRA should we receive responses with a recommendation to enter into a 45-day negotiation period. There was one speaker slip, Andrew Slifka, long-time Alameda resident and also a representative of the Carpenter's Union in Alameda County, and speaking on behalf of the Construction Building Trades Council of Alameda County. Mr. Slifka addressed concerns and disappointment with the Alameda Point Community Partners (APCP) withdrawal from the project since they had a Project Labor Agreement with APCP. He urged the Board to look at the same requirements for any developer that should come forward, because Project Labor agreements bring value to the community, well-paying jobs with benefits, careers and local work opportunities. Member Daysog asked if specific questions regarding the financing of the project were outlined in the RFQ. He commented on the financing/business model associated with revitalizing the Catellus project and how it was distinct from the business model that was employed for the rest of Alameda Point. He also discussed incorporating a different business model. David Brandt, Deputy Executive Director, responded that developers will be asked who their source of capital is and for a deposit of "earnest money" in the amount or $1 million before a developer is selected. This information will be provided to the Board. Member Daysog asked if the potential developers understood the amount of property open for redevelopment. Ms. Potter responded that the $108 million purchase price is based on Phases 1 and Phases 2, which is essentially everything but the Wildlife Refuge and the area south of Atlantic Ave. and north of the 26-acre park, plus the golf course. David Brandt also clarified that we were careful to let the developers know that the PDC wasn't an entitlement. Member Matarrese asked whether a Project Labor Agreement (PLA) was presented to the bidders as part of the package that A… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2006-11-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-01-02.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2007-01-02 | 2 | Page 2 investigate this opportunity further, particularly the deep water docks included in the MARAD lease. Executive Director, Debra Kurita, said the item will be agendized and be brought back to the ARRA. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-01-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-02-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2007-02-07 | 2 | Page 2 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, RAB representative. The RAB meeting on Feb. 1 gave a very interesting presentation on heat removal of volatile materials in the groundwater and in the soil. Apparently when the electro-heaters are activated, they use more electricity than the entire rest of the island. It heats the grounds up to 28 feet deep up to 98 degrees C, which is just under boiling. It takes approximately 1.5 years to cool back down but is a very effective means of remediation currently in progress at two sites: Bldg 360 (Phase 2 and very contaminated), and Parcel 17 near the seaplane lagoon east. There was also an update of that area with a data gap sampling near the Hornet soccer field and bay trail. Surface samples upwind of the Hornet soccer field was highlighted as an area of concern. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) Eugenie Young spoke about the cruise ship opportunities at Alameda Point. At approximately 11:52 p.m., Member Matarrese moved to continue the meeting beyond midnight, seconded by Member Gilmore and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes - 5, Noes - 0, Abstentions - 0. Bill Smith spoke about various topics. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 11:59 p.m with a moment of silence in honor of Assistant City Attorney, Byron Toma's father, Takeyuki Toma, aka "Dick" Toma, who passed away this weekend. He served in WWII as part of the 447th Japanese American Regiment. Respectfully submitted, Stune Glidden Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-02-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-05-08.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2007-05-08 | 2 | Page 2 Each of the master developer teams was given 10 minutes to make final comments (in this order: Catellus, Lennar, and SunCal) before the Board began discussion of the item. There was one public speaker, Richard Rutter, who discussed his support of staff's recommendation to select one Master Developer. The following motions were made: Member Matarrese motioned to set aside the Partnership Agreement approach and select just one Master Developer. Motion was seconded by Member deHaan and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes - 4, Noes - 1 (Gilmore). Member Matarrese motioned to appoint Catellus as the Master Developer. Motion was seconded by Chair Johnson and failed by the following voice vote: Ayes - 2 (Matarrese, Johnson), Noes - 3 (Tam, deHaan, Gilmore). Member Tam motioned to select SunCal as the Master Developer. Motion was seconded by Member deHaan and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes - 3 (Tam, deHaan, Gilmore), Noes - 2 (Johnson, Matarrese). 3-B. Approve Draft Comment Letters on Record of Decision for Installation Restoration Sites 1 and 25 and Authorize Executive Director to Submit Comment Letters to the Navy. At the last meeting, Member Matarrese asked staff to prepare comments on the draft ROD for Sites 1 and 25. Member Matarrese requested that the bottom-line and desires of the ARRA is stated right up front as an introduction of the letters. Member Matarrese moved to approve the letters with the edit of repeating the end goal right at the front of the letter. Motion was seconded by Member deHaan and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes - 5, Noes - 0. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, RAB representative. There was no report, as Member Matarrese was on vacation and did not attend the meeting. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There was one speaker, David Howard, who spoke about car-ownership for low income individuals and families of the affordable housing development at Alameda Point. | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-05-08.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-07-18.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2007-07-18 | 2 | Matt Fragner, with the Councilmember's/Boardmember's/Commissioner's approval, revised and recited the precise language modifying the three specific issues of the ENA. ouncilmember/Boardmember/Commissioner deHaan motioned to approve the ENA with the modifications to the specific sections in the ENA. Motion was seconded by Vice Mayor/Boardmember/Commissioner Tam and passed by the following voice votes: 5 Ayes, 0 Noes, 0 Abstentions. 3. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 11:27 by Mayor/Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Airna Glidden Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-07-18.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-08-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2007-08-07 | 2 | David Brandt, Deputy Executive Director, summarized to the Board that the Navy's caretaker obligations for the former North Housing Complex will expire in September, and recommends that the ARRA assume caretaker and maintenance responsibilities. He discussed that it would be a simple conveyance to gain control of the property so that it can be leased. The property is still fully operational but deteriorating rapidly. Mr. Brandt discussed the BRAC process: as soon as the property is declared as surplus, the Local Reuse Authority (ARRA) is responsible for screening the property. This process could take as long as a year, but there are several options for conveyance, including a public benefit conveyance for the park, a homeless accommodation request, or negotiated EDC for cost. Chair Johnson suggested trying to acquire all the property. Member deHaan questioned the legal ramifications for the conveyance process, and taking over with a no-cost EDC. Mr. Brandt explained that the Navy's position is that they are not governed by the old BRAC rules - that they are applying the post-2005 "No no-cost EDC" rules. All Boardmembers agreed that the ARRA should move forward expeditiously in order to preserve the parkland and prevent further deterioration of the property. Member Matarrese motioned to approve the staff recommendation with further direction to convey the entire property (Marina Village and North Housing complex) to the City. The motion was seconded by Member deHaan and passed by the following voice votes: 4 ayes (Member Gilmore absent), o noes, o abstentions. 4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) Bill Smith spoke about various topics including clean-up problems, liquefaction, and the surplus housing at former North Housing. 5. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member deHaan discussed a side trip tour he had of Fort Ord with Mr. Michael Houlimard, and compared the Fort Ord redevelopment project with the Alameda Point project. Member deHaan explained that at Fort Ord, they are only redeveloping 8… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-08-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-09-04.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2007-09-04 | 2 | Debbie Potter summarized the Alameda Point project to date and introduced Pat Keliher, SunCal's Project Manager, to present the Master Project Schedule. The ENA calls for the master plan to be prepared initially, and updated on a quarterly basis and presented to the ARRA. The first update of the Master Schedule will be presented in the Dec. - Jan. timeframe. Pat Keliher walked through highlights of the Project Master Schedule and explained that the schedule was put together in a logical manner, first with the public planning process, which clearly is important to set the stage for a final development plan. The first community meeting will be scheduled very soon, and consist of land, site, design constraints and charettes. The second stage of public process includes returning back to the public to present a development concept. Mr. Keliher emphasized how critical it is to remain consistent and continue the public process throughout the project timeline. Next critical item on the schedule is the traffic, location, and infrastructure impacts of the VA issue and scope of their project. Mr. Keliher stated that SunCal began early on working together with the VA. The next key phase is the Planning and Entitlement phase where the development concept, public amenities, adaptive reuse, and historic district issues are refined. Mr. Keliher explained that SunCal has met with members of the Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (AAPS), and with Chris Buckley and Richard Rutter, to evaluate buildings and uses in the historic district. SunCal's next key item on the schedule is the submittal of the Entitlement Application in March 2008. Mr. Keliher did not go into detail with the balance of schedule which includes the DA, DDA, CAA, Business Plan, MOA, Tidelands Trust Agreement, etc. He further explained that the NEPA & CEQA processes can't start until project description is in place. He expressed how critical the next three to six months are and that SunCal is committed to meeting the milestones. Member Matarrese focused on… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-09-04.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-10-03.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2007-10-03 | 2 | Toronto, Canada. Also, the first magazine issued by the National Wildlife Refuge Association included an segment on Alameda and asked the FAWR to be an affiliate of theirs. Member deHaan asked how successful the mating pairs have been up to this point. Ms. Feeney summarized the progress of the lease tern colony, explaining that Alameda has the sixth largest colony in the world, but that we are isolated from the other colonies (most in Southern Ca). Member Matarrese really enjoyed the pictures included in the presentation and appreciates the fragility of the ecosystem of the site. He discussed another upcoming item on the Agenda, Site 1, an uncharacterized waste pit which is adjacent to the Wildlife Refuge, and the importance of addressing the clean-up issues and how it relates to the water-borne life of the refuge. Mr. Saddler added that once construction begins at Alameda Point, it would inevitably impact how the clean-up is managed. Vice Chair Tam asked if they have seen some of the latest conceptual plans from the VA. Mr. Saddler said that he and Ms. Feeney met with the VA and were able to see three versions of proposed plans. They were concerned that the new concepts proposes the area between the proposed Golf course and the refuge site as a buffer zone, but also expressed their desire to stay engaged with the VA and keep things in perspective as to what's best for Alameda, what's best for the Veterans and what's best for the wildlife. Member Matarrese clarified that the VA is a fed-to-fed transfer, and not the Alameda development. Member deHaan recommended the Board receive periodic updates of the VA's proposals and requested a briefing. Member Matarrese agreed and asked whether the updates can be obtained officially. Deputy Executive Director, David Brandt, stated that there is no official proposal available yet from the VA. Member Matarrese requested that when there is an official proposal, he would like the Board to see it. The Board agreed. 3-B. Alameda Point Project Update - oral report Debbie Potter, B… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-10-03.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-11-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2007-11-07 | 2 | Chair Johnson recommended keeping Item 3-C on the agenda, affirmed by staff that it would be helpful for further discussion. Vice Chair Tam requested a correction of the 10/16 minutes to reflect that it was Member Matarrese who seconded the motion, and not her. Member Gilmore motioned for approval of Item 2-B with the following corrections: to include full complement of the Boards and Commissions with one member representing his or her Board/Commission's position and reporting back to that board or commission, and this includes the Climate Protection Task Force and Housing Commission representatives; and to reflect that Member Matarrese seconded the motion, and not Vice Chair Tam. The motion was seconded by Member Matarrese and passed by the following voice votes: 5 ayes, 0 noes, 0 abstentions. There were two speakers on Item 2-D (Kids Chalk Art Project), Mark Wagner, who thanked the Board for waiving the fee for the use of Alameda Point for the project; and Trish Spencer, President of the Alameda PTA Council, who gave a brief explanation of the project, which spotlights art and brings art to the students and families of Alameda schools. They plan to draw the largest chalk project in the world. 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3-A. Proclamation for Ken Hansen, Community Co-Chair of the FISCA RAB. Chair Johnson proclaimed Nov. 7, 2007 as Ken Hansen Day in the City of Alameda, and presented the Proclamation to Mr. Hansen. Mr. Jim Sweeney also presented Mr. Hansen with a Letter of Appreciation from the US Navy, signed by Laura Duchnak, Director of the BRAC Program Office. Mr. Mike Quillen of ERM presented a letter of appreciation and recognition to the ARRA Board to honor Mr. Hansen for his contribution and achievements to the ARRA and the City of Alameda. 3-B. Alameda Point Project Update - Oral Report. Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, gave a brief project update: SunCal held its first community meeting on October 24th. There were over 200 members of the community in attendance. SunCal introduced… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-11-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-12-05.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2007-12-05 | 2 | The entire land mass that the VA hopes to have transferred to them by the Navy is approximately 597 acres. They envision developing about 113 acres concentrated in the north east area of the property. Mr. Hutchison further explained that the VA is still in negotiations with the USF&W because of the Lease Tern and California Brown Pelican whose habitat is within the area they hope to control. Mr. Jaynes concluded the presentation with an overview of the property area, stating that Alameda Point is strategically located to serve the Veterans of the greater Bay Area, and in addition, it is ideally and centrally located to serve the Veterans of northern Alameda County. He indicated on the map which area was the federal-to-federal parcel at the far west end of Alameda Point. It primarily consists of what was the airfield and landfill for NAS. The parcel does not include the Northwest Territories, which is still going to the City of Alameda. It also does not include any submerged lands. The 579-acre parcel runs from the west side of hangar row all the way down to the bay, and follows the perimeter shoreline all the way around the tip. When it gets to the Northwest Territories, it comes back down to hangar row. Mr. Jaynes presented the VA's site development plan which they have been working on for 18 months. They plan to only develop 113 acres, and the remaining 466 acres will be left undeveloped. The VA's planned development is a circumference of about 1900 feet from the Lease Tern colony, based on the closest structure on hangar row, to assure the protection of the Lease Tern and the Brown Pelican and so the VA and these endangered species can co-exist on the site. Their plans include an outpatient clinic on the far east end which would replace the two facilities currently in Oakland. The clinic will be approximately 80-90,000 sq. ft. and be a full-service ambulatory care clinic which will not have any beds. The VA would like to develop an above- ground cemetery on the 50+ acres on the far west end of the parcel. Ther… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-12-05.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-01-02.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-01-02 | 2 | review will continue over the next 12-18 months. The conclusion of the peer review thus far is that there are issues for which SunCal will discuss the mitigation techniques. SunCal has met with multiple federal agencies, and their meeting with the Navy was to introduce them to the concept that the PDC didn't work, and, as the existing term sheet is predicated on the PDC, SunCal will come back to the Navy in Jan-Feb with an outline on their strategy. Mr. Keliher explained that the Alameda Point project is very complex, but nothing that is insurmountable. Member deHaan expressed concern with economics of the project and what issues SunCal was anticipating will be covered at the next public meeting. Mr. Keliher stated that it is SunCal's job to present more specifics on each of the different planning concepts, i.e., Measure A, non- measure A, or a hybrid of these two, etc. Member deHaan stated that the loose ends and driving force was the transportation issue. Mr. Keliher agreed that the transportation issue was a trigger and that it would take several years and a lot of different agencies involved to tie up this loose end. Member deHaan commented that the public meetings were well-received. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative. Member Matarrese attended the 12/6/07 meeting and the main agenda item was a summary handout of 2007 activities and a look-forward to 2008 with remediation at Alameda Point. He provided the handout, "Environmental Progress at Alameda Point" and requested that it be provided to ARRA members and posted on the City's website. He requested that the map identifying the sites be included with the handout. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speaker slips. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY none. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 7:43 p.