pages
1,915 rows where page = 3
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: body
date (date) >1000 ✖
- 2005-05-12 3
- 2007-02-28 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
- 2008-10-27 3
- 2010-07-26 3
- 2010-10-06 3
- 2011-04-06 3
- 2013-07-24 3
- 2015-07-27 3
- 2015-10-26 3
- 2017-01-11 3
- 2005-01-05 2
- 2005-01-18 2
- 2005-01-24 2
- 2005-01-31 2
- 2005-02-28 2
- 2005-03-10 2
- 2005-04-07 2
- 2005-04-19 2
- 2005-04-25 2
- 2005-05-23 2
- 2005-07-13 2
- 2005-07-14 2
- 2005-07-20 2
- 2005-07-25 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
- 2006-04-24 2
- 2006-06-07 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
- 2006-11-01 2
- 2006-11-08 2
- 2006-11-15 2
- 2006-12-11 2
- 2006-12-13 2
- 2007-01-31 2
- 2007-02-26 2
- 2007-03-26 2
- 2007-03-28 2
- 2007-04-04 2
- 2007-04-18 2
- 2007-04-23 2
- 2007-07-11 2
- 2007-07-23 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
- 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
- 2008-08-13 2
- 2008-08-25 2
- 2008-09-10 2
- 2008-09-22 2
- 2008-10-01 2
- 2008-11-12 2
- 2008-11-18 2
- 2008-11-19 2
- 2008-12-10 2
- 2009-01-26 2
- 2009-02-23 2
- 2009-03-23 2
- 2009-04-01 2
- 2009-04-27 2
- 2009-07-27 2
- 2009-09-10 2
- 2009-09-28 2
- 2009-10-07 2
- 2009-10-26 2
- 2009-11-12 2
- 2010-01-06 2
- 2010-02-22 2
- 2010-03-22 2
- 2010-04-26 2
- 2010-05-24 2
- 2010-06-24 2
- 2010-07-07 2
- 2010-09-27 2
- 2010-11-03 2
- 2011-01-05 2
- 2011-02-23 2
- 2011-02-28 2
- 2011-03-28 2
- 2011-07-25 2
- 2011-09-26 2
- 2011-10-11 2
- 2011-10-12 2
- 2011-12-01 2
- 2011-12-14 2
- 2012-01-04 2
- 2012-01-11 2
- 2012-02-27 2
- 2012-04-23 2
- 2012-05-03 2
- 2012-06-06 2
- 2012-06-25 2
- 2012-07-11 2
- 2012-08-27 2
- 2012-08-28 2
- 2012-11-08 2
- 2012-11-13 2
- 2013-01-28 2
- 2013-03-14 2
- 2013-04-11 2
- 2013-07-22 2
- 2014-01-27 2
- 2014-04-01 2
- 2014-10-27 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
- 2015-11-18 2
- 2016-01-07 2
- 2016-01-25 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
- 2017-02-22 2
- 2017-04-24 2
- 2017-07-05 2
- 2017-07-12 2
- 2017-07-17 2
- 2017-10-02 2
- 2018-01-03 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
- 2018-12-17 2
- 2019-01-09 2
- 2019-01-10 2
- 2019-01-23 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
- 2019-09-25 2
- 2019-11-12 2
- 2019-12-18 2
- 2020-03-10 2
- 2020-07-09 2
- 2020-07-14 2
- 2020-08-17 2
- 2020-11-18 2
- 2020-12-14 2
- 2021-01-25 2
- 2021-03-24 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
- 2005-01-06 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
- 2005-02-10 1
- 2005-02-14 1
- 2005-02-15 1
- 2005-02-16 1
- 2005-02-23 1
- 2005-02-24 1
- 2005-03-01 1
- 2005-03-02 1
- 2005-03-03 1
- 2005-03-14 1
- 2005-03-15 1
- 2005-03-16 1
- 2005-03-24 1
- 2005-03-28 1
- 2005-04-05 1
- 2005-04-06 1
- 2005-04-11 1
- 2005-04-14 1
- 2005-04-20 1
- 2005-04-27 1
- 2005-04-28 1
- 2005-05-03 1
- 2005-05-09 1
- 2005-05-17 1
- 2005-05-18 1
- 2005-05-26 1
- 2005-06-01 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
- 2005-06-23 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
- 2005-08-22 1
- 2005-08-25 1
- 2005-09-01 1
- 2005-09-06 1
- 2005-09-12 1
- 2005-09-14 1
- 2005-09-15 1
- 2005-09-20 1
- 2005-09-21 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
- 2005-11-01 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
- 2006-02-22 1
- 2006-02-27 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
- 2006-05-24 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
- 2006-09-27 1
- 2006-10-03 1
- 2006-10-05 1
- 2006-10-09 1
- 2006-10-11 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
- 2006-11-29 1
- 2006-12-05 1
- 2006-12-14 1
- 2006-12-19 1
- 2007-01-02 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
- 2007-01-29 1
- 2007-02-01 1
- 2007-02-06 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
- 2007-03-08 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
- 2007-04-25 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
- 2007-05-23 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
- 2007-07-18 1
- 2007-07-25 1
- 2007-07-26 1
- 2007-07-30 1
- 2007-08-07 1
- 2007-08-08 1
- 2007-08-15 1
- 2007-08-21 1
- 2007-08-22 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
- 2007-12-05 1
- 2007-12-06 1
- 2007-12-10 1
- 2007-12-12 1
- 2007-12-18 1
- 2008-01-02 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
- 2008-02-07 1
- 2008-02-11 1
- 2008-02-19 1
- 2008-02-20 1
- 2008-02-25 1
- 2008-02-27 1
- 2008-03-04 1
- 2008-03-13 1
- 2008-03-18 1
- 2008-03-19 1
- 2008-04-02 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
- 2008-05-06 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
- 2008-07-02 1
- 2008-07-09 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
- 2008-10-02 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
- 2008-11-06 1
- 2008-11-13 1
- 2008-11-20 1
- 2008-11-24 1
- 2008-12-02 1
- 2008-12-03 1
- 2008-12-04 1
- 2008-12-08 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
- 2009-01-14 1
- 2009-01-20 1
- 2009-01-21 1
- 2009-01-22 1
- 2009-01-28 1
- 2009-02-03 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
- 2009-03-05 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
- 2009-04-15 1
- 2009-04-21 1
- 2009-04-22 1
- 2009-04-23 1
- 2009-05-05 1
- 2009-05-11 1
- 2009-05-13 1
- 2009-05-14 1
- 2009-05-19 1
- 2009-05-27 1
- 2009-06-02 1
- 2009-06-08 1
- 2009-06-10 1
- 2009-06-16 1
- 2009-06-17 1
- 2009-06-25 1
- 2009-06-29 1
- 2009-07-01 1
- 2009-07-07 1
- 2009-07-08 1
- 2009-07-13 1
- 2009-07-15 1
- 2009-07-21 1
- 2009-08-03 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
- 2009-11-05 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
- 2010-01-25 1
- 2010-01-26 1
- 2010-02-03 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
- 2010-03-03 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
- 2010-04-06 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
- 2010-05-06 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
- 2010-06-14 1
- 2010-06-15 1
- 2010-06-16 1
- 2010-06-21 1
- 2010-06-28 1
- 2010-07-06 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
- 2010-09-09 1
- 2010-09-13 1
- 2010-09-21 1
- 2010-09-22 1
- 2010-09-25 1
- 2010-10-05 1
- 2010-10-11 1
- 2010-10-13 1
- 2010-10-14 1
- 2010-10-19 1
- 2010-10-20 1
- 2010-10-25 1
- 2010-10-28 1
- 2010-11-04 1
- 2010-11-08 1
- 2010-11-10 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
- 2011-01-04 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
- 2011-02-01 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
- 2011-03-09 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
- 2011-04-25 1
- 2011-04-28 1
- 2011-05-03 1
- 2011-05-05 1
- 2011-05-11 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
- 2011-07-19 1
- 2011-07-28 1
- 2011-08-04 1
- 2011-09-01 1
- 2011-09-06 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
- 2011-11-01 1
- 2011-11-02 1
- 2011-11-08 1
- 2011-11-09 1
- 2011-11-14 1
- 2011-11-15 1
- 2011-11-28 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
- 2012-02-02 1
- 2012-02-07 1
- 2012-02-09 1
- 2012-02-13 1
- 2012-02-21 1
- 2012-02-22 1
- 2012-02-23 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
- 2012-03-20 1
- 2012-03-22 1
- 2012-03-26 1
- 2012-03-28 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