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-01-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-05-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-05-07 | 2 | understanding of using monetary expenditure as a baseline, but was concerned that spending money doesn't necessarily mean progress. He would like a break-down in more incremental, more defined product. Mr. Keliher acknowledged Member deHaan's concerns, and offered to choose core topics that ARRA would like to have reports on, and speak about substantive issues at the meetings. Chair Johnson discussed that the milestones are already in place and it's not necessary to add extra "interim' milestones. Member deHaan explained that all he's requesting is for SunCal to stick with timeline, report on current activities, and provide a progress report on key issues and accomplishments. Member Gilmore requested a brief description, and to provide context for what's going on, rather than just the dry milestones that are shown on the chart. Member Matarrese agreed and said it is worthwhile to list whether we're behind, or on, schedule; and to show progress on something that is significant as a milestone so that the public can anticipate what's going to happen. It is also useful to check things off. Member deHaan expressed that he just doesn't want to see SunCal in the same position they were when they had to request an extension, as September is approaching quickly. Member Gilmore requested no powerpoints, explaining that time spent making the presentation should not take away from time spent working on the project. Mr. Keliher agreed. There was one public speaker, Bill Smith, who spoke on various topics, including public transit. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative. Member Matarrese was unable to attend the meeting and did not have a report. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speakers. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member deHaan provided feedback and expressed his concerns about the May 5th community meeting regarding Transit Oriented Alternatives. He was concerned that the poor turnout was due to lack of publicity … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-05-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-06-04.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-06-04 | 2 | Member Matarrese requested that staff provide more detailed information under 'budget consideration /fiscal impact', i.e., how much did we spend, did we exceed budget, etc. Ms. Potter explained that all the activities undertaken by staff and consultants to prepare the legislation is an eligible reimbursement activity pursuant to the ENA with SunCal, that all costs are borne by SunCal. Member Matarrese would like to see these details in the staff report. He also asked about the activities SunCal is currently undertaking. Ms. Potter discussed that SunCal is particularly focused on examining sea level rise on Alameda Landing and Alameda Point, fill and geotechnical grading, updating the infrastructure numbers and hoping to have an updated proforma in 2-4 weeks that reflect those numbers. SunCal is also working on scheduling community meetings at the end of July or beginning of August, and on Sept. 19, their Development Concept is due. Member deHaan was hoping for more detail or progress report on each of the myriad activities that SunCal is doing. Ms. Potter explained that staff heard the desire expressed by the Board last month for a detailed progress report. She stated that SunCal will be back next month with a detailed update the Board is looking for. Member deHaan clarified the purpose of the options of the legislation and Ms. Potter affirmed his clarification. Vice Chair Tam asked for clarification on the consent calendar item just approved regarding increasing Marc Associates' budget. Ms. Potter confirmed that Marc Associates is the firm that worked with staff and the Navy on this legislation, and that their entire effort is covered under the contract amount of $120,000. In an effort to understand our coalition partners and how we are stacked in the bill, Vice Chair Tam commented that the Alameda Point legislation Section 2851 is a small piece. Ms. Potter explained that the entire bill is approximately 1000 pages long and Alameda Point is sandwiched between a number of other bases (all branches, not just the N… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-06-04.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-07-01.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-07-01 | 2 | Member Matarrese requested, for the public, that Ms. Potter comment and describe the letter the Navy sent to the ARRA in response to the ARRA's request for funds to provide services to Alameda Point. Ms. Potter explained that the Navy sent the ARRA a response that there is a 50 year Lease in Furtherance of Conveyance (LIFOC) Agreement that allows us to lease the property, collect revenue, and use the lease revenues for maintenance of the property. The Navy further stated that they did not anticipate revisiting the terms of the LIFOC for maintenance activities. Member Tam asked if the Navy is implying we increase our lease rates in order to generate the necessary funds we were requesting. Ms. Potter replied that that was the conclusion the Navy has eluded to, but that they were not offering to step in, nor did they offer any options to augmenting anything. Member deHaan expressed his concern and dissatisfaction with the Navy's response - given that the property is in a state of deterioration and does not make economic sense - and requested further discussion. Chair Johnson agreed and requested the item be agendized and brought back for discussion at the next ARRA meeting. Pat Keliher gave a brief update on the high level topics, including infrastructure, baseline assumptions, and mitigation on some of the issues. He stated SunCal's goal for their consultants and City Staff to agree on baseline assumptions, which affect the entire land plan. He's optimistic that progress is being made to achieve that goal. The number one issue that SunCal and City staff has agreed on was what to assume for global warming, sea level rise and the design parameter, which is 18 inches - a reasonable baseline to set design standards. All of the land plan will be based on that assumption. Another important issue is the Floodplain and mitigation. SunCal is evaluating the pros and cons of three main options: 1) elevate everything, 2) levy systems, or 3) a combination of the both. Mr. Keliher further discussed that their Environmental consu… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-07-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-09-10.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-09-10 | 2 | projects that were going out for bid on this year. Ms. Little replied that the last roof repair project was finished, as well as the preliminary assessment of the pier conditions, and that work will be scheduled to start the piling and pier replacements. The greatest issue is that there are old systems at Alameda Point - if there were a water or sewer problem or other major activity, we need cash on hand to resolve those issues. Member Matarrese expressed his concern that we're funding infrastructure that doesn't belong to us, the City doesn't own the property, it still belongs to Navy. We're adding value to what the Navy is putting a high price tag on. He stated that he would much rather put that money toward unfunded liabilities of General Fund services. Member Gilmore agreed, stating that, in theory, should we have a major system malfunction, there are tenants that pay to cover these issues. There should be a balance while we're in a holding position with the Navy. Vice Chair Tam motioned for approval of the Contract with St. Francis Electric, the motion was seconded by Member deHaan and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 3-B. Alameda Point Update - Presentation of the Draft Development Concept. Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, introduced Pat Keliher and Peter Calthorpe, Urban Designer, who presented a powerpoint presentation of the draft development concept to the Board and public. The presentation can be viewed at www.alamedapointcommunity.com. After the presentation, Chair Johnson opened the item to the Boardmembers for discussion. Member Matarrese asked if both plans assume a $108M payment to the Navy, to which Ms. Potter replied, "yes." Member Gilmore asked Mr. Calthorpe for more specific information regarding his comment on the importance of phasing the transportation enhancements so housing could keep pace with the capacity in the tube, asking if it can work, and when we will know. Pat Keliher, SunCal's Alameda Point Project Manager, explain… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-09-10.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-10-01.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-10-01 | 2 | The two PBCs received were from the City's Recreation and Park department and from Habitat for Humanity for self-help housing. We are recommending the PBC from Rec and Park, and will indicate our support for Habitat for Humanity for 20 to 30 units of self-help housing. The Habitat for Humanity PBC is approved by the federal housing agency, HUD; and the Department of Interior would approve the Rec and Park PBC. The next step is to begin negotiating a Legally Binding Agreement (LBA). The LBA is an agreement document that goes forward to HUD, along with our amendment to the Community Reuse Plan (Reuse Plan), HUD reviews the Reuse Plan and makes the ultimate determination of how well it meets the needs of homeless accommodation. We are scheduling two community meetings in November, on the 3rd with the Planning Board, and on Nov. 24th on the amendment to the Reuse Plan, and draft LBA at its Dec. 3 meeting. The statutory requirement is to get everything to HUD in December. Member Matarrese asked how HUD weighs different factors during their evaluation of the proposals. Ms. Potter explained that typically, the screening process regulations are broadly drafted in order to give local jurisdictions a lot of leeway and opportunity for the Reuse Plan to meet their needs. What they are looking for is a balance of homeless accommodation, and what they call "other community goals", in terms of job generation, economic development, housing, and open space. Member Matarrese asked if there is a previous process which we were involved in. Ms. Potter replied that the 1996 Community Reuse Plan was the last time we were involved in that process. Member Matarrese informed staff and the Board that he just received a letter from the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) regarding the remediation of site where the Midway Shelter is located. The letter informed of DTSC's plan to evaluate the impact of removing viscous material and widespread contaminated material from that site. Staff will follow-up. Chair Johnson called public spe… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-10-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-11-05.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-11-05 | 2 | any, are available without completing the project proforma and negotiating a DDA, which is due in June 2010. The CIC has made no commitment of funds to the project. Its only obligation is to negotiate in good faith on both the land plan and public./private partnership until the ENA expires in June of 2010. The DDA must be approved by the City Council and the CIC; and until the DDA is approved, it is not possible for the CIC to commit funds to the project. Under the terms of the ENA, SunCal is paying for all city staff costs and third party consultant costs consistent with the requirement for the fiscal neutrality that we demand. Member Matarrese referred to the comments included in the staff report and stated that it was important to make a distinction whether the points being raised were from the boards or from individuals. Pat Keliher, SunCal's Alameda Point Project Manager gave the presentation. The presentation will be made available on SunCal's website. At the conclusion of the presentation, Chair Johnson called all of the speakers first: Corinne Lambden - concerned about the historical relevant structures, and would like Board to consider all options of adaptive reuse before permanently destroying them. Mary Fetherolf - thanked SunCal for the presentation and asked a couple of process questions about where to find the financial models and assumptions of the project, and about the draft Master Plan. Elizabeth Krase - spoke on behalf of AAPS. She discussed concerns about the historic buildings planned for demolition, stating that it's not acceptable. Doug Biggs - APC has enjoyed participating in the SunCal community process and supports SunCal's plan. 'Chelle Fredrick - excited to see the progress that has been made, encouraged by the plan that acknowledges the unprecedented potential of Alameda point yet still recognizes the constraints. Diane Lichtenstein - echoed what Mi'Chelle Frederick said. Interested in how the development will happen, and would like to see more of the integration and diversity in the … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-11-05.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-11-18.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-11-18 | 2 | Member Gilmore stated that a key issue revolves around the feasibility of implementation and the traffic solutions - how to move people on and off the island. She discussed this as being a big part of her comfort level with regard to whether the plan can be executed. She wants to see real life examples of the solutions in place and working, and does not want Alameda to be the experiment. Member Matarrese had two transportation-related points: how we are addressing commute in the tube into China Town, and truck routes, how are we moving goods? Matthew Ridgway, consultant from Fehr & Peers, addressed the transportation issues. He stated that traffic congestion is expected to be worse, regardless of Alameda Point redevelopment, as moving traffic to/from Alameda Point is secondary next to the traffic moving through the tube and the 880 corridor. One of the questions was whether the option of a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) was out. Mr. Ridgway responded 'no', but is reserving the right of way to bus transit alignment. He further discussed that the project is developer funded and funding will be sought from AC Transit and other funding sources. Another question was regarding buy-in of other stakeholders. Mr. Ridgway explained that they are working with AC Transit for funding issues and Caltrans on Broadway/Jackson improvements, but there is a much larger group of stake holders, and they are not assuming things outside of Alameda's purview. The Board had requested a matrix be created. Mr. Ridgway prepared a draft which highlights major differences between the three plans, the APCP plan, the WRT plan, and the current SunCal plan. One of the major differences they realized was having an onsite school, which was carried forward to the current AP transportation strategy. A rapid bus element was not definitive in other plans, but in the current AP transportation strategy, it is definitive to fund a rapid bus transit system, also proposing to fund construction and operating costs for an additional BRT line across the whole island … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-11-18.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-12-02.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-12-02 | 2 | 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 11:19 p.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-12-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-01-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-01-07 | 2 | 2) the amount of the Community Improvement Commission (CIC) investment in the Alameda Point project and whether or not that investment of redevelopment dollars adversely impacts the City's general fund which is responsible for financing critical city services. Ms. Potter discussed the Presidio conveyance model - a transfer from military ownership via special legislation to the National Park Service and was not subject to BRAC requirements - it was determined that the same conveyance model is not feasible for Alameda Point. Alameda Point is subject to BRAC, was previously screened for other federal agency uses, was screened pursuant to the McKinney-Vento act for homeless uses, and is required to be conveyed at fair market value for private ownership and reuse. The ARRA is working with the Navy to negotiate a conveyance term sheet to transfer the property and provide for its ultimate reuse as a mixed- use community that generates jobs, provides housing for all incomes, and opens up the waterfront and creates new recreational opportunities for Alameda and the region. To achieve that goal, the City entered into an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with SunCal. Ms. Potter addressed the issue of tax increment funds, clarifying that there cannot be a pledge of tax increment funds without a DDA, approved by the City Council and CIC in public following a public hearing, therefore, any approval of tax increment funding will only happen after input and participation from the community. If tax increment funds are raised through the sale of tax increment bonds, those bonds are secured and repaid solely by tax increment funds generated in the Alameda Point Redevelopment Project Area (APIP), and in no way obligate the City's general fund. Based on current projections of the property value to be created by the build-out of the master plan, staff anticipates that a maximum of $184 million of tax increment will be created over the life of the project. This number is well short of the $700 million being referenced in the community. I… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-01-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-02-03.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-02-03 | 2 | Ms. Little gave a brief overview of Alameda Wine Company's request to amend their lease to change their hours of operation. Staff is recommending no change to their lease at this time. The tenant addressed the CIC explaining her request is due to financial reasons, stating that the hours of 11:00 a.m.- - 4:00 p.m. are the least profitable for her business. Member Matarrese motioned to follow staff's recommendation to keep the status quo and defer any change to the Alameda Wine Company lease until such time that there is the eventuality and risk of the business closing. Only at that time should this item be brought back to the CIC. Member Gilmore seconded the motion and it was passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 3 Noes: 1 (Vice-Chair deHaan) Abstentions: 1. (Member Tam) 3-B. Recommendation to approve a Five Year Lease and Repayment Plan/Write-off with AC Hornet Foundation. (Development Services) [ARRA] Ms. Little and Nanette Mocanu, Finance & Administration Division Manager, summarized the Hornet's' repayment plan to alleviate their debt. The Board gave direction to staff to bring this item back after revisions to the repayment plan to include that the Hornet provide: a new business plan, credible financial reports, evidence of creditors, and address the issue of the benefit to the ARRA of moving the Hornet for profitable use of Pier 3. The Board also requested that a representative from the Hornet attend the meeting when this item is brought back before the ARRA. 3-C. Recommendation to approve an amendment to Consultant Contract with Harris & Associates for On-Call Services for Review of Land Development Entitlement Applications for Redevelopment of Alameda Point. (Development Services) [ARRA] This item was continued to the next Regular ARRA meeting on March 4, 2009. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of January 8th Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese requested the Board review the handouts regarding OU-5 and OU-2B te… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-02-03.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-03-04.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-03-04 | 2 | Authority (HA) and BWFC. He's excited that this plan will permanently end homelessness. He reminded the board that the Homeless Needs Assessment was done a year ago, March 2008, and today, the needs for the homeless is even greater. He addressed a couple of issues discussed in the presentation, including the site plan. He commented that the drawing is only a small portion of entire site, and that the general plan principles are met: housing is closer to the Tinker Ave. transit corridor, which makes for easy access to transportation and schools. Regarding the environmental clean up, Mr. Biggs stated that they are constrained by the ROD (Record of Decision), which limits the Navy's culpability. He discussed that in the worse case to comply with ROD, the HA came up with a plan built into the funding mix, as well as a plan which is part of the service plan to set aside money for insurance. He assured the Board that the project was made to be as risk-averse as much as possible Member Matarrese stated a few modifications to the recommendation, including making sure the eight acres stay contiguous, and that the Miracle League is specified within the eight acres; that language is worked into the LBA that addresses if the remediation insurance is cross prohibitive, we don't have to take title. Chair Johnson added the provision that outside counsel, or counsel, should make any changes necessary to ensure additional safeguards. Donna Mooney, ARRA General Counsel, summarized that this is an ARRA motion approving the resolution (the addendum to final EIR), amending the Community Reuse Plan, and approving the LBA as modified. The motion was made by Chair Johnson, seconded by Member Matarrese and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes - 6, Noes - 0, Abstentions - 0. As the HABOC, the recommendation was to approve the resolution approving the MOU between the Housing Authority, Alameda Point Collaborative, and Building Futures for Women and Children; and approving the LBA as modified. The motion was made by Commissioner Torrey… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-03-04.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-04-01.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-04-01 | 2 | liberty to discuss the term amount. The redevelopment challenges of the ARRA and TIDA are very similar (transportation, density, etc.) noting that ARRA's Measure A and environmental issues are a greater challenge. 3-B. Alameda Point Update. Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, gave an overview of SunCal's work over the past 60 days, including its work toward the March 26 submittal of its Ballot Initiative. SunCal requested a Tidelands Summary be prepared. The summary was prepared by City Attorney's office and transmitted to City Clerk's office. Once the notice is published, SunCal can begin its signature-gathering process to be completed by June 17. If the required number of qualified signatures is received, the City Council will have to take action to place the initiative on the ballot by Aug. 7. Pursuant to the ENA, SunCal has until April 30 to elect whether they're going to formally move forward with the ballot process or submit an application that is consistent with existing law. A second milestone to be completed by April 30 is the required deposit to begin CEQA work. Staff anticipates coming back to the ARRA in May with an award of contract for an EIR consultant. SunCal will also provide a presentation and summary of the components of their initiative which will include a specific plan, community plan, a Development Agreement, and various other amendments to the zoning ordinance and city's general plan. Member Matarrese requested that the timeline of the process be posted on the Alameda Point website. One speaker, Ashley Jones, directed a question to Mayor Johnson regarding her ability to be impartial regarding the Measure A issue as it pertains to the redevelopment at Alameda Point. Mayor Johnson replied that the speaker time is for the public to comment on the item and not for discussion. Janet Davis expressed concern about the contamination and the safeguards in place before development begins. David Brandt explained to Ms. Davis that the agencies that are overseeing the clean up … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-04-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-05-19.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-05-19 | 2 | 3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speakers. 4. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Vice Chair deHaan and Member Matarrese attended the last RAB meeting and had concerns about the Navy's cleanup direction - whether it is predicated on the PDC, or if the Navy is remediating according to SunCal's concept plan. Member Matarrese requested clarification of their method and also requested this item be agendized and brought back to the ARRA at its next regular meeting. 5. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 8:04 p.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-05-19.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-07-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-07-07 | 2 | 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speakers. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Vice Chair deHaan asked for an update on the SunCal milestones. Assistant City Manager, David Brandt, stated that there is a payment requirement due on July 19th, , and qualified signatures, or an alternative plan, was due in mid September for the City Council to accept. The Navy requirement is now July 2010. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 8:24 p.m., by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-07-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-10-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-10-07 | 2 | Member deHaan was concerned that there would be a shortage of fields or available game-play on the field for Alameda clubs. Dale Lillard, Park and Rec Director, explained that there has not been a shortage of fields, and any shortage experienced was only due to the water rationing mandated by EBMUD to help with the drought, not by any scheduling conflicts. Member Matarrese clarified that this particular field at Alameda Point is not a City-owned field - it still belongs to the Navy and it is not being ceded to another city, it is being leased. He further explained that it is not any different than when the buildings are leased at Alameda point - leasing is not restricted to Alameda only - and if that land was not leased to the Piedmont soccer club, and because Alameda's Parks and Rec department didn't have the funds to maintain the field, it would be a weed field. There was further discussion from the representatives of the Jack London Youth Soccer Sports League, Alameda Soccer Club, and the Piedmont Soccer Club. They answered questions posed by the speakers and the Board, and further expressed their continued support and maintenance of the Alameda Point field for the benefit of all the youth soccer clubs. Item 2-C was motioned for approval by Member Matarrese, seconded by Member Tam and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 Discussion on Item 2-E: Leslie Little discussed staff's request to augment the existing budget for removal of fire debris of Building 6 by $500,000. She summarized that in late March, Building 6 caught fire. The initial debris removal was done, but asbestos and other contaminated building materials were found, and the remaining concrete tower structures were unstable. We are eligible for a $200,000 grant from DTSC to offset the $500,000. Vice Chair deHaan asked what the overall cost would be when complete; and if we were going to hold Catellus responsible to pay back the cost. Ms. Little stated the amount to be approximately $2 million by completion. She furthe… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-10-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-01-06.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-01-06 | 2 | 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speakers. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member Matarrese discussed the visit to El Toro and Hamilton bases, particularly that the City of Irvine established a local development corporation to develop the Great Park. Member Matarrese would like to put an item on a future ARRA agenda to evaluate that particular option to see if it has utility for the ARRA or successor to the ARRA. He stated that Hamilton is farther along than most other bases - there are lots of houses; 10 hangars in use, eight of which have been rehabbed for public and private, with two hangars remaining in the Coast Guard. Member Matarrese recommends looking for potential military use for the hangars at Alameda Point. He stated that the most important and striking feature of Hamilton was that they were taking the runways and returning them to wetlands. Member Matarrese discussed that a wetlands option for the west end of Alameda Point might be a superior option to bolster the shoreline with an engineering solution. The wetlands are a carbon sink, and there may be future carbon credits; it filters runoff, provide better habitat for the environment and is a superior buffer to storm or wave action because it doesn't require maintenance. Vice Chair deHaan discussed that some of the dredging from the Port of Oakland was used for establishing that wetlands. Member Matarrese added that levies were built as well. Vice Chair deHaan stated that getting "tipping fees' is extremely important to jumpstart this type of operation. Chair Johnson liked the idea of wetland restoration. Member Matarrese reiterated that the ARRA remain insistent that the Navy scoop and remove Sites 1 and 2. Member Matarrese stated that there was concern expressed by two members of the RAB (one representative from the EPA and one from the Audubon Society) of rumors that the Bay Trail was in jeopardy, either from the Wildlife or the VA. Member Matarrese would like to find the source to the rumor to see if it… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-01-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-02-03.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-02-03 | 2 | Chair Johnson agreed with Mr. Bangert that the regulatory agencies, including the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Water board should participate in the presentation. Chair Johnson further stated that the Board supports Member Matarrese's recommendation for a public presentation regarding the remediation activities at Alameda Point. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were several speakers. Jean Sweeney suggested a before and after" powerpoint presentation of the clean-up sites. Jim Sweeney agreed with Richard Bangert and Member Matarrese about a presentation to the public. Mr. Sweeney encourages educating the public about remediation, the plan, and what can be done realistically at Alameda Point. Gretchen Lipow - attends RAB meetings, was impressed with the bright, talented members and how they interact with the agencies. Ms. Lipow invites the public to observe these meetings, stating that the group looks out for the communities' welfare. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Vice Chair deHaan discussed the Special Election of Feb 2nd regarding Measure B. There were 14,000 votes cast - 85% NO and 15% YES. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 7:31 p.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, June Glidden Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-02-03.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-03-03.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-03-03 | 2 | 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) No speakers 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member Matarrese said that he and Chair Johnson attended the Association of Defense Communities (ADC) conference in Feb in Albuquerque, NM. He stated that they participated in various sessions and will prepare notes highlighting topics discussed in the sessions, including base conversion stories and reuse of former military bases that were better, similar, or worse off than Alameda Point. Regarding the base conversion and reuse, the spectrum ran from rural conversion of an army weapons depot in Kansas, to a small village in Illinois. Member Matarrese stated that there were a lot of contacts and exposure to all branches of service, their experts and their experience, including the Director of the Fort Ord Reuse Authority. Ann Marie Gallant, Interim Executive Director, expressed that she was pleased with the ARRA's involvement in ADC and that she, along with executive staff, was invited to sit on the host committee to plan the Annual ADC Conference taking place in San Francisco this year. The anticipation is that there will be more than 1000 people in attendance. She stated that the ADC accepted the ARRA's invitation to host an event at Alameda Point. She also said that the ADC is interested in having the ARRA do a forum on the base and its history, including all the different elements and components on remediation, phase-out issues, and that it would be a good case study in terms of how they can learn some lessons. Member Matarrese discussed two key items: 1) legislation on defense authorization bill, which help communities grapple with the cost of closed bases, and 2) the new Undersecretary's initiative to deal with green approaches, sustainability, and alternative energy sources. Member Gilmore asked what the dates for the ADC Annual Conference were. Ms. Gallant replied that it was early August, the 8th thru 11th. Member Tam reminded the Board of the Charter provision to make a conscious effort to go dark in… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-03-03.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-04-06.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-04-06 | 2 | 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) No speakers 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member Matarrese said that he and Chair Johnson attended the Association of Defense Communities (ADC) conference in Feb in Albuquerque, NM. He stated that they participated in various sessions and will prepare notes highlighting topics discussed in the sessions, including base conversion stories and reuse of former military bases that were better, similar, or worse off than Alameda Point. Regarding the base conversion and reuse, the spectrum ran from rural conversion of an army weapons depot in Kansas, to a small village in Illinois. Member Matarrese stated that there were a lot of contacts and exposure to all branches of service, their experts and their experience, including the Director of the Fort Ord Reuse Authority. Ann Marie Gallant, Interim Executive Director, expressed that she was pleased with the ARRA's involvement in ADC and that she, along with executive staff, was invited to sit on the host committee to plan the Annual ADC Conference taking place in San Francisco this year. The anticipation is that there will be more than 1000 people in attendance. She stated that the ADC accepted the ARRA's invitation to host an event at Alameda Point. She also said that the ADC is interested in having the ARRA do a forum on the base and its history, including all the different elements and components on remediation, phase-out issues, and that it would be a good case study in terms of how they can learn some lessons. Member Matarrese discussed two key items: 1) legislation on defense authorization bill, which help communities grapple with the cost of closed bases, and 2) the new Undersecretary's initiative to deal with green approaches, sustainability, and alternative energy sources. Member Gilmore asked what the dates for the ADC Annual Conference were. Ms. Gallant replied that it was early August, the 8th thru 11th. Member Tam reminded the Board of the Charter provision to make a conscious effort to go dark in… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-04-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-05-06.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-05-06 | 2 | certification process after a parcel has been cleaned. Ann Marie Cook of EPA further explained this process: Once a site has reached a point where it is considered meeting the goals set for it to be cleaned, the Navy prepares a "Remedial Action Completion Report' and the EPA, because it is a Superfund site, is required to make the determination that all clean-up action necessary has been completed. The Navy then drafts a Finding of Suitability report to transfer that property. Member Gilmore asked for the status of the transfer process of cleaned VA lands and whether or not the Navy and the VA have reached a basic deal. Jennifer Ott explained that the transfer is moving forward, but awaiting approval from the administration to move forward. She stated that at this time, there are no details of a basic deal, but she will keep the Board updated on any further developments. Vice Chair deHaan asked about the status of remediation of the Seaplane Lagoon. Mr. Robinson stated that they are currently in Stage 1, which includes removing large debris piles on the north side, and that Stage 2 will include remediating soils from the outlet of the storm drain systems. Construction activities will start in Sep./Oct. 2010. Vice Chair deHaan also asked about Site 2 wetlands. He was concerned that the estimated cost of clean-up for Site 2 was approximately $100 million. Mr. Robinson stated that number seems high, and is more likely $20 million - but will get the correct information to report back to the Board. There were three speakers: Jim Sweeney discussed the potential adaptive reuse of Building 5. According to Ann Marie Cook, Building 5 is one million square feet, is 65 feet tall, and qualifies as a historical building. She managed to secure funding from an EPA pilot program and they are looking at costs associated with reusing portions of the building and demolishing other portions. She will be able to provide an update in three months, with a final report in about seven months. Irene Dieter, speaking on behalf of community,… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-05-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-07-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-07-07 | 2 | 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) One speaker, Jon Spangler, discussed clean-up of Alameda Point. He inquired what will happen with everything that is above-ground at Alameda Point, the crumbling infrastructure, buildings that were built with toxic materials, and contaminated buildings. He asked who will pay for remediation and up-keep if SunCal's contract is not renewed. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Considering the investigatory report against Councilmember Tam, Vice-Chair deHaan offered to attend the League of California Cities meeting as the alternate representative for the City of Alameda. He asked if this issue should be agendized for the next regular Council meeting. The General Counsel clarified that because Vice Chair deHaan is already the alternate, no official action is required, but if the Board would like to take a vote, this cannot happen tonight and would have to be at another meeting. Member Matarrese concurred with Vice-Chair deHaan and requested this issue be agendized for the next council meeting. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 7:34 p.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-07-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-09-01.