- 2012-05-01 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
- 2012-06-11 1
- 2012-06-12 1
- 2012-06-14 1
- 2012-06-19 1
- 2012-06-26 1
- 2012-06-27 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
- 2012-07-31 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
- 2012-09-13 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
- 2012-10-29 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
- 2013-01-09 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
- 2013-04-08 1
- 2013-04-10 1
- 2013-04-16 1
- 2013-04-18 1
- 2013-04-22 1
- 2013-04-24 1
- 2013-05-07 1
- 2013-05-13 1
- 2013-05-21 1
- 2013-05-28 1
- 2013-06-04 1
- 2013-06-05 1
- 2013-06-10 1
- 2013-06-11 1
- 2013-06-18 1
- 2013-06-24 1
- 2013-06-26 1
- 2013-06-27 1
- 2013-07-02 1
- 2013-07-23 1
- 2013-07-30 1
- 2013-08-19 1
- 2013-09-03 1
- 2013-09-12 1
- 2013-09-17 1
- 2013-09-24 1
- 2013-09-25 1
- 2013-09-26 1
- 2013-09-30 1
- 2013-10-01 1
- 2013-10-02 1
- 2013-10-07 1
- 2013-10-15 1
- 2013-10-23 1
- 2013-10-28 1
- 2013-11-04 1
- 2013-11-05 1
- 2013-11-14 1
- 2013-11-19 1
- 2013-12-03 1
- 2013-12-04 1
- 2013-12-11 1
- 2013-12-17 1
- 2014-01-07 1
- 2014-01-09 1
- 2014-01-13 1
- 2014-01-15 1
- 2014-01-21 1
- 2014-01-22 1
- 2014-01-23 1
- 2014-02-04 1
- 2014-02-10 1
- 2014-02-18 1
- 2014-02-19 1
- 2014-02-20 1
- 2014-03-04 1
- 2014-03-10 1
- 2014-03-13 1
- 2014-03-18 1
- 2014-03-24 1
- 2014-03-26 1
- 2014-04-02 1
- 2014-04-10 1
- 2014-04-14 1
- 2014-04-15 1
- 2014-04-23 1
- 2014-04-24 1
- 2014-04-28 1
- 2014-05-06 1
- 2014-05-08 1
- 2014-05-12 1
- 2014-05-14 1
- 2014-05-20 1
- 2014-05-27 1
- 2014-05-28 1
- 2014-06-03 1
- 2014-06-09 1
- 2014-06-12 1
- 2014-06-17 1
- …
Link | body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-01-05.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-01-05 | 3 | impact their contingency or any other line items contained in the ARRA-led predevelopment budget. 8. ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION OF THE ARRA TO CONSIDER CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR: 8-A. Property: Alameda Naval Air Station Negotiating parties: ARRA, Navy, and Alameda Point Community Partners Under negotiation: Price and Terms Announcement of Action Taken in Closed Session: The ARRA received a briefing from the Real Property Negotiator; no action was taken. 9. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Johnson adjourned the open session meeting at 6:11 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Frankel ARRA Secretary 3 Y:\Comdev\Base Reuse& Redevp\ARRA\MINUTES\2005\01-05-05 Regular. ARRA minutes.doc | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-01-05.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-02-02.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-02-02 | 3 | 5-B. Oral report from Member Matarrese, RAB representative. RAB met on January 6, 2005. Key topics were the Seaplane Lagoon; site 17. The draft feasibility study was presented. A timeline for implementing remediation for that site in 2006 was discussed. This would be the actual remediation of contaminants in the Seaplane Lagoon. An update of action on the Miller School and Woodstock Child Care Center, site 30 and the remediation activities that went on there. New RAB member, Joan Conrad, voted in. Next meeting is February 3, 2005 at 6:30 pm. 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 7. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member Mataresse thanked staff for all the work done, particularly with getting community workshops together and stated that he's very interested in the Transportation workshop on March 23rd, acknowledging that having a transportation infrastructure in place before a development increases the value of the land because it's there and not an encumbrance. A meeting on February 18, 2005 is schedule to reactivate our liaison committee with AC Transit Propose to discuss transportation with a BART liaison committee. Chair Johnson suggests our liaison committee should schedule a meeting with BART, which may need council approval. States BART is a big issue for Alameda. Stephen Proud stated that the logistics had not been worked out yet, but mentioned that it would be hosted as a joint workshop with either one of the boards or commissions and the APAC but that the 4th workshop would be a more general public forum. There was nothing formal discussed for a 5th workshop. Member DeHaan would like to see the Economic Development Commission host the 5th meeting. Chair Johnson stated that discussions regarding EDC hosting had already been done. Chair Johnson asked if there was a public outreach planned. Prior ones very well attended. Great benefit that these workshops are broadcasted live. 9. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Johnson adjourned the open session meeting at 7:51 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-02-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-03-02.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-03-02 | 3 | Chair Johnson stated that the information given at the workshops should include the fact that some solutions are never going to happen because they are so expensive, or at least not in the foreseeable future. There are some solutions that are feasible long term, but we're looking at short term feasible solutions that can get started even before base development starts. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 4-A. Recommendation to approve a 10-year lease agreement with Nelson's Marine for Building 167. Nanette Banks, Finance and Administration Manager introduced David Jaber, regional vice- president of PM Realty Group. Mr. Jaber presented a short analysis regarding the Nelson's Marine issue. Mr. Jaber recommends the lease and supports the market rent for Nelson's Marine. He also analyzed the $34M difference that was presented by the boat yard attorney at the last ARRA board meeting. Mr. Jaber gave a brief background and discussed how the fair market value of the Nelson's Marine rent was determined: Nelson's Marine was one of the first groups out to Alameda Point, with a 5 year lease which contained a clause that allowed for renewal at 90% of fair market value. This survey was performed by Dunn Associates and that helped determine the fair market value. The fair market value component provided by Dunn & Associates was on the base rent. When the rent survey was done, the focus was on four things: 1) review of the lease and the leases, 2) site coverage ratio, 3) the gross rent and net rent conversion, 4) the review of the rent per square foot. Mr. Jaber gave a review of the leases, comparing the costs between two boat yard leases for taxes, insurance, and maintenance. He analyzed the numbers -- using a 20 yr. term to help explain the differential -- which showed that the $34M loss, proposed by the opposing four boatyards, was not supported. His analysis further justified that the net lease proposed comes out with the appropriate rate. Mr. Jaber concluded that the fair market value -- the 31.5 % based upon the 90% of fair market value … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-03-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-04-06.