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-09-01 | 2 | Member Matarrese moved for approval of Item 2-C. Vice Chair deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice votes: Ayes: 3, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 1 (Tam) 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3-A. Adopt a Resolution Supporting the United States Navy's Transfer of 549 Acres of the Former Naval Air Station in the City of Alameda to the United States Department of Veterans Affairs for the Development of an Out-Patient Clinic and Columbarium. The Deputy City Manager, Development Services clarified that the staff report combines an information piece which addresses the VA-NAVY deal, and requires no action; and a 'recommendation' portion to adopt a resolution in support of property transfer to the VA. The Deputy City Manager, Development Services summarized the background of the proposed VA project and property transfer. Member Tam inquired if it was necessary that the resolution exclude the 9.7 acres of the Least Tern colony, to which the Deputy City Manager, Development Services explained that the 9.7 acres is included, along with the buffer zone surrounding the Wildlife Refuge, which is more than half of the 549 acres. The Deputy City Manager, Development Services introduced Larry Jaynes, Capital Asset Manager from the Department of Veteran Affairs. Mr. Jaynes gave a brief presentation of the status and projected timeline of the VA project. Speakers: Proponents: Mark Chandler, Commissioner of the Alameda County Veterans Affairs Commission; Alex McElree, Operation Dignity; Aidan Barry. Opponents: Gary Bard; Leora Feeney, Friends of the Alameda Wildlife Refuge (FAWR) Committee; Ron Barklow; Cindy Margulis; Michael Lynes, Golden Gate Audubon; Jean Sweeney; Jon Spangler; Jim Sweeney; Adam Gillitt; William Smith, Sierra Club; Joyce Larrick, FAWR; Nancy Hird Chair Johnson inquired if there is a specific location identified in the resolution for the VA project, to which the Deputy City Manager, Development Services responded in the negative, further explaining that the 549 acres are part of a formal request that include… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-09-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-10-06.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-10-06 | 2 | The Planning Services Manager gave an oral presentation on the schedule of the Alameda Point Community Forums, an initial eight month public outreach effort of the first phase of planning, which would end in June 2011 and restart the environmental review process. The Planning Services Manager explained that while the City of Alameda is doing a CEQA document EIR, the Navy will be doing a NEPA document. The Navy process won't start until there is a project description or general description of the City's plan. The goal is eight months. The eight-month schedule starts with a series of community outreach efforts, including community workshops and internet outreach. The tentative schedule of the first three meetings is: November 9 at the Grand Pavilion, November 18 at Mastick, and December 8 in west Alameda. These workshops and key components of each meeting will be consistent from meeting to meeting. The Planning Services Manager summarized the six key areas as noted in the staff report: 1) Community Facilities, 2) Land Use Mix, 3) Streets, Parks, and Open Space, 4) Transportation Access, 5) Architectural Character and Building Types, and 6) Historic Character and Adaptive Reuse. There are plans for a Tenant Forum in the spring focused on economic development strategy, a Developer and Business Forum, and discussions with each of the Boards and Commissions. A summary will be presented to the ARRA Board in March 2011, and a project description in June 2011. Member Gilmore requested an overview of where Alameda and the Bay Area stand in the commercial and industrial real estate market. The Interim City Manager discussed the application of a citywide real estate management policy which will include the information Member Gilmore requested about comparable leases. Member Tam requested an evaluation of internal competition, i.e., Marina Village VS. Alameda Point. Member Matarrese discussed the commercialization and industrialization approach to development at Alameda Point, stating that the markets already out there are no… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-10-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-11-03.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-11-03 | 2 | Member Matarrese commented that SunCal had no problem spending approximately $50,000 on an election mailer a month ago. Member Matarrese supports APC's request, but would like to require that APC start the proceedings on their contractual remedy to the outstanding bill. Member Gilmore requested an update and report on the status of the predevelopment costs, and of the ARRA budget. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services informed Member Gilmore and the Board that staff will incorporate the ARRA budget and Predevelopment costs information into the update/staff report that will be presented to the Board in January. Vice Chair deHaan inquired how the APC will pay back a $50,000 loan. Mr. Biggs explained that the Project Implementation Loan (PIL) is from the Corporation for Supportive Housing. Traditionally, these loans are paid off by development fees, but since the development plans for Alameda Point are uncertain at this time, APC is asking the City to back them up. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated that the predevelopment planning cost will be wrapped into the total cost of the project and financed through every available funding source to make the consolidation and relocation work. Speakers: Jon Spangler spoke in support of APC's request. Member Matarrese motioned to approve the recommendation to collateralize $50,000 for the pursuit of the planning study, with the requirement that the APC formally invoke their remedy in their contract in pursuit of reimbursement by SunCal. Member Matarrese also requested that the work done by the contractor be under public domain so that it is not proprietary to APC since it is being underwritten by the ARRA. Vice Chair deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of October 7 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese did not attend the October 7th meeting but will attend the RAB meeting on Nov. 4. Member Matar… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-11-03.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-12-01.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-12-01 | 2 | 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speakers. 6. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS 6-A. Alameda Point Community Forums Update. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services gave a presentation and an overview of the community forums. She provided a link to the workbook that people can participate in the going- forward process: ww.alamedapoint-goingforward.com Speakers: Philip Tribuzio, Henry Hernandez 6-B. Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Board Composition: Options for New Structure (continued from November 16, 2010). The Interim City Manager provided a presentation to update the Board on the 'Going-Forward" plan. Speakers: Honora Murphy, John Knox White, Anne Spanier, John Spangler There was confusion among the public regarding the topic of Item 6-B. Member Tam explained that the confusion comes from the wording of the item. The item is an update of the Going- Forward plan, and not a recommendation to change the ARRA Board Structure. Chair Johnson further clarified that this item is not before the Board for a decision, and that the Interim City Manager presented the item as an introduction of the concept, which the Board could either pursue or abandon. Member Gilmore expressed concern that there were advisory groups for Alameda Point that were active for many years [Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG), Alameda Point Advisory Commission (APAC)], but that they were ultimately dissolved by the ARRA. Member Gilmore's concern was that expanding the ARRA Board meant putting important decisions in the hands of non-electeds. Vice Chair deHaan expressed concern that he didn't want his elected position to be undermined by introducing a new structure or re-establishing an advisory group. It would be counter- productive to the long-standing mechanisms currently in place. Member Tam premised her statement by requesting that her comments be taken in the context that she is giving her opinion, and not trying to develop consensus for direction. Member Tam commented that the ARRA's amended by… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-12-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-01-05.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-01-05 | 2 | 2 consultant team are working together to respond to the RFQ. Placeholders have been put on all Council/ARRA agendas before the March due date in case policy direction is needed. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services summarized the RFQ, stating that the initial phase is for 500,000 sq. ft. of space. Staff is working closely with the Navy (property owners) on policy issues that may need to be discussed with the Board. The short list will be in April. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services will discuss the developer solicitation process on the 18th in response to the RFQ, and before the short list. Other bases have been jump-started by large institutional user like LBL, it is a great catalyst and opportunity to get Alameda Point started. Member Johnson asked about the location and competitors. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded that the location was very specific: 20 - 25 minutes from blackberry gate; and that the biggest competitor is LBL's own property at Richmond Gild Station, 90 acres along the waterfront. The cities of Berkeley and Emeryville are also included. Member deHaan inquired if LBL is looking for land site or adaptive reuse. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that since LBL needs state of the art R&D facilities, they want to find new construction. In initial conversations, the area that stands out is the area south of Atlantic. Construction would start in July 2013 in areas without cleanup issues. Chair Gilmore requested the RFQ be posted on the City's website so that the Board can access it and be prepared to get questions answered. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated that the Golden Gate Yacht Club and Oracle Racing announced that the America's Cup #34 will be held in San Francisco in 2013. In anticipation of the event, staff sent event organizers a letter reemphasizing the city's support for the San Francisco bid, and where Alameda can be helpful, i.e., host supportive services on Alameda Point for the America's Cup - ha… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-01-05.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-02-02.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-02-02 | 2 | Chair Gilmore reminded staff that she has asked for a real estate leasing primer from staff, and would like this primer before a property manager RFP, because it will inform the RFP. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services replied that the leasing primer has been put in a draft scope for an economics firm to help staff put together a presentation. The primer will be done as soon as there is an economist on board. The project management team is working with the Federal Government, Veteran's Administration, on their project as a potential institutional user; as well as with the Alameda Point Collaborative (APC) and Building Futures for Women and Children, consolidating their facilities to meet their longer term needs, but on a smaller piece of land. The Public Works department will be implementing a federal transportation administration grant for transportation improvement and routes at Alameda Point. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services prepared a budget of the project, which will be discussed further on 2/15 at the mid year adjustment. The Planning Services Manager discussed the adopted general plan for Alameda Point. Member Tam discussed the importance of engaging the school district, East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD), Peralta Community College District, as they were not included in the outreach. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that staff will be meeting with the EBRPD tomorrow, and will include these agencies in the outreach. Vice Chair Bonta supports moving forward with the Going Forward process, as the plan provides specificity and focus, with flexibility - an important balance. Member Johnson and Chair Gilmore also support moving forward. Chair Gilmore emphasized the importance of flexibility. She stated that the process and plan couldn't be so rigid that opportunities are missed. Speakers: Doug Biggs, Rob Ratto, Elizabeth Greene, Helen Sause, Carol Gottstein, Nancy Hird, Gretchen Lipow, Karen Bey. Member deHaan moved to approve endorsing the Alameda Point "Goi… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-02-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-03-02.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-03-02 | 2 | Chair Gilmore reminded staff that she has asked for a real estate leasing primer from staff, and would like this primer before a property manager RFP, because it will inform the RFP. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services replied that the leasing primer has been put in a draft scope for an economics firm to help staff put together a presentation. The primer will be done as soon as there is an economist on board. The project management team is working with the Federal Government, Veteran's Administration, on their project as a potential institutional user; as well as with the Alameda Point Collaborative (APC) and Building Futures for Women and Children, consolidating their facilities to meet their longer term needs, but on a smaller piece of land. The Public Works department will be implementing a federal transportation administration grant for transportation improvement and routes at Alameda Point. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services prepared a budget of the project, which will be discussed further on 2/15 at the mid year adjustment. The Planning Services Manager discussed the adopted general plan for Alameda Point. Member Tam discussed the importance of engaging the school district, East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD), Peralta Community College District, as they were not included in the outreach. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that staff will be meeting with the EBRPD tomorrow, and will include these agencies in the outreach. Vice Chair Bonta supports moving forward with the Going Forward process, as the plan provides specificity and focus, with flexibility - an important balance. Member Johnson and Chair Gilmore also support moving forward. Chair Gilmore emphasized the importance of flexibility. She stated that the process and plan couldn't be so rigid that opportunities are missed. Speakers: Doug Biggs, Rob Ratto, Elizabeth Greene, Helen Sause, Carol Gottstein, Nancy Hird, Gretchen Lipow, Karen Bey. Member deHaan moved to approve endorsing the Alameda Point "Goi… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-03-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-04-06.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-04-06 | 2 | John McManus, senior director of Cushman & Wakefield was available to answer questions. Chair Gilmore expressed concern that implementing a long term lease strategy that is niche- focused will take as long as implementing a development plan. Mr. McManus replied that a reuse strategy is different than a build-to-suit strategy, stating that it is important that it is clearly defined what is available. Advised a strategy to show potential office buildings with a potential floor plan and be able to explain to potential tenants that all risks have been removed and understand what can be delivered. Chair Gilmore clarified that in order to effectively market Alameda Point, money needs to be spent upfront to determine concept buildings or concept plans apart from what the master plan ends up being. Mr. McManus agreed with Chair Gilmore, stating that there needs to be a clear definition, and if it is left to the potential tenants to figure out, in an environment where there is so much vacancy, chances are that Alameda Point will not get their attention unless it's a very unique use with a big footprint. Member Tam inquired about the element of competition in the marketplace, asking what kind of recommended capital outlay is needed for Alameda Point to have a competitive edge. Mr. McManus stated that the good competitive news is that redevelopment and enterprise zones are not going to be competitors for Alameda Point. Joe Ernst, SRM associates, added that there is so much obsolescence of space - there is no longer a need for more plain office space -- and it is a function of understanding the market for spaces and uses that cannot be developed elsewhere, and aligning with the right team to develop it. Vice Chair Bonta inquired if there are market segments performing differently than the market trends. Mr. Ernst replied that those segments with superior performance include life sciences, such as the LBNL opportunity, light industrial, and R&D flex space. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated that the next st… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-04-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-06-01.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-06-01 | 2 | Member deHaan reported that the RAB is starting to look at the fuel distribution system underneath the runway, adjacent to the lagoon. He explained that since it is fuel, the clean up might be problematic, but easier to remediate than heavy metals and PCBs as in other sites. 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS (11-052) Alameda Point Update The Deputy City Manager - Development Services gave a short update. Alameda Point was among six other sites LBNL short-listed for its second campus. Staff is working with the development team daily to prepare high quality responses to upcoming submittals to LBNL. The final selection process will be in November. A two-hour developer interview was held on May 31st, which included a 30-minute presentation, by the development team. The presentation included case studies of projects they worked on, project delivery, and public outreach plans. Staff plans to have other informal meetings with the development team. A community meeting is scheduled for July 13th from 7-9:30 p.m. Staff is looking at various suitable venues, in terms of capacity and access. There will be an extensive outreach plan, including revamping and developing a separate website focused on LBNL, and a Facebook page which will be managed by a marketing company - all in an effort to access different populations that have not been accessed before. Staff and the development team will be making presentations to different organizations throughout the city. Staff will provide a packet of the community outreach materials to the City Council at its June 21st meeting. Regarding the larger master planning efforts of Alameda Point, staff held its first webinar on May 18, 2011 to impart the financial basics on how the pro forma works more generically, and details on infrastructure costs related to the existing entitlement, which is the general plan. A Transportation workshop was held on May 26, 2011. There was a presentation that detailed case studies of how other commun… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-06-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-09-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-09-07 | 2 | November. Regarding the larger redevelopment of Alameda Point, there are ongoing negotiations with the Navy re: conveyance of property, continuing conversation with State Lands re: Tidelands Trust Exchange. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point will come back to the ARRA with updates in the next couple of months. Member deHaan asked to confirm the LBNL timeline. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point explained that the UC Regents meets every two months, if the timeline were to slip, or if they were not ready to make a selection in November, the issue will slip to the next meeting in January. The City Manager informed the Board that staff has informally heard that the selection may indeed slip to January, but reassured the Board that staff is completely ready and has not asked for any extension as others have. Alameda is on time, on budget, and will be ready for a November meeting if it happens. Staff is urging a prompt decision. 8. REFERRALS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 9. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member deHaan discussed that the Associated Community Action Plan (ACAP) will have their last meeting next week. He recommends that community members view their audit, which was released to the public. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 7:19 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary Regular Meeting ARRA September 7, 2011 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-09-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-10-05.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-10-05 | 2 | 81 Member Tam discussed the City's other obligation to provide work-force and affordable housing. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point informed the Board that since staff has been receiving a lot of inquiries regarding remediation, there will be a presentation from the Environmental Consultant, Peter Russell, at the November ARRA meeting. Chair Gilmore stated that, in addition to the no-cost conveyance, the City gets control over the land. This is a valuable opportunity to develop more long term leases because we can provide tenants with certainty. Member deHaan recognized and thanked the members of the BRAG and other numerous community organizations over the past 15 years. Chair Gilmore joined Member deHaan in recognizing the community organizations that brought us to this point. Member Bonta moved to approve the Term Sheet. Member Tam seconded the motion. On the call for the question, the motion carried by a roll call vote: Member deHaan - Aye, Member Johnson - Aye, Member Tam - Aye, Vice Chair Bonta - Aye, Chair Gilmore - Aye. Ayes: 5. Noes: 0. Abstentions: 0 5. ORAL REPORTS (11-071) Oral Report from Member deHaan, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) Representative - Highlights of September 1, 2011 RAB Meetings. Member deHaan introduced Richard Banger, RAB member, who was present in the in audience. Mr. Banger compiled a great amount of information on the history and activity regarding the remediation of Alameda Point on his website: www.alamedapointenvironmentalreport.com The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point added that, with Mr. Banger's help, key information about remediation will be included on the City's website. Staff is also working with the Environmental Consultant, Peter Russell, to provide a less technical, shorter executive summary, but have technical minutes still available. 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) Carol Gottstein, Alameda citizen, spoke about the base cleanup and informed the public about the repository at City Hall West which includes a large amount of inform… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-10-05.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-11-02 | 2 | Chair Gilmore thanked Dr. Russell and members of the RAB for their technical expertise and diligence over the decade and more. 5. ORAL REPORTS (11-076) Oral Report from Member deHaan, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) Representative - Highlights of October 6, 2011 RAB Meetings. Member deHaan echoed the statements from Dr. Russell's presentation and reminded the public that the remediation is ongoing, and that a vast majority of property will be given to the ARRA with certain restrictions. 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS None. 8. REFERRALS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 9. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 8:12 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary Regular Meeting ARRA November 2, 2011 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-12-07.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-12-07 | 2 | With reasonable costs, a developer can provide ideas to test assumptions. ARRA has a fund balance, with a certain amount spent on planning. Options will be explored to find ways to leverage for upfront costs. Staff is exploring other sources of low cost capital with contingencies built into the costs, with the same analysis used for other options. Vice Chair Bonta inquired about the developer role as an advisor to ARRA. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point explained that ARRA would be the property owner and maintain control over entitlement process. With the understanding that ARRA is not a developer, put out an RFQ for a development advisor, with a recommendation that the advisor actually be a developer with experience working on large-scale projects, not just a consultant. In this advisor role, the developer would actually work for the ARRA, are paid a monthly fee, but their contract can be terminated by the ARRA. The advantage from a transaction standpoint is that it would be a simple contract; the advisor has no actual rights to development or land. The concept is that the ARRA maintain control, work in a partnership, but ARRA would be the leader. Vice Chair Bonta inquired if there are any examples of that type of partnership. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point stated that Hamilton AFB is a similar example. Hamilton hired a team of advisors, which included attorneys and economic consultants who planned and entitled all of Hamilton. They did an RFQ with developers and negotiated purchase and sale, but had entitlements all upfront. Member Johnson expressed concern about handling the most difficult parcels or areas that will take longer to clean up. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point discussed starting up efforts and creating value will make the property more valuable. Less money is taken out of the project by a master developer, which leaves more money in the project for development itself. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point informed the Board that staff would be coming back to… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-12-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2012-01-04.pdf,2 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2012-01-04 | 2 | Member deHaan expressed concern about how to address the community process. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point explained that there was feedback from the community that there is a bit of fatigue on community meetings. The focus now is to engage the tenants. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point agreed with Member deHaan that the Economic Development Commission and other formal bodies should be engaged. Vice Chair Bonta moved for approval of the staff recommendation. Member Johnson seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (12-006) Approve Amendment No. 2 to the Memorandum of Agreement between the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and the United States Navy for the Economic Development Conveyance of Portions of the Former Naval Air Station Alameda. Chair Gilmore stated that although the No-Cost Economic Development Conveyance is overshadowed by the redevelopment news, it is still amazing and exciting news. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point agreed and provided a summary of events. The ARRA approved a term sheet with the Navy on October 5, 2011. The term sheet contemplated a no-cost conveyance of Alameda Point from the Navy to the ARRA consistent with the 1996 Reuse Plan. The Term Sheet became the final amendment to the existing 2000 Memorandum of Agreement with the Navy. The Chief Operating Officer - Alameda Point discussed the changes, including the conveyance schedule, the enforcement mechanism, use of proceeds, and the addition of submerged lands. The conveyance schedule contemplates a vast majority of the property coming to the ARRA by the end of 2012. Chair Gilmore thanked staff for working tirelessly and effortlessly over the years to make the No- Cost Economic Development Conveyance happen. Proponent: Helen Sause, Housing Opportunities Make Economic Sense (HOMES). Member Tam moved for approval of the staff recommendation. Member Johnson seconded the motion. Chair Gilmore requested a roll-call vote be conducted: Vice Chair Bonta - aye, Member deHaan - aye… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2012-01-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-01-04 | 2 | the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (*05-004) - Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on December 21, 2004. Approved. (*05-005) Ratified bills in the amount of $4,037,089.03 (*05-006) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of $127,102.65 to Stewart & Stevenson for Ferry Vessel Reduction Gears, No. P.W. 10-04-15. Accepted. (*05-007) Recommendation to terminate the Contract with J.W. Riley & Son, Inc. for Alameda Point Multi Use Field, No. P.W. 12-02-18 and authorize project completion. Accepted. (*05-008 - ) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of $45,000 to Maze and Associates for Financial Modeling Services. Accepted. ( *05-009) Recommendation to accept Annual Review of the Affordable Housing Ordinance. Accepted. (05-010) Recommendation to approve Agreement between the Alameda Unified School District and the City of Alameda for Use and Development of Real Property at the K-8 School and Park site in the Bayport Residential Development Project. Mayor Johnson stated that the Agreement facilitates the goal for having the school and the park built near the Bayport residential area. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether there is funding for the Preschool and Tiny Tots at the Community Building, to which the Recreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (*05-011) - Recommendation to accept the Bayport Residential Interim 115Kv overhead power line improvements and authorize recording a Notice of Completion. Accepted. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 January 4, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-01-18 | 2 | Michael John Torrey, Alameda, commented on the importance of donating blood. (05-030) Presentation by Peter Simon, Dean, College of Alameda and Liz Sullivan, Organizer with Oakland Community Organizations regarding the proposed Oakland Aviation High School at the Oakland Airport. Withdrawn by presenters. (05-031) Presentation of letters of appreciation to members of the Alameda Police Department by NC1 Danielle Carter, Recruiter, Naval Reserve Recruiting Area Pacific. NC1 Randy Montrose, Recruiter in Charge, Naval Reserve Recruiting Area Pacific, presented letters of appreciation to members of the Alameda Police Department ; Sergeant Jill Ottaviano, Alameda Police Department, accepted the letters of appreciation on behalf of the Alameda Police Department. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar, including continuing the Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of J. Barni to February 1; continuing the Public Hearing to consider Amendment to Zoning Map to February 1; and noticing the Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of Rita Mohlen for a later date. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent Mayor Johnson - 1. ] [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. ] (*05-032) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Community Improvement Commission (CIC) Meeting of December 21, 2004; the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on January 4, 2005; and the Special Joint City Council, CIC and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Meeting of January 5, 2005. Approved. (*05-033) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,049,755.31. (05-034) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Planning Board's approval of Design Review, DR04-0101, to allow a 5,300 square foot new commercial building (veterinary hospital) to replace approximately 2,000 square feet of commercial buildings, with a parking lot expansion to 23 spaces; and adoption of related resolution. The property is located at 1410… | CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-01-31 | 2 | Authority, the Port of Oakland, and the City of Oakland for the Cross Airport Roadway Project (Ron Cowan Parkway) Accepted. ( *06-035) - Recommendation to accept and authorize recording a Notice of Completion for the Bayport Stormwater Pump Station System Improvements. Accepted. (*06-036) Recommendation to authorize execution of a lead-based paint hazard reduction Grant Agreement with Alameda County Lead Poisoning Prevention Program. Accepted. (*06-037) Resolution No. 13920, "Approving the Application for California Cultural and Historical Endowment (CCHE) under the California Clean Water, Clean Air, Safe Neighborhood Parks and Coastal Protection Act of 2002. " Adopted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (06-038) Resolution No. 13921, "Appointing Michael B. Cooper as a member of the City Recreation and Park Commission. Adopted and (06-038A) Resolution No. 13922, "Appointing Dora J. Dome as a member of the City Social Services and Human Relations Board. " Adopted. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolutions. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. The City Clerk administered the Oath and presented a certificate of appointment to Ms. Dome. (06-039) Resolution No. 13923, "Commending Alameda Police Lieutenant Bob Cranford for his contributions to the City of Alameda. " Adopted. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Mayor Johnson read the Resolution. The Acting Police Chief accepted the Resolution on behalf of Lieutenant Cranford and expressed Lieutenant Cranford's appreciation for the Resolution. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 January 17, 2006 | CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-02-01 | 2 | the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number . ] (05-049) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council meetings held on January 18, 2005. Mayor Johnson requested that the minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting should be revised to reflect that she was not absent. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Special City Council Meeting and revised Regular City Council Meeting. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (*05-050) Ratified bills in the amount of $4,627,942.61. (*05-051) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Investment Report for period ending December 31, 2004. Accepted. (*05-052) Recommendation to approve Agreement with Ameresco Half Moon Bay, LLC for the purchase of power from Landfill Gas Generation. Accepted. (*05-053) Resolution No. 13812, "Authorizing the Application to CalTrans for a Bicycle Transportation Account Grant for Improvements to the Bay Farm Island Bicycle Bridge Approach. Adopted. (05-054) Resolution No. 13813, "Authorizing the Application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for a Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Grant for the Cross Alameda Trail Phase I." Adopted. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the purchase of the right-of- way for the linear park was part of the Alameda Belt Line property, to which the Public Works Director responded in the affirmative. The City Attorney stated that the Alameda Belt Line litigation Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 February 1, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-02-15 | 2 | (*05-075) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report for the second calendar quarter of 2004. Accepted. ( *05-076) Resolution No. 13815, "Appointing an Engineer and an Attorney for Island City Landscaping and Lighting District 84-2. " Adopted. (*05-077) Resolution No. 13816, "Appointing an Engineer and an Attorney for Maintenance Assessment District 01-01 (Marina Cove) . Adopted. (*05-078) Resolution No. 13817, "Amending the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Salary Schedule by Establishing a Salary Range for the Position of Inventory Control Clerk. " Adopted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (05-079) Resolution No. 13818, "Appointing Dennis J. Hanna as a Member of the Social Service Human Relations Board.' Adopted. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. The City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented Mr. Hanna with a Certificate of Appointment. (05 -080 - ) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code to Increase the Composition of the Golf Commission from Five to Seven Members by Amending Subsections 2-9.1 (Commission Created; Composition), 2-9.2 (Membership; Appointment; Removal) and 2-9.3 (Voting) of Section 2-9 (City Golf Commission). Introduced. Mayor Johnson stated that she suggested the membership increase because there is a lot of upcoming activity at the golf course, including the new clubhouse; having two more members would help with the workload; the Golf Commission Chair supports the idea. The Interim City Manager stated the golf course has become a large operation; the golf budget is over $5 million; there will be major changes at the golf course that require financial overview in the next few years. Councilmember deHaan stated the Transportation Commission was lowered from nine to seven members; the Recreation and Park Commission has five members; inquired whether the membership of the Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 February 15, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-03-01.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-03-01 | 2 | federal programs in the Administration's 2006 budget. Accepted. (05-096) Adoption of Resolution Approving Parcel Map No. 8574 for a Sixteen Lot Subdivision at Harbor Bay Business Park. Not heard. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (05-097) - Resolution No. 13820, "Commending Recreation and Park Director Suzanne Ota for Her Contributions to the City of Alameda. Adopted. Councilmember Daysog moved adoption of the Resolution. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Mayor Johnson read the Resolution and presented it to Suzanne Ota; stated that Ms. Ota has done an outstanding job. The Interim City Manager presented Ms. Ota with flowers. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that she started her service to the City working with the Recreation and Park Department she always appreciated Ms. Ota's enthusiasm, energy and "can do" spirit. Councilmember Daysog stated that Ms. Ota brings so much joy to so many parts of the community. Councilmember Matarrese stated that the City would miss Ms. Ota; as a citizen as well as a Councilmember, he appreciates the great job that Ms. Ota has done. Councilmember deHaan stated that Ms. Ota should feel very comfortable in her accomplishments. (05-098) Public Hearing to consider rezoning ZA 05-0001/R 05-0001 Zoning Text Amendment/Reclassification to add a Theater Overlay District and rezoning certain properties to include the Theater Overlay Districti and (05-098A) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Section 30-2 (Definitions) ; Amending Subsection 30-3.2 (Combining Districts) ; Adding a New Subsection 30-4.22 (T- Theater Combining District) ; and Repealing Subsection 30-6.23(2) (b) of Chapter XXX (Development Regulations) and Reclassifying and Rezoning Certain Properties Within the City of Alameda to Include the Theater Combining District. Continued to March 15, 2005. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 1, 2005 2 | CityCouncil/2005-03-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-03-15 | 2 | Ordinance Text Amendment ZA03-0003 [paragraph no. [05-115 ] was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Vice Mayor Gilmore moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [ Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number . ] (*05-113 - ) Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting, the Special Joint City Council and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners Meeting, and Regular City Council Meeting held on March 1, 2005. Approved. (*05-114) Ratified bills in the amount of $6,660,114.93. (05-115) Recommendation to adopt Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment, ZA03-0003, - Citywide Guide to Residential Design. Richard W. Rutter, Alameda, stated that the guidelines are a good tool for the public and staff to utilize; urged adoption. Elizabeth Krase, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (AAPS) , stated that the guidelines are long overdue; urged adoption. Kevin Frederick, AAPS, urged adoption of the guidelines. Janelle Spatz, AAPS, stated that AAPS supports and encourages adoption of the guidelines. Ross Dileo, Alameda, urged endorsement of the guidelines. Christopher Buckley, AAPS, urged adoption of the guidelines. Denise Brady, AAPS, stated that the guidelines have been in the works for a very long time; urged adoption. Councilmember Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Matarrese thanked staff for developing the guidelines; stated the guidelines are very comprehensive and provide some good guidance; noted that the window section of the guidelines prohibits use of aluminum windows stated Regular Meeting 2 Alameda City Council March 15, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-03-22.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-03-22 | 2 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- -MARCH 22, 2005- -6:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:45 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider : (05-132) Public Employment - Title: City Manager. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that the Council gave direction to Recruiter. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council March 22, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-03-22.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-05 | 2 | Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [ Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. . ] (*05-138 - ) Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting, the Special Joint City Council and Community Improvement Commission Meeting, and the Regular City Council Meeting held on March 15, 2005; and Special City Council Meetings held on March 22, 2005. Approved. (*05-139) Ratified bills in the amount of $4,165,275.22. (*05-140) Recommendation to accept the City of Alameda Investment Policy. Accepted. ( *05-141) Recommendation to approve two-month Contract extension for William C. Norton for City Manager services. Accepted; and ( *05-141A) Resolution No. 13824, "Requesting that the Public Employee Retirement System Board Waive the 960-Hour Rule for William C. Norton. " Adopted. (*05-142) Resolution No. 13825, "Approving Revised Memorandum of Understanding and Salary Resolution Between the Alameda Police Officers Association Non-Sworn Unit and the City of Alameda for the Period Commencing December 28, 2003 and Ending December 24, 2006. " Adopted. (*05-143) Introduction of Ordinance Approving and Authorizing Execution of Lease Between the City of Alameda (Lessor) and the County of Alameda (Lessee) for Real Property Located at 1429 Oak Street. Introduced. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (05-144) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Planning Board's approval of Rezoning, R04-0002, to rezone 1/2 acre from R-5 to C-C; Variance, V04-0018, for a second driveway when one driveway is permitted by the Alameda Municipal Code; Use Permit, UP04-0013, for expansion of the vet clinic, and Design Review, DR04-0101, to allow a 5,300 square foot new commercial building (veterinary hospital) to replace approximately 2,000 square feet of commercial buildings, with a parking lot expansion to 23 spaces. The property is located at 1410 Everett Street, 2501 Central Avenue and 2507 Central Avenue, in the C-C Community Commercial and R-5 General Residential Zoning Dist… | CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-19 | 2 | recommendation to authorize the Acting City Manager to use $201,000 in Measure B ferry reserves [paragraph no. 05-169], and the Resolution Approving the Application for Land and Water Conservation Fund [paragraph no. 05-174] were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. ] ( 05-163) - Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on April 5, 2005 and the Special City Council Meeting held on April 7, 2005 and April 8, 2005. Approved. (*05-164) Ratified bills in the amount of $1,826,558.48 ( *05-165) Recommendation to approve Agreement with Community Playgrounds, Inc. in the amount of $98,930 for Leydecker Park Playground Renovation Project. Accepted. (05-166) Recommendation to authorize the Acting City Manager or designee to enter into an agreement for the acquisition of real property from the East Bay Municipal Utility District for $110,800 plus closing costs. Councilmember deHaan requested clarification on the impacts of drawing $110,800 from the Recreation and Park Commission's existing budget. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he understood that the $110,800 was coming from the Open Space Fund. Mayor Johnson stated that the Open Space Fund was a result of the property sold at the Harbor Bay Business Park; Council directed that the sale proceeds be placed in a separate Open Space account. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the money was also being used for the Estuary Park Project. The Acting City Manager responded in the affirmative. stated purchasing the full amount of land [for Estuary Park] shown in the General Plan could cost up to $5 million; there will be discussions with the developer and the Bay Conservation and Development Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 April 19, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 2 | (*05-201) Recommendation to authorize Call for Bids for Legal Advertising for the Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2006. Accepted. (*05-202) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Investment Report for period ending March 31, 2005. Accepted. (*05-203) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Financial Report for the period ending March 31, 2005 and approve third quarter budget adjustments. Accepted. (*05-204) Recommendation to set Hearing to establish Proposition 4 Limit for Fiscal Year 2005-06 for May 17, 2005. Accepted. (*05-205) Recommendation to accept the work of SpenCon Construction, Inc. for Repair of Portland Cement, Concrete Sidewalk, Curb, Gutter, Driveway and Minor Street Patching Phase 5, Fiscal Year 2004-05, No. P.W. 08-04-08. Accepted. ( *05-206) Recommendation to approve an Agreement with Alameda County to continue participation in the Alameda HOME Consortium and authorize the Acting City Manager to negotiate and execute necessary documents. Accepted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 05-207) - Resolution No. 13836, "Appointing Ray A. Gaul as a Member of the Golf Commission. Adopted. (05-207A) Resolution No. 13837, "Appointing Bill T. Schmitz as a Member of the Golf Commission. " Adopted. (05-207B) Resolution No. 13838, "Appointing Jane Sullwold as a Member of the Golf Commission. Adopted. Vice Mayor Gilmore moved adoption of the resolutions. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. The City Clerk administered the Oath and presented certificates of appointment to the Golf Commission members. (05-208 ) Ordinance No. 2940, "Reclassifying and Rezoning Certain Property within the City of Alameda by Amending Zoning Ordinance No. 1277, N.S., from R-5 (General Residential) Zoning District to C-C (Community Commercial) Zoning District, for that Property Located at 2507 Central Avenue at Everett Street. Finally passed. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 May 3, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-04.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-04 | 2 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING WEDNESDAY- -MAY 4, 2005- -5:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 5:00 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent : None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider : (05-220) Public Employment; Title: City Manager. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that Council gave direction to the recruiter. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 9:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council May 4, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-12 | 2 | Councilmember Daysog inquired what the outside attorney could do that the Council could not do. Mayor Johnson stated that the Council does not provide attorney services the City Attorney would have a conflict of interest in advising the Council on her contract. Councilmember deHaan moved approval the recommendation predicated on further discussion of the scope of work in closed session. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that a discreet number of issues are of concern; that he was not clear on the conflict. Mayor Johnson stated there would be a conflict if there are legal issues; requested further explanation from the Assistant City Attorney. The Assistant City Attorney stated if Council asks a legal question regarding interpretation of any provision of the City Attorney' S contract or requests the contract be approved as to form, there would be a conflict; the City Attorney would not be able to provide information [legal advice] another attorney's services would be necessary. Mayor Johnson noted that Council has to hire an attorney to sign [approve the form of ] the City Attorney's contract. Councilmember Daysog stated that the City of Oakland requested the City of San Francisco to comment on whether the Oakland City Attorney position should be an elected position. Councilmember deHaan stated the Council needs to understand and clean up the mechanisms of the contract, and ensure the contract language is legal. Mayor Johnson stated when the contract has been changed on a routine basis, outside attorneys have signed [approved the form of ] the contract without communicating with the Council, which is not a very good procedure. Councilmember deHaan stated that the Council is requesting more detailed information. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that the Council is trying to determine the history of the current situation and review salary scales; an Special Meeting Alameda City Council 2 May 12, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 2 | Measure. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember Matarrese stated the schools have an impact on the whole City; the funding will keep programs in place and forestall any possibility of outside control, which would consist of the County or State telling Alameda how to run its school district. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated kids are owed a good, quality education; the City cannot count on the State to provide funding. Councilmember Daysog stated the resolution is of vital interest to the City. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember deHaan stated the quality of education is one of the most important things in the City. Mayor Johnson stated schools would face cuts if the Measure does not pass Senator Perata is trying to equalize State funding of education; school facilities in other communities are higher quality; the Alameda Unified School District has done an excellent job with the amount of funding it receives; she was impressed with the teacher and students when she visited a second grade class at Miller School. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. SPECIAL ORDER OF THE DAY AND REGULAR AGENDA ITEM (05-229) Welcome and presentation honoring Friendship City delegation from Wuxi, China; and (05-229A) Resolution No. 13940, "Recognizing the Selection of the City of Wuxi, China as Alameda's Friendship City and Authorizing the Mayor to Sign a Memorandum of Understanding Regarding the Formulation and Implementation of Sister City Relations. Adopted. Jim Franz and Stuart Chan of the Social Service Human Relations Board introduced interpreter Tu Zhongliang, Deputy Director, Wuxi Municipal Foreign Affairs Office, who introduced the Wuxi delegation: Wang Zhuping, Vice Chairman, Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) ; Zhou Yonggeng, Secretary General CPPCC; Bian He, Deputy Secretary General CPPCC; and Jiang Guoliang, Director of Study, Culture and History CPPCC. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 May … | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-06-07 | 2 | from Out on the Island and the Alameda Lesbian Potluck Society. Ms. Arbuckle thanked the Council for the proclamation and for the recognition of the Gay and Lesbian citizens. REGULAR AGENDA ITEM (05-262) Resolution No. 13846, "Commending Alameda Police Department Officer Frank Damian for His Contributions to the City of Alameda. Adopted. Mayor Johnson read and presented the Resolution to Officer Frank Damian. Officer Damian thanked the Council for the Resolution and stated that it has been an honor to serve with such a great department. The resolution was adopted by consensus - 5. *** Mayor Johnson called a recess at 7:58 p.m. and reconvened the Regular City Council Meeting at 9:55 p.m. *** PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS (05-263) Update on the new main library project. The Project Manager provided a brief update. Councilmember Matarrese thanked the Project Manager for ensuring that the project is on time and on budget; stated that it would be nice not to have to draw down on the $2 million fund redevelopment bond money that has been earmarked for the project. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to accept the City of Alameda Long-Term Park Use Policy [paragraph no. 05-267] and the recommendations regarding Alameda Ferry Services [paragraph no. 05- 270) ] were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Vice Mayor Gilmore moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 June 7, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-06-21 | 2 | Project, No. P.W. 07-02-07 in the amount of $50,000 using Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds for the purchase and installation of bus shelters. Accepted. (*05-303) Resolution No. 13854, "Recommending the Inclusion of Projects in the Alameda Countywide Bicycle Plan. " Adopted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS ( (05-304) - Resolution No. 13855, "Appointing Peter W. Holmes as a Member of the Public Utilities Board. " Adopted. (05-304A) Resolution No. 13856, "Appointing John R. McCahan as a Member of the Public Utilities Board. " Adopted. Councilmember Daysog moved adoption of the resolutions. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. The City Clerk administered the oath and presented certificates of appointment to the Public Utilities Board members. ( (05-305) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code to Change the Name of the Public Art Advisory Committee to Public Art Commission, Transfer Reporting from Recreation and Park Commission to City Council, and Transfer Staffing from the Recreation and Park Department to the Planning and Building Department by Amending Subsections 30-65.3 (Contribution Requirements), 30-65.4 (Public Art) 30-65.5 (Alameda Public Art Fund) , 30-65.7 (Public Art Advisory Committee), , 30-65.8 (Application and Approval Procedures for Placing Public Art on Private Property) , 30-65.10 (Guidelines for Approval) and 30-65.11 (Appeal to the City Council) of Section 30-65 (Public Art in New Commercial, Industrial, Residential and Municipal Construction) Introduced. Richard Neveln, Alameda, stated that changing the name of the Public Art Advisory Committee to the Public Art Commission would involve increased responsibility. suggested that the duties be reviewed. Vice Mayor Gilmore moved introduction of the ordinance. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 June 21, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-06-23.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-06-23 | 2 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND SOCIAL SERVICE HUMAN RELATIONS BOARD MEETING THURSDAY- -JUNE 23, 2005- -7:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the special joint meeting at 7:10 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present : louncilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor Johnson; Board Members Bonta, Chen, Franz, Flores-Witte, Hanna, Hollinger Jackson, Wasko - 12. [Note: Councilmember Daysog could not stay for the entire meeting due to a scheduling conflict. ] Absent : None. AGENDA ITEM (05-318) - Work Session to discuss 2004 Board accomplishments and goals; workgroup accomplishments and 2005 work plans for the Assessment and Awareness Workgroup, Family Services Workgroup and Sister City Workgroup; and Board directions for coming year. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the special joint meeting at 9:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Social Service Human Relations Board June 23, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-06-23.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-06-28.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-06-28 | 2 | City Attorney's office for a future meeting noted the hiring of outside counsel was not part of the budget adoption. Chair Johnson stated the matter could be brought back at the July 5 City Council Meeting if the Council action is not clear. The City Attorney stated the matter is on the July 5 Council agenda per Council's request for discussion in closed session; noted that she was requested to provide a proposal at the last performance evaluation. Chair Johnson stated different interpretations of the Council's actions at the June 7 Council Meeting are not necessary; the Council can place the matter on the July 5 Council Meeting in open session; that she does not believe the matter is a closed session item. Commissioner/Board Member Gilmore stated that she distinctly remembers that there was a certain amount of concern in discussing authorized amounts in open session because of litigation strategies. Chair Johnson stated that the concept needs to be adopted in open session. The City Attorney stated that she is proceeding to provide a proposal at the July 5 Closed Session Meeting in order to not reveal litigation strategies and to respond to the Council's request for additional oversight and threshold identification; any budget amendments should subsequently be placed on an open session agenda; at the last performance evaluation, the Council requested that the matter initially be addressed in closed session. Chair Johnson stated there is also direction that action has to be consistent with the Charter. The City Attorney concurred with Chair Johnson. Chair Johnson stated that the Charter provides that the Council consent to the hiring of outside counsel. The City Attorney distributed an opinion by Robert Logan which addressed budget appropriations and authorizations; stated that it is appropriate for the Council to follow the pattern and practice that has been in place for over 16 years and which was adopted at no less than five public meetings where a budget appropriation for the City Attorney was authorized; stat… | CityCouncil/2005-06-28.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-07-05.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-07-05 | 2 | stated he appreciates Chief Matthews making the Police Department an integral part of the community. Supervisor Lai Bitker presented a proclamation on behalf of the Board of Supervisors; stated she has enjoyed working with Chief Matthews and appreciates his work with children. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS (05-325) Presentation by the Alameda Architectural Preservation Society to the City of Alameda of a Historic Preservation Award for the adaptive re-use of the City Hall West Building at Alameda Point. Denise Brady, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society, presented the Award to Mayor Johnson. Mayor Johnson thanked Ms. Brady and stated that the Award would be displayed in a prominent place in City Hall. (05-326) Library Project update. The Project Manager gave an update on the Library Project. Mayor Johnson stated the Project is progressing very well. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired when the cranes would arrive. The Project Manager responded that the cranes would tentatively arrive on July 25; street closure would be necessary from 6:00 a.m. for about four or five hours for two days. Councilmember Matarrese stated the City is being environmentally conscious with the construction of public buildings. The Project Manager stated the bid received a year ago was approximately 20% over budget. thanked the Council for the foresight to allow the Contract to be negotiated. Mayor Johnson noted that the Pentagon is a LEED certified building. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the 21% project completion was on time. The Project Manager responded in the affirmative; stated an expanded budget and schedule presentation would be provided every six months; stated that another city received revised bids which came in 25% over budget. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 July 5, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-07-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-07-19 | 2 | Mayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to authorize the Acting City Manager to execute a Contract with Masayuki Nagase [05- 348], the recommendation to authorize the Fire Chief to accept the $404,087 Awarding of the Assistance to Firefighters Grant [05-349] and the recommendation to adopt specifications and authorize Call for Bids [05-350] were removed from the consent calendar for discussion. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [ Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. . ] (*05-345) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Social Service Human Relations Board Meeting of June 23, 2005 and the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on July 5, 2005. Approved. Councilmember Daysog requested that the word "scheduling" be inserted prior to "conflict" in the June 23, 2005 minutes [under Roll Call] . (*05-346 ) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,960,630.82. (*05-347) Recommendation to accept the work of Clyde G. Steagall, Inc., for Alameda Point Pier 3 electrical upgrades, No. P.W. 08-02- 08. Accepted. (05-348) Recommendation to authorize the Acting City Manager to execute a Contract with Masayuki Nagase for fabrication and installation of public art work, Cadence of Water, at the new Main Library. Mayor Johnson stated that she would like to see a better representation of the artwork. The Library Director introduced Masayuki Nagase; stated Mr. Nagase has created dozens of public art installations and was the unanimous choice of the Art and Recognition Team. Mr. Nagase stated the artwork consists of eight medallions measuring 4 feet to 7 feet high; the water element theme represents the City's surrounding bay and beach areas. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 July 19, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-08-02.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-08-02 | 2 | Mayor Johnson read and presented the Proclamation to Brad Kruck. (05-379) - Proclamation declaring Irene Hanson to be Alameda's 2004 Housing Choice Voucher Program Rental Property Owner of the Year in the four or more rental unit category. Mayor Johnson read and presented the Proclamation to Irene Hanson. (05-380) Library Project update. The Project Manager gave a brief presentation. Councilmember Matarrese thanked the Project Manager for ensuring that the project was on schedule and for managing the contingency fund; requested that the Project Manager thank the contractors. The Project Manager stated that a second change order, which is a credit back to the Contract, would be brought to the Council next month. Councilmember deHaan stated that he hoped that future reports would be as upbeat as the report presented tonight. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to authorize the Mayor to send a letter to the United States Postal Service [05-383] and Adoption of Resolution Empowering the City Attorney to Employ Special Legal Counsel 105-386] were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [ Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. ] ( 5-381) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Community Improvement Commission (CIC) meeting held on June 21, 2005; and the Special, Special Joint City Council and CIC, and Regular City Council meetings held on July 19, 2005. Approved. ( *05-382) - Ratified bills in the amount of $4,913,721.97. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 August 2, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-08-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-08-16.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-08-16 | 2 | [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number) ] (*05-398) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Community Improvement Commission, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners meeting and the Regular City Council meeting held on August 2, 2005. Approved. (*05-399) - Ratified bills in the amount of $2,127,711.09. (*05-400) Recommendation to accept Quarterly Investment Report for period ending June 30, 2005. Accepted. ( *05-401) - Recommendation to accept Quarterly Sales Tax Report for the period ending June 30, 2005, for sales transactions in the First Calendar Quarter of 2005. Accepted. (*05-402) - Recommendation to authorize the City Manager to execute second amendment to Consultant Agreement with Harris & Associates, extending the term, scope of work and price for services associated with the Webster Street Renaissance Project. Accepted. (*05-403) Recommendation to approve an agreement with Ameresco Keller Canyon, LLC for the purchase of power from Landfill Gas Generation. Accepted. (05-404) Resolution No. 13882, "Creating Special Newsrack Districts in Both the Park Street and West Alameda Business Districts as Authorized in the Alameda Municipal Code Section 22-7, Newspaper and Periodical Vending Machines of Article 1 (Streets) , Chapter XXII (Streets and Sidewalks) " Adopted. Councilmember Matarrese stated that the public should be aware of the Newsrack Ditricts, which go along with the improvements on Park and Webster Streets and increase attractiveness in the business districts. Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association (PSBA) urged adoption of the resolution. Sherri Steig, West Alameda Business Association (WABA) stated WABA supports adoption of the resolution. Councilmember Daysog stated that he would like to recognize the efforts of former Councilmember Karin Lucas; requested staff to review posting signs on historic lampposts. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 August 16, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-08-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-09-06.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-09-06 | 2 | (05-425) Recommendation to authorize the Mayor to send letters to federal legislators supporting S. 1260 (Vitter) S. 113 (Feinstein), H.R. 2353 (Rogers) , and H.R. 3431 (Dent ) which amend federal legislation to further restrict the establishment of tribal gambling casinos. Doug Siden, East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) thanked the Council for the efforts to stop the gambling casino proposal at Martin Luther King Park; encouraged continual vigilance; stated that the Tribe's application has not been withdrawn; there has been no response to EBRPD's communications to the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Mayor Johnson stated there has been a true partnership between all the affected cities, EBRPD, and the County; the public should be informed of federal representatives actions; read a portion of the proposed legislation: stated local control at the federal level means the Governor that she would prefer local control be more local; the Governor does not have much control over casinos there is a lot of important work being done that will help the community. Councilmember Daysog stated that there is a slew of legislation pushing back on casinos' efforts to enter urban areas; H.R. 3431 would ensure local governments within 15 miles of a proposed site have a say ; encouraged H. .R. 3431 be strengthened. Councilmember Matarrese moved to approval of the staff recommendation Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (*05-426) Recommendatior to accept the work of Gallagher & Burk, Inc. for repair and resurfacing of certain streets, Phase 25, No. P.W. 05-04-06. Accepted. (*05-427) Recommendation to approve the Request for Proposals (RFP) for Restaurant and Bar Services at the Chuck Corica Golf Complex. Accepted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (05-428 ) Resolution No. 13888, "Commending Alameda Free Library Director Susan H. Hardie for Her Contributions to the City of Alameda. Adopted. Counci lmember Daysog moved adoption of the resolution. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 September 6, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-09-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-09-20.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-09-20 | 2 | CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Johnson announced that the bills for ratification [paragraph no. 05-450] was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Vice Mayor Gilmore moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [ Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. . ] ( *05-449 - ) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council meetings held on September 6, 2005. Accepted. (05-450) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,807,630.92 Mayor Johnson stated that improvements are being made for buying within Alameda; a lot of office supplies, tires, and auto supplies are purchased outside the City and outside the County; the check register changed to make City versus non-City purchases more apparent ; requested staff to examine how other communities program to buy within the community; spending tax money outside of Alameda should not be done unless necessaryi the Council could adopt a resolution to formalize buying and hiring in Alameda. Councilmember Matarrese suggested that a Buyer position be reviewed; stated there are multiple sources for the same type of materials; the check register shows two places for tire purchases, with one in Oakland; a Buyer position may pay for itself by the money saved in buying in bulk and negotiating contracts. Mayor Johnson stated there are multiple providers for phone service and copy maintenance and repair; some items are bought through a County contract supporting jobs, creating tax revenue, and supporting Alameda businesses are some of the benefits from buying in Alameda. The City Manager stated that all processes are being reviewed; staff is working to have Alameda businesses meet the prices of businesses outside Alameda; bulk purchasing would encourage meeting the prices elsewhere. Mayor Johnson stated the City should be hesitant to have COSTCO memberships; items should be bought in Alameda questioned whether money is really saved when residents' ta… | CityCouncil/2005-09-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-10-04.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-10-04 | 2 | Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [ Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. . ] (*05-481) - Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on September 20, 2005. Approved. (*05-482) Ratified bills in the amount of $2,049,649.49. (*05-483) Recommendation to approve issuance of the Request for Proposals for a Materials Security and Inventory System for the Alameda Free Library Accepted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (05-484) Consideration of City Attorney's Contract Renewal. Continued to the October 5, 2005 Special City Council Meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (05-485 ) Susan Potter, Alameda, inquired on the status of rolling stores stated that she applied for a permit to do business as an espresso truck over a year ago; all County and State health inspections have been passed; other businesses are doing what she has been told she cannot do. Mayor Johnson stated that the issue was referred to the Planning Board. The Assistant City Manager stated the Planning Board had a work session on the issue and was not enthusiastic with moving forward the impacts on community neighborhoods were a concern; staff was requested to work further on the issue; stated a report will be presented to the Council. Mayor Johnson requested that information on the Planning Board's decision be provided. Councilmember Matarrese stated a decision needs to be made on the matter; the law needs to be enforced or changed; mobile vendors should not be allowed if the Planning Board has reservations on the concept. Mayor Johnson inquired whether anything prevented someone from entering into an agreement with a property owner. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 October 4, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-10-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-10-18.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-10-18 | 2 | (*05-502) Resolution No. 13902, "Approving and Adopting the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program Overall Annual Goal of 11% for Federal Fiscal Year 2005-2006. " Adopted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (05-503) Resolution No. 13903, "Appointing Avonnet M. Peeler as a Member of the Civil Service Board. Adopted; (05-503A) Resolution No. 13904, "Appointing Audrey M. Lord-Hausman as a Member of the Commission on Disability Issues. " Adopted; and (05-503B) Resolution No. 13905, "Appointing Janet W. Iverson as a Member of the Historical Advisory Board. (Landscape Architect, Architect, Building Design Seat). " Adopted. Vice Mayor Gilmore moved adoption of the resolutions. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. The City Clerk administered the Oath and presented Ms. Peeler with a certificate of appointment. 05-504) Recommendation to approve the proposed change in roof color for the Alameda Free Library - New Main Library Project, No. P.W. 01-03-01. The Project Manager gave a brief presentation. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the architect recommended a roof color. The Project Manager responded that the architect favored the lighter gray, but would be comfortable with either gray; stated the lighter gray has more reflectivity and would keep the structure cooler. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Library Building Team (LBT) had a strong color preference. The Assistant City Manager responded that the darker gray color was the LBT's unanimous selection. Councilmember Matarrese requested a report outlining items removed through value engineering; requested a run down of cost differences; stated that copper roofs are extremely durable; inquired whether the proposed roof would have yearly maintenance. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 October 18, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-10-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-11-01.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-11-01 | 2 | Councilmember deHaan inquired whether items removed through value engineering were prioritized, to which the Project Manager responded in the negative. Councilmember deHaan requested that items removed through value engineering be prioritized by cost and gain. Councilmember Matarrese stated direction was given to review longevity versus spending; analysis should be given to saving $26,000 today and spending $60,000 for restroom rehabilitation in the future because durable countertops were not installed. The Project Manager stated there was significant discussion on the countertop issues; countertop prices would be provided to the Council. Councilmember Matarrese requested a report on long-term projections for replacement costs. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. ] (*05-519) - Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on October 18, 2005. Approved. (*05-520) - Ratified bills in the amount of $2,861,380.74. ( *05-521) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Investment Report for the period ending September 30, 2005. Accepted. ( *05-522) - Recommendation to authorize the City Manager to pay Bay Ship & Yacht Company $134,598.19 for facility upgrades to the Main Street Ferry Terminal. Accepted. (*05-523) Resolution No. 13906, "Amending Resolution No. 9460 to Reflect Current Positions and Entities to be Included in the City of Alameda's Conflict of Interest Code and Rescinding Resolution No. 13726. " Adopted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 November 1, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-11-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-11-15.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-11-15 | 2 | Parking, with a Three-Hour Maximum Per Car Per space, for the Webster Street and the Park Street Business Districts on December 3, 10, and 17, 2005. Adopted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (05-540) - Michael John Torrey, Alameda, wished everyone a happy thanksgiving. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (05-541) Consideration of Mayor's nominations for appointment to the Economic Development Commission (2 vacancies) and Recreation and Park Commission. Mayor Johnson nominated Morris H. Trevithick to the Real Estate/Land Development seat of the Economic Development Commission and continued the Community at Large vacancy (EDC) and the Recreation and Park Commission vacancy. (05-542) Discussion of a proposal for the City of Alameda, as a participant in the Alameda County Lead Poisoning Prevention Program, to partially fund a survey to be used in analyzing the feasibility of increasing the County Service Area fee for lead abatement education and services. Mayor Johnson stated that Supervisor Alice Lai-Bitker was present to provide the Council with information on the matter. Supervisor Lai-Bitker stated that Mark Allen, Alameda County Lead Poisoning Prevention Program (ACLPPP) Board, was also available to provide the Council with information ACLPPP has provided a great value in preventing lead poisoning among children; government jurisdictions have suffered from financial challenges and budget reductions ; staff layoffs occurred during the current fiscal year ; stated that there has not been a fee increase since the fee was adopted in 1991; now is a good time to examine an increase. pre- - 1978 homes currently have a $10 assessment fee; stated ACLPPP would pay for the cost of an election. Councilmember deHaan inquired how the cities of Oakland, Berkeley, and Emeryville responded to the request to partially fund the survey Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 November 15, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-11-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-12-06.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-12-06 | 2 | for oversights. The Project Manager responded that the Architect does not voluntarily offer to pay recourse would be a claim on the insurance policy. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the first claim could be for the firewall, to which the Project Manager responded the firewall and staircase could be potential claims. Mayor Johnson stated that the project is moving along well; the public is very impressed with the process. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the Consent Calendar with the caveat of withdrawing the recommendation to appropriate $142,000 in Urban Runoff Funds [paragraph no. 05-556] ; noted major inroads have been made on the ferry service. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number ] ( * 05-554) - Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on November 15, 2005. Approved. (*05-555) Ratified bills in the amount of $4,504,278.52 (05-556) Recommendation to appropriate $142,000 in Urban Runoff Funds to repair public storm drainage facilities within the Bridgeside Shopping Center and reimburse Regency Centers for expenditures incurred. Withdrawn. (*05-557) Recommendation to adopt the Ferry Short Range Transit Plan. Accepted. (*05-558) Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications and authorize Call for Bids for Five Police Communications Center Workstations. Accepted. (*05-559) Recommendation to accept the Affordable Housing Ordinance Annual Review. Accepted. (*05-560) - Recommendation to accept the Public Art Ordinance Annual Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 December 6, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-12-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-12-20.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2005-12-20 | 2 | (05-579) - Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report for the period ending September 30, 2005, for sales transactions in the second calendar quarter of 2005. Councilmember deHaan stated that there has been a drastic 16.5% reduction in tax revenue generation; requested a forecast for the upcoming quarters. The Finance Director stated that the sales tax consultant advised her that sales tax receipts were not reported for the transportation and business-to-business categories during the third quarter the non-reporting occurred throughout the State; sales tax receipts should be reported in the next quarterly report for businesses headquartered in the southeast Gulf area; the report should be received the first part of January. Councilmember deHaan stated there was an 80% reduction in the commercial production, an overall 21.8% reduction in business-to business, and retail dropped 16.5% inquired what attributed to the 16.5% reduction in retail. The Finance Director stated that the reported geographic areas show downturns on Park Street and Webster Street as well as areas south of Lincoln Avenue; the decline could be attributed to construction activity as well as businesses coming in and out; stated that one, specific business was not inordinately impacted; impacts were across the board. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the sales tax for the area north of Lincoln Avenue dropped immensely because of the economy. The Finance Director stated that she did not know why there was a decline in the area; under-reporting could have occurred. Mayor Johnson requested more information on under-reporting. The Finance Director stated that reports were late in coming to California for some businesses such as a multi-state business headquartered in Mississippi. Mayor Johnson inquired when the report would be available, to which the Finance Director responded the first part of January. Mayor Johnson requested an update when the final figures are received from the State. The Finance Director stated that the figures wo… | CityCouncil/2005-12-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-01-03.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2006-01-03 | 2 | CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Johnson announced that the bills for ratification [paragraph no. 06-004], the recommendation to accept the work of Golden Bay Construction [paragraph no. 06-005], and the recommendation to approve an increase for the Construction Contract with Ghilotti Brothers, inc. [paragraph no. 06-006 were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [ Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. ] ( *06-003) - Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on December 20, 2005. Approved. (06-004) - Ratified bills in the amount of $2,904,675.88. Mayor Johnson stated that she was impressed with the progress staff has made in purchasing within Alameda; requested staff to check on the possibility of purchasing tires in Alameda. Councilmember Matarrese inquired why there are a number of negative amounts on the last page of the register. The Finance Director responded the negative amounts indicate that a credit memo was issued or an offset occurred to a payment. Councilmember Matarrese inquired why Dang & Trachuk had a $16,000 negative on the check register. The City Attorney responded the negative $16,000 was for the Alameda Belt Line litigation. Councilmember deHaan stated that departments are paying attention to where money is being spent; reporting has shown a marked improvement. Councilmember deHaan moved approval of ratifying the bills in the amount of $2,904,675.88. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 January 3, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-01-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-02-07.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2006-02-07 | 2 | Councilmember Daysog stated that the City should be proud of the knowledgeable residents involved with the Airport Operating Committee; the progress has been positive. Mayor Johnson stated that resident knowledge has been extensive. Councilmember deHaan inquired when regional dialogue would commence regarding the other runways. Mr. Grossman responded preliminary discussions have been initiated with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and Regional Airport Planning Committee; the work should start within the year and continue to be a multi-year process. Councilmember deHaan stated Alameda's voice is important throughout the process. (06-060) Library project update. The Project Manager gave a brief update. Mayor Johnson inquired whether branch library hours would cover the Main Library hours during the closure. The Acting Library Director stated covering the hours was not feasible because extra staff was needed for the tagging process; the public would be advised on the closure through a major press release along with a notice from the schools; staff could review the matter again. Mayor Johnson inquired whether collections would be tagged on the weekends. The Acting Library Director responded collections would be tagged six days a week at the Main Library; the branch library collections would be tagged on the existing closed days [Friday and Sunday]. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the branch library collections would be tagged in two days. The Acting Library Director responded in the negative; stated the branch library tagging will not start at this time the two-week process would concentrate on the Main Library. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether high school students or temporary staffing could help with the tagging process. The Acting Library Director responded in the negative; stated the Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 February 7, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-02-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-02-21.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2006-02-21 | 2 | Communications Center Workstations for the Police Department from Wright-Line Technical Environment Solutions in the amount of $45,535.03. Accepted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS ( 06-082) Resolution No. 13927, "Appointing Lorre Zuppan as a member of the Economic Development Commission. Adopted. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the Resolution. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. The City Clerk administered the Oath and presented a certificate of appointment to Ms. Zuppan. (06-083) Report on proposed PERS Golden Handshake Retirement under California Government Code Section 20903. The Human Resources Director provided a brief report. Councilmember deHaan inquired what are the procedures for moving forward with the Golden Handshake program. The Human Resources Director responded interested employees would need to file retirement papers with PERS by June 30; stated PERS would provide a notice to the employees and would make adjustments for the two years additional credit once the employees start receiving pension checks. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the matter would return for Council action. The Human Resources Director responded that a resolution will be presented to the Council on March 7. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether a certain number of people are required to participate in the program, to which the Human Resources Director responded in the negative. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether a reduction in the work force would be necessary if individuals do not take advantage of the program, to which the Human Resources responded staff reduction might be necessary. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated fourteen classifications are listed; inquired whether each classification has only person or more than Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 February 21, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-02-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-03-07.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2006-03-07 | 2 | Mayor Johnson stated that Advanced Cell Technologies is a new company at the Business Park. (06-108) Library Project update. The Project Manager provided a brief presentation. REGULAR AGENDA ITEM (06-109) Consideration of change order for first floor ceiling treatment for the New Main Library Project. Mayor Johnson stated that putting items back into the project is good; the wood ceiling would make the New Main Library more beautiful. Councilmember Matarrese stated the change order is a good way to spend the additional money; the risk goes down as the project nears completion; now is the time to invest the money back into the project. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether there is a difference between the durability of the cherry wood ceiling and the acoustical tiles and whether the Library Building Team or Project Manager had a top priority add-back. The Project Manager responded the ceiling change order is the only choice; stated the architect asserts to the durability of the cherry wood ceiling in his letter; acoustical tiles cannot be cleaned; a wood ceiling can be cleaned. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether there is a number two add- back that the money should be spent on. The Project Manager responded other value engineering items cannot be added back due to scheduling restraints; small items could be put back. Councilmember Matarrese requested that a value-engineering list be provided to the Council in an Off Agenda Report. Councilmember Daysog stated the New Main Library is for all of Alameda: the Council should move forward if the change order improves the beauty of the Library; inquired whether the interest earned on Measure O funds would be used, to which the Project Manager responded in the affirmative. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 March 7, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-03-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-03-21.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2006-03-21 | 2 | [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. ] ( *06-139) - Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on March 7, 2006. Approved. (*06-140) Ratified bills in the amount of $1,993,920.94. ( *06-141) Recommendation to adopt Specifications and authorize Call for Bids for furnishings in the New Main Library. Accepted. (*06-142) Recommendation to release Request for Proposal for network equipment and services for the Alameda Free Library. Accepted. (*06-143) Recommendation to accept the work of Richard Heaps Electric, Inc. for the Pole-Mounted Radar Speed Display Signs Project, No. P. W. 06-05-05. Accepted. Mayor Johnson requested staff to review areas for additional sign locations; stated the speed signs are a preventative measure. The City Manager stated that the Pubic Works Department is working with the Police Department on some type of monitoring that would measure the signs' effectiveness. Mayor Johnson inquired whether speeds could be monitored mechanically; inquired how much the signs cost. Councilmember deHaan responded the costs are noted in the ledger. Jon Spangler, Alameda, stated he hopes that more signs are installed; the pedestrian right-of-way enforcement works; more education is needed. Mayor Johnson stated the area is safer if signs help to reduce speed. (*06-144) Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications and authorize Call for Bids for Fernside Boulevard pedestrian access improvements near Lincoln Middle School (Safe Routes to School) , No. P.W. 11-02-15. Accepted. (*06-145) Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications and authorize Call for Bids for the Fiscal Year 2005-2006 repair of Portland Cement concrete sidewalk, curb, gutter, driveway and minor street patching, No. P. W. 03-06-06. Accepted. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 March 21, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-03-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-04-04.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2006-04-04 | 2 | Councilmember deHaan inquired how close the parking spaces need to be to the Library site, to which the Project Manager responded 400 feet. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the adjacent property [Gim' S ] owner could be asked to stabilize the building or at least get the building painted. The Project Manager responded that he plans to speak to the property owner; stated the building is leaning towards the back. Councilmember Matarrese stated that people concerned with the historical aspect of the building should be involved; the development has the potential to be attractive all the way up to Park Street. Mayor Johnson stated that Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (AAPS) should be involved; they [Gim's owner ] submitted plans to the Historical Advisory Board in January. The Project Manager stated development plans for the property have been submitted. Councilmember Matarrese stated that everything should be done to make the site look good. The Project Manager stated that he would contact the property owner before his next presentation to Council. CONSENT CALENDAR (06-169 - ) Recommendation to release Request for Proposals for Thin Client Public Access System for the Alameda Free Library. (06-170) Recommendation to release Request for Proposals for equipment, software, and services for a computer laboratory for the Alameda Free Library. The Project Manager provided a brief presentation. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the computers would be leased or purchased, to which the Project Manager responded that the computers would be purchased. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that technology changes rapidly inquired whether leasing would be more cost-effective. The Project Manager responded that the matter would be reviewed and Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 April 4, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-04-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-04-18.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2006-04-18 | 2 | Proclamation provided the Council with flyers that were distributed to Girl Scout troops. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the Consent Calendar. . Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent Vice Mayor Gilmore - 1. ] [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. ] ( *06-201) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on April 4, 2006, and the Special City Council Meeting held on April 5, 2006. Approved. ( 06-202 - Ratified bills in the amount of $2,827,937.04. ( *06-203) Recommendation to approve the Amended and Restated Housing Assistance Agreement, Attachment A to the City Manager Employment Agreement, and authorize the execution of related documents. Accepted. (*06-204) Recommendation to adopt plans and specifications and authorize Call for Bids for repair and resurfacing of certain streets, Phase 26, No. P.W. 03-06-08. Accepted. (*06-205) Resolution No. 13943, "Amending the Alameda City Employees Association (ACEA) Salary Schedule by Establishing the Salary Range for the Classification of Permit Technician III." Adopted; and 06-205A) - Resolution No. 13944, "Amending the Management and Confidential Employees Association (MCEA) Salary Schedule by Establishing the Salary Range for the Classification of Police Records and Communications Manager. Adopted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (06-206) ) Public Hearing to consider a recommendation to adopt Fiscal Year 2006-2007 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Action Plan and authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute related documents, agreements, and modifications. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager provided a brief presentation. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 April 18, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-04-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2006-05-02 | 2 | Councilmember deHaan stated there are structural concerns with the historic building; inquired whether there are ways to ensure that the asset stays in tact. The Project Manager responded in the affirmative; stated plywood bracing could be applied to the interior and corners. Mayor Johnson inquired whether spending money on cosmetic improvement makes sense if structural work is not performed to make the building sound; the community considers the building to be a historic asset; the building should be painted for the grand opening; grant money should not be spent on the façade if the owner is not committed to perform structural work. The Project Manager stated the façade grant money could pay for a decent paint job and window replacement. Councilmember deHaan stated the question is whether the building is in jeopardy of being lost; inquired whether the owner's application addresses the shoring up of the building. The Project Manager responded that the current application includes a foundation replacement and structural stabilization; stated he has not been in the building for over six years; the building appears to have a five-degree tilt towards the back; the permit addresses using the structure as a tearoom, which prompted the involvement of the Health Department. Councilmember deHaan stated that he would like to see other City departments engaged in the process, particularly the Planning Department. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the owner was hung up with the County Health Department and whether the City could concurrently process the rest of the application The Project Manager responded Health Department requirements trigger other requirements stated a straight rehabilitation application could move forward fairly quickly. Mayor Johnson inquired whether an application went to the Historic Advisory Board (HAB) . The Project Manager responded that the HAB issued a partial demolition permit for up to 30% of the structure. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the application was for the historic structure alone, t… | CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-05-03.pdf,2 | CityCouncil | 2006-05-03 | 2 | indicated that approximately 100 cities are in the same position as the City of Alameda. Mayor Johnson stated the requirements should not change for bids that have already gone out. The Public Works Director stated staff tried to reason with CalTrans; an April 14 e-mail stated CalTrans was considering the [DBE program] change, but instructed the City not to use sample boiler plate language provided; CalTrans implied there would be a grace period; finding out about the change yesterday was a shock. Councilmember Matarrese requested that the documentation be provided to the City Manager to start building the City's case. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated there is nothing to prevent CalTrans from changing regulations again; the letter should explain the position the City was put in by CalTrans and put CalTrans on notice that the City would like accommodations and a grace period in the future. Councilmember deHaan stated there could be costs involved with the delay in the project or a cost differential in bids; there is an unfair advantage. Mayor Johnson stated contractors put together bids in good faith; CalTrans causing the City to reject bids is unfortunate for the City and the contractors. Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation with the direction that the City go forward with a strong rebuttal. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent Councilmember Daysog - 1. ] Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 6:58 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council 2 May 3, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-05-03.pdf |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE "pages" ( [body] TEXT, [date] TEXT, [page] INTEGER, [text] TEXT, [path] TEXT, PRIMARY KEY ([path], [page]) );