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-04-06 | 3 | Matthew Ridgway and Michael Keeling from Fehr and Peers gave the transportation presentation. (Both the entire presentations are available for review and are on file with the ARRA Secretary) Mr. Ridgway gave an overview of the transportation strategy that has been developed and discussed some of the major components for sustainable transportation, including land use strategy, employment and retail, residential and retail, and to discourage auto use. The presentation included a menu of options and the challenges that go along with those options. There was much discussion about the Tubes getting more constrained and congested from the development within the region and Oakland. Mr. Ridgway presented some ideas about how to minimize the impact on the tube. The initial transportation strategy includes the use of ECO passes - the cost of purchasing ECO passes will be built into the homeowner's association fees for anybody who lives at Alameda Point. It will be built into the fees that are part of the employment component of Alameda Point as well. The plan also includes shuttle buses, enhanced ferry services to include bike stations, car share programs, multi modal transit center, onsite transportation coordinator (a person who organizes the car pools and van pools, makes sure the shuttles are operating efficiently) etc. The presentation also included BART and AC Transit options/route alternatives as well as a light rail option (Cybertran). In June, the transportation options will be moved on to a more detailed evaluation and the next steps include two major components: 1) continue to look at the long term transit options and 2) take the short terms transit options that we've talked about and look at them with much more detail so that we have something that is ready to construct on opening day of the project. Another point, according to the MTC, in terms of land use densities to support transit, Alameda would be considered suburban - rural, the density that you are talking about would fit into that category, which in th… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-04-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-04-19.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-04-19 | 3 | Member Gilmore summarized the challenges of reducing the amount of expenditures in the ARRA budget, by allowing the general fund to absorb those expenditures. Bill Norton replied that staff provided the ARRA Board with this detail to see the impact of the changes on the general fund. 3-B. Recommendation to Authorize the Executive Director to Direct P.M. Realty, Acting as Property Manager, to Enter Into a Contract with Courtney Giampolini to Waterproof City Hall West (Building One) in an Amount not to Exceed $966,650 Nanette Banks provided photos of the extensive water damage in various locations of Building 1(City Hall West). Building 1, like other buildings at Alameda Point, have problems that require a lot of work, specifically asbestos remediation, lead paint and waterproofing, roof and other capital upgrades. Ms. Banks introduced Rick Jones, construction manager from PM Realty Group. After Mr. Jones explained the problems with the buildings, he and Chair Johnson had conversation about the contractor bidding process and if this process was approved by the ARRA. Ms. Banks explained that in an exhibit to the property management agreement with PM Realty, PM Realty is allowed to use their own process for selecting contractors for us. Member deHaan, as well as the other boardmembers, expressed concern about the almost $1M.cost for the building repair. Member Gilmore questioned the long-term "guarantees" to this costly solution. She wanted reassurance that the same problems don't resurface in a year, after spending $1M. Mr. Jones explained that there is a 10 yr warranty, which is pretty standard in the industry. Staff and boardmembers discussed other options for housing City Staff. Bill Norton explained that there is no other space available for city staff to move into. There was also further discussion about window replacements. Mr. Jones stated that 40 windows would be replaced, and the other 200 are aluminum. Member Daysog stated that the ARRA is in a fiscal crises and as such non-life threatening projects, like … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-04-19.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-05-12.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-05-12 | 3 | Leslie discussed the employee positions and vacancies in the department and how they fit together with the three budget categories: Community Development, ARRA, and the CIC. Municipal Services funding was noted in length, with Member Daysog requesting a separate report/background information on the mitigation fund. Bill Norton advised that there are still negotiations with the developer upcoming and if the developer exercises their notice to proceed, they will make direct cost recovery payments, until we have a disposition and development agreement, to DSD and the general fund. Member Matarrese advised that we have to be prepared for the developer not exercising their right to proceed, and that if we are able to segregate general fund obligations from ARRA fund obligations, that would be the foundation for making a decision on anything less than the best case scenario. Leslie Little concluded her presentation. 6. ORAL REPORTS 6-A. Oral report from APAC. There were no representatives from the APAC to give a report. 6-B. Oral report from Member Matarrese, RAB representative. Member Matarrese gave a brief overview of the last RAB meeting he attended. 7. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) (Any person may address the governing body in regard to any matter over which the governing body has jurisdiction that is not on the agenda.) 8. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY 9. ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION OF THE ARRA TO CONSIDER: 9-A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR: Property: Alameda Naval Air Station Negotiating parties: ARRA, U.S. Navy, and Alameda Point Community Partners Under negotiation: Price and Terms 9-B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR: Property: Alameda Naval Air Station Negotiating parties: ARRA and U.S. Navy Under negotiation: Price and Terms Announcement of Action Taken in Closed Session, if any. 10. ADJOURNMENT 3 L:\Comdev\Base Reuse& Redevp\ARRA)MINUTES(2005\May 12. Special ARRA.minutes.doc | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-05-12.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-06-01.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-06-01 | 3 | 5. ORAL REPORTS 5-A Oral report from APAC. Chair Lee Perez was not present and the ARRA Secretary read written comments from Helen Sause regarding her concerns on the redevelopment of Alameda Point. Chair Johnson advised that it was unclear whether Ms. Sause's written note were drafted with Lee Perez as the APAC oral report, or if she intended them to be just public comment. 5-B. Oral report from Member Matarrese, RAB representative. Member Matarrese said he would have two RAB at the July 14th ARRA meeting. 6. ORAL COMMUNICAITONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) (Any person may address the governing body in regard to any matter over which the governing body has jurisdiction that is not on the agenda.) There was one speaker slip, Virginia Roberts, who supports Helen Sause's comments regarding appointing a citizens committee to assist with the Alameda Point redevelopment. Chair Johnson noted that public involvement is always encouraged and would like people to continue to participate in the process. 7. COMMUNICAITONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY There was no additional communications from the Board. 8. ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION OF THE ARRA TO CONSIDER CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR: Chair Johnson advised that this item was a place holder in case it was needed, but that there was no item to discuss. 9. ADJOURNMENT Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 9:37 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary 3 L:\Comdev\Base Reuse& Redevp\ARRA)MINUTES\2005\June 1.Regular ARRA minutes.doc | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-06-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-07-14.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-07-14 | 3 | Regarding the Historic Preservation, Mr. Thomas discussed that there was a lot of community involvement with questions regarding which buildings and homes to keep and which to get rid of. The residential portion of the plan included 3000 new units: homes for sale and rentals. There were several speakers who discussed various topics related to the PDC, including: - Conversion of the naval base - Measure A - Adequate school facilities at AP. - Transportation planning - Solar energy equipment - Keeping the BOQ building for Veterans or Senior Housing - Historic District Preservation - Housing for all income levels 7. ORAL REPORT 7-A. Oral report from APAC. No oral report. 7-B. Oral report from Member Matarrese, RAB representative. Councilmember Matarrese discussed topics from the last RAB meeting, including clean-up methods, and how petroleum is being extracted. He also gave an update on the BCT activities and the schedule for the site management program, which lists all the clean-up activities. 8. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) No speaker slips. 9. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None 10. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 10:21 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary 3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-07-14.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-10-05.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-10-05 | 3 | Alex McElree, Executive Director of Operation Diginity, requested the ARRA Board encourage the City Council to fulfill the promise they made to Operation Dignity and to the homeless through the homeless conveyance of the McCain/Feinstein Act and build the 39-Units (homes). 6. COMMUNICATIOS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY. None. 7. ADJOURNMENT: Meeting was adjourned at 8:29 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary 3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-10-05.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-12-07.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2005-12-07 | 3 | Preservation: Emphasize the need to get information at the earliest possible date so that the information could be used in the process of developing a plan which is then ultimately evaluated in the EIR, and NOT when the final EIR comes out. 5. Appendix E - What would Phase I of Fiscal Mitigation payment be? And an explanation of why we are not contemplating municipal services fee (like Bayport)? 6. Continued emphasis that this "Preliminary" plan document is a step to a "Final' plan. All Boardmembers accepted staff recommendation to bring back a Final version of the PDC in February 2006. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, RAB representative. Boardmember Matarrese reported on the RAB meeting from November because he did not attend the Dec. meeting (he was attending D.A.R.E.) There was a presentation on the remediation strategies for Site 27, between Appezzato Memorial Parkway and Nelson's Marine. There were a wide range of options (9 remediation strategies), and there was a uniform recommendation and vote to advise the Navy to use the most efficient and rapid remediation strategy. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) Marilyn York, Barbara Bach, and Ken Robles of the Alameda Naval Air Museum spoke about their proposed 10-year lease. Chair Johnson advised that they are looking forward to receiving the lease for review but have not seen it come to the Board yet. 6. COMMUNICATIOS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY. Boardmember Daysog requested the Board address Gail Greeley's issues regarding Home Sweet Home and moving a portable building. Member Matarrese requested an off-agenda report addressing this same issue. 7. ADJOURNMENT: Meeting was adjourned at 9:14 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary 3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2005-12-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2006-02-01.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2006-02-01 | 3 | Page 3 know that ARRA does not own the property yet. Member Matarrese repeated the notion of ensuring ample time for dealing with Historic properties, having advanced notice for ARRA, Planning, and the public - to understand what's ahead. Member Daysog motioned for approval of this item. The motion was seconded by Member deHaan and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes - 5: Noes - 0; Abstentions - 0 3-B. Recommendation to Approve a 20-year Lease with the Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD). Nanette Banks, Finance and Administration Manager of DSD, presented the Board with the lease, gave an overview of MARAD, a tenant on the base since 1997, and explained that the lease negotiations have been going on since May 2002. The lease being presented included two components: the lease combines the MARAD warehouse and pier uses. In addition to generating, under this new lease, a proposed $1.8 M in the first two years with 3% increases, MARAD is the largest electricity user in Alameda and responsible corporate citizens. They' ve already spent $1M on dredging, an ARRA obligation, but MARAD put the money up front. Chair Johnson discussed security fencing, possibilities of reconfiguring least intrusive manner. Member deHaan asked whether MARAD discussed possibilities of shouldering relocation of Hornet and the different scenarios regarding the Hornet's location. Ms Banks replied that MARAD couldn't make an initial investment and it is an obligation of ARRA, but that the 3% increase in rent should pay for whatever decision is made. Member deHaan stated that MARAD should strive to find dollars to relocate the Hornet, since it's to their benefit. Chair Johnson suggested that MARAD may have better access to homeland security money. Under the new lease, gross lease revenue for the first 2 years is 1.8M per year. Net is $800,000 to ARRA Chair Johnson requested a copy of pro forma. She also emphasized an important attachment - Exhibit H - which outlines ARRA's obligations under the lease. Ms. Banks explai… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2006-02-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2006-09-06.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2006-09-06 | 3 | Member Matarrese and Chair Johnson asked what portion of Triangle Park Improvements the $250,000 would buy us. Referring to a map, Mr. Siden described the lower end toward Encinal High School and the City's mini park and said that the EBRPD will maintain it. Member Matarrese asked the ARRA Executive Director, Debra Kurita, to get staff to work on a way to accomplish us getting this investment in town. He expressed concern that the deadline for getting the land dedicated and completing the project is fast approaching and requested this item be moved up on the priority list and brought back to the ARRA Board. Debra Kurita responded that staff will agendize and bring this item back to the Board at its next meeting on October 4, 2006. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 7:36 p.m. Respectfully submitted. Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2006-09-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2006-10-04.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2006-10-04 | 3 | Page 3 forward in negotiating a lease for these specific areas. Member deHaan expressed his desire that EBRPD continue to be involved in the area and asked how the funding stream would be maintained in the future. Mr. Anderson indicated that possibly a small assessment district would have to be established if the project becomes larger. Member Matarrese stated that he would like a long-term commitment from EBRPD for the area. The consensus among ARRA members and EBRPD was the first priority is extending the Bay Trail from the boat ramp along the beach to the Hornet; if additional funds remain, the other areas will be considered. Member Matarrese motioned that EBRPD make improvements on the Bay Trail from the existing boat ramp as far north as possible, including cleaning up the beach. If additional funds remain, they would be used for the picnic area and former RV parking lot. Staff was directed to negotiate a lease with EBRPD to accomplish this. Member Daysog seconded the motion, and the motion passed unanimously. 3-B. Alameda Point Project Update. Debbie Potter, Acting Alameda Point Project Manager, gave an Alameda Point update presentation to the Board. The presentation included a chronology of the ARRA's negotiations with the Navy and an explanation to the community on how we went from "no cost" to paying $108.5 million for the Navy property. Ms. Potter also discussed the master developer, APCP's, election not to proceed with the project and presented staff's recommendation for an initial next step. Ms Potter summarized the genesis of how we got from a no cost EDC to a 108.5 million dollar purchase price: She explained how the ARRA's PDC and the general plan call for over 3 million square feet of commercial development. In January 2004, however, the Navy sent a letter requesting that we submit a formal amendment to our "no-cost" EDC application to formerly make the case about why we felt like we continued to be eligible for a "no-cost" EDC. The Navy's letter further stated that it could not continue to work w… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2006-10-04.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2006-11-01.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2006-11-01 | 3 | an agreement (not even actually shoveling dirt or tearing down buildings, etc.) David Brandt responded that the soonest would be two years. Member Gilmore commented that this increases the timeframe "window" and recommended that when staff returns in January with the study session of the leases, it might be worthwhile to take a look at not just the 3rd and 4th phases, but the 1st and 2nd phases, too. Ms. Little clarified that we will be presenting an entire overview of all the leasing and it can be compared against the PDC. No action was taken on this item - it was an update and for informational purposes only. 3-B. Alameda Point Environmental Remediation Update: Western Shoreline - IR Sites 1,2, and 32, Soil at IR Site 25 (Coast Guard North Housing), and Compliance with Marsh Crust Ordinance Debbie Potter gave an update on the clean-up status of these specific IR sites, as requested at the October 4 ARRA meeting. Peter Russell, environmental consultant from Russell Resources, was available to answer questions from the Board as a follow-up to the staff report provided. Member Matarrese's main concern was the Navy's option to install an engineered cap rather than a soil cover over landfill waste. Member Matarrese, along with the rest of the Board members, discussed at length their preferred alternative: having the Navy scoop out the landfill sites and haul it away. Debbie Potter discussed the process by which Peter Russell reviews all documents the Navy promulgates regarding all IR sites. She explained that we comment during the public comment period, but we do it at a staff level. She agrees with Member Gilmore about the policy-level decision that we want clean-up to a level that supports the community reuse plan and the PDC, and that the Navy has committed to clean-up to the reuses that are identified in the PDC. Ms Potter further explained, and reiterated by Peter Russell, that the ARRA-preferred option to scoop and haul the landfill is not economically feasible - and an engineered cap is potentially equally ef… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2006-11-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-05-08.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2007-05-08 | 3 | Page 3 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY none. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 8:57 by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Have Glidden Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-05-08.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-09-04.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2007-09-04 | 3 | construction, infrastructure, etc. makes the project difficult, and the factors that affect our developer, and would affect any developer, affects the Navy as well. Pat Keliher stated that SunCal has a tactical strategy to deal with the Navy - that they have a streamlined process of sharing technical studies and other documents that underpin the CEQA & NEPA processes; but that there are still a lot of unknowns, including whether there will be funding for clean-up. Chair Johnson compared the Oaknoll site to Alameda, that Oaknoll was a clean site without Tidelands Trust issues. Mr. Keliher reiterated SunCal's commitment to the challenging, but necessary task, stating that SunCal would work with the City of Alameda, their consultants and lobbyists, to deal with the changing climate ahead that may affect things moving forward. The Board thanked Mr. Keliher and SunCal for presenting the Master Project Schedule and expressed it was a job well done. 4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speakers. 5. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 6. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 10:07 p.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-09-04.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-10-03.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2007-10-03 | 3 | consultation to make sure that whatever the VA does, they cannot harm the endangered species. Ms. Potter clarified that the USF&W are not pursuing ownership of the property at this time and that if the Navy goes forward with the property transfer to the VA, the Navy will retain clean-up obligations for the property. Vice Chair Tam questioned what SunCal's follow-up with the VA has been to this point regarding the site, if their dialogue with the VA includes potential alternative sites. Ms Potter responded that SunCal has had one additional follow-up meeting with the VA and that SunCal is aware of their need ultimately, and that this issue is a key item on SunCal's Project Master Schedule. It is noted that Chair Johnson arrived at this point in the discussion (7:52 p.m.). Ms. Potter gave her update on SunCal, including that the first two community meetings have been scheduled, the first on 10/24 at Mastick Senior Center. The agenda for this meeting includes introduction of SunCal and their partners to the community, framing the project and their approach to the project, and site constraints. A second meeting is tentatively scheduled on 12/12 at the O'club to solicit feedback from community regarding the range of development scenarios, and their key focus to continue surveying property and preparing to do sampling - the technical work to support the land-planning effort. Member Matarrese asked if we're on track with zoning issues. Ms. Potter explained that she has prepared an off-agenda report discussing that the status of the public trust designation protects us more than locking in zoning, and recommends that staff not do anything ahead of the entitlement process. FM requested that this item be agendized. Chair Johnson asked if the mortgage crisis is a risk to SunCal. Ms. Potter said that SunCal has reassured they are not impacted by that crisis. Chair Johnson wants to be kept updated of SunCal's activities regarding the project. This report was for information only. No motion or action was required. 3-C. Approve… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-10-03.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-11-07.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2007-11-07 | 3 | from the Planning Dept. Andrew Thomas, Planning Services Manager, wanted clarification on the task force member role to represent their board or commission. Member Matarrese discussed that the memo distributed by Andrew Thomas regarding the roles and responsibilities accurately captured the intent and purpose - which was to increase the familiarity with all the boards and commissions of the plan when it's finished, so they are not seeing it for the first time. The task force is responsible for two things: 1) report back, and 2) advise SunCal on positions their boards and commissions have taken. It is a very clean and efficient way of getting to the point of having the boards and commissions versed in the plan as it is presented to them. Vice Chair Tam expressed her concerns about the members of the task force being asked to refrain from speaking at the Oct. 24th meeting until their roles and responsibilities were clarified. | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-11-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-12-05.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2007-12-05 | 3 | Mr. Jaynes explained the VA's two major construction projects, one for the clinic, one for the cemetery. Both projects are congressionally authorized and appropriated, if approved for the budget, design will begin on the clinic in 2010, with construction completed by spring/summer 2012. The columbarium is on the same timeline, but could be phased and opened sooner. The enhanced use lease is in the concept application process and will go to the Secretary of the VA in the spring, and if approved, the enhanced use process will begin in late spring and work toward having a partner and open in 2012. Member Tam thanked Mr. Jaynes and Mr. Hutchison for the presentation and had some questions: 1) on the discussions the VA has had with the Navy regarding environmental clean-up costs, 2) has there been progress in the VA's coordination with SunCal, and 3) the VA's role and relationship with the Alameda Healthcare District. Mr. Hutchison explained that the VA has had ongoing dialogue with the Alameda District hospital and will be meeting with the new CEO tomorrow morning (Dec. 6) to continue that dialogue and they are very interested in maintaining that relationship with the Alameda Healthcare District. He further explained that the VA has issued an RFP for outpatient services, and that the Alameda Healthcare District has responded. A final determination has not yet been made. As a response to Member Tam's first question about the clean-up costs, Mr. Hutchison discussed that the Navy is responsible for clean-up. The VA's MOU with the Navy will set forth the terms and conditions that outline the requirements of the Navy to bring it up to appropriate commercial standards. The VA does not want to take on liability for contamination over which they had no control. The inter-agency transfer will set forth clearly the Navy's requirements with no dispute between the VA and the Navy as to those requirements. He emphasized that the VA has a significant due diligence process. Member Tam mentioned that since the VA is the alumni assoc… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2007-12-05.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-05-07.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-05-07 | 3 | Respectfully submitted, Aira Ridden Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-05-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-06-04.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-06-04 | 3 | Meeting was adjourned at 7:22 p.m. by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Airan Glidden Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-06-04.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-07-01.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-07-01 | 3 | 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative. Member Matarrese did not have a report, as the next RAB meeting in on Thursday, July 3rd 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) There were no speakers. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Chair Johnson reported that she attended the Spring Meeting for U.S. Conference with Mayors, and that it was very good. Member Tam asked if Chair Johnson had the opportunity to meet Senator Obama. Chair Johnson said she heard and saw Senator Obama speak, but did not meet him. She did, however, get Bill Clinton's autograph. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 1:00 a.m. (7/2/08) by Chair Johnson. Respectfully submitted, Arma Glidden Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-07-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-09-10.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-09-10 | 3 | gives priority to the buses and encourages increased ridership. Mr Keliher added that all questions will be answered between the concept plan submittal and master plan submittal, and that the transportation solution is a driving factor. Member Gilmore requested a meeting before the City Council which is focused on transportation issues be part of SunCal's presentation schedule. Mr. Keliher affirmed her request. Member Gilmore further discussed that the two plans are not Measure A compliant, and asked what SunCal's plan was if the citizens were to reject their proposals. Mr Keliher responded by saying that they have no magic Measure A plan that could be financed, and there is no third alternative, they would have to start over. Member Gilmore appreciated his honesty on the matter. Member Matarrese addressed the transportation issue regarding commercial traffic - truck routes, etc., and asked whether there was going to be a recommendation from the Transportation Commission. Ms. Potter explained that the plan is to route the Development Concept to all the boards and commissions for review and comment. Member Gilmore requested that the school year commute traffic also be addressed. Member Matarrese requested to see a commercial and industrial component of the plan, to be examined with the same depth, what might be envisioned, and what are some of the plans to bring the commercial and businesses in. He further discussed that Alameda does not have a large commercial tax base. Economically, the tax burden is spread and residential tax payers are shouldering the main load and maybe are at capacity. He would like to know the best mix of commercial and how we might attract commercial business. Vice Chair Tam discussed the importance of their role (as the ARRA Board) for the long-term in guiding and approving a Development Plan that future councils and the community can adaptively react to, manage, and govern under different challenges; as this plan will manifest beyond the time that they're on this Board. She stated it is … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-09-10.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-10-01.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-10-01 | 3 | 3-B. Report on Restoration Advisory Board Comment Letter on Installation Restoration Site 1. Ms. Potter summarized that at the ARRA meeting on September 10, the Board received several letters regarding Site 1. Staff was directed to work with the environmental consultant, Dr. Peter Russell, to prepare a response to RAB letters. The ARRA's position is that land fill should be dug up and hauled off, this position has been consistent during the public comment process, which is not concluded. A final draft Record of Decision (ROD) is due on Oct. 28th, which will give us further opportunity to provide comments on the final draft ROD. However, as all of this work has been going on, the results of the additional trenching did not reveal waste, so the sense is that there is no longer a landfill at Site 1. We would like to send a letter to the Navy requesting they do a little more work to determine whether a land fill is still present at Site 1. The Navy began remediation on groundwater contamination. Member Matarrese reminded staff that the original concern expressed was, not that there was a landfill, but that it was uncharacterized and unknown. He wants to make sure all contaminated materials are removed, and inert ones remain in place. Ms. Potter stated that we must go through the CERCLA process, and that the time-critical removal was for the material down to two feet. Member Matarrese asked how Site 1 could be closed if there is still objectionable material there. Ms. Potter responded by stating that the work effort and investigation as part of IR Site 32 work includes going further than two feet, and the moving of the materials allows the changing of the boundaries of the IR sites and what they are studying. Member Matarrese would like a risk assessment provided to the City with anticipated development in mind - to build a case for the ultimate price tag for the property, i.e., if the property goes to auction, the contamination status would affect the price. There were two speakers on this item. James Leach, RAB memb… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-10-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-11-18.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2008-11-18 | 3 | Alameda Point. Mr. Ridgway explained that they have looked at the issue of relocation of the ferry terminal to the estuary or to sea plane lagoon, but have not looked at dredging or fueling stations; and have not reached that level of detail at this point. Another request from the Board was to provide examples of transit alternatives. Fehr & Peers provided a handout with information which cites several examples. Studies included comparative analysis of transit uses among specific cities in the bay area. They are diligent in citing statistics and research conducted nationally to reduce the number of auto trips. Regarding funds for island wide transportation solutions, Mr. Ridgway stated that operating and capital cost are being borne by the Alameda Point project. In response to the request to have an analysis of how many vehicle trips this plan will create, Mr. Ridgway said that a detailed phasing plan will be included in the Dec. 19 draft master plan. Member Matarrese reiterated that the PDC and concept plan didn't address the issue of goods and services moving on and off Alameda Point - truck routes, etc. for commercial and retail. He stressed that this is a critical component that needs to be addressed. For Peter Calthorpe addressed the next category of issues regarding adaptive reuse and light industrial questions, and questions regarding examples of other transit oriented development. Mr. Calthorpe gave a presentation of several examples of comparable mixed use developments, housing over retail, live-work - in other bay area cities including Oakland, Richmond, Daly City, San Mateo, and San Jose. Alameda Point has a unique component to offer which attracts entities to the various mixed-use elements, that Alameda Point has the ability to have a large company "campus". Vice Chair Tam asked Mr. Calthorpe to comment on creating that buffer between the different types of uses so there are no inherent conflicts that city councils have to deal with. Mr. Calthorpe explained that, until you get to real industrial uses,… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2008-11-18.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-01-07.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-01-07 | 3 | determine how to actually finance the project, once the land is conveyed, there are several different mechanisms, including debt & equity. With regard to the bankruptcies on the other projects that SunCal was the operator on, not necessarily the owner of, most all of those were Lehman projects. When Lehman filed bankruptcy and decided to not fund SunCal, SunCal decided, involuntarily, to throw each of those projects into bankruptcy in hopes of forcing Lehman to start to fund those. These projects are independently financed and structured and have absolutely nothing to do with the Alameda Point project. Member Gilmore reiterated the concern regarding SunCall's ability to fund predevelopment expenses. Mr. Keliher explained that if SunCal defaults under the ENA and doesn't perform, it is simply over. He further stated that, to date, SunCal has deposited all the funds. Both Member Gilmore and Mr. Keliher clarified and confirmed that the ARRA is not obligated in any way to reimburse SunCal for the predevelopment funds that have been spent. There was discussion about the historic structures. Mr. Keliher is in agreement with the Board that it's not the wisest move to proactively rip down the structures, and that SunCal will work with staff on working out a process of evaluating the best direction. Member Matarrese offered comments for consideration, including requesting detail of commercial space, and what impact of those spaces would be with regard to traffic and truck routes, and the industrial-type uses. Member Tam also asked about industrial uses, mixed-use and residential. Peter Calthorpe described another similar project in San Jose where there was a balance of use in the commercial, civic, and retail areas. He stated that industrial development needs to be treated in special way, explaining that it has not yet been determined whether there are industrial users that are appropriate for this site and that should be part of the mix. Member Tam asked about the BCDC sea level rise, and the 24" that one speaker mention… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-01-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-04-01.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-04-01 | 3 | Respectfully submitted, Airan Glidden Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-04-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-10-07.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2009-10-07 | 3 | Member Matarrese motioned to approve the allocation of the $500,000 to complete the demolition, and added that the entire cost of the demolition be assigned to Catellus. Member Gilmore seconded the motion and it was passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: o, Abstentions: 0 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS None. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of September 3rd Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese said that the highlight of the meeting was an update and discussion on Site 1, the far northwest end of the wildlife refuge and lower part of Northwest Territories. The Navy presentation refreshed the RAB on boundaries and milestones, the Navy's containment preference to use an engineered four-foot soil cover, and their path forward which included a timeline to Record of Decision (ROD) and remedial action to begin in December of 2010. The RAB's discussion mostly challenged the assessment of that contamination - the fact that the sample site data was old and inadequate. Member Matarrese stated that discussions at the meetings have been heated and required a facilitator. There are people knowledgeable enough to ask very technical questions and the bottom line is that no one is satisfied with the Navy's proposal to cap it with four feet of soil. Member Matarrese was not able to attend the October 1 RAB meeting. The next meeting is Nov. 5. Member Tam asked what the Navy plans to do with the feedback and their plans to go forward with capping, even to our objection. Member Matarrese explained that the Navy was supposed to have a final ROD by September 17th, but does not know if it has been published. The Navy is also supposed to go through the pre-design work this December of whatever solution there might be. ARRA's letter to the Navy stating the objection to the soil capping was also copied to the Congressional delegation, which may garner a little more attention to slow this process down and get a different resolution. Member Matar… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2009-10-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-09-01.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-09-01 | 3 | Member Tam brought attention to the alternative resolution from the Golden Gate Audubon Society which includes recognition that there should be protection for the Least Terns, based on a biological opinion issued by the US Fish and Wildlife. Member Gilmore inquired why the VA was requesting 549 acres when they only require approximately 100 acres for their project, to which Mr. Jaynes replied that the Navy stated the transfer would be the 549 acres or nothing. Mr. Jaynes further explained that it is not part of the VA's mission to manage that portion of property, so the VA is planning to have a separate agreement with the USF&W to oversee the remaining 449 acres, just as the Navy has the same agreement with them right now; the funding will come from the VA instead of the Navy. Member Matarrese inquired if the property was transferred to the ARRA, could the ARRA then dispose of it to the VA, to which the Deputy City Manager, Development Services responded in the affirmative. Mr. Jaynes expressed that there may be stumbling blocks without proceeding with the BRAC process. Member Matarrese inquired whether the city will be able to participate in the VA project process, to which the Deputy City Manager, Development Services responded in the affirmative. Member Gilmore requested more details from the VA regarding what their plans are with USFW, and the proposed annual budget, so that it does not become an afterthought. Member Tam suggested adding the language from the Golden Gate Audubon Society regarding the protection of the Least Tern colony to the ARRA Resolution. Vice Chair deHaan moved for approval of Item 3-A, with a revision to the Resolution adding "Whereas, the City of Alameda will continue to prioritize the protection and conservation of the California Least Tern in its planning documents and decisions". Member Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by a unanimous voice vote: 5 Ayes. 3-B. Presentation: Alameda Point - 'Going Forward'. The Interim City Manager announced that Item 3-C will be combined w… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-09-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-10-06.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-10-06 | 3 | Member Tam inquired if there was opportunity for Alameda to get funding for the EIR process. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services responded in the affirmative, stating that staff has discussed funding possibilities with the Navy. There are some technical issues as the Navy has a contract for their NEPA process, and the City has a CEQA contract, but it may be possible to combine the processes so that it is cost efficient. Member Tam inquired if there are synergies between the sister federal agencies (Lawrence Berkeley Lab is with the Dept. of Energy, and the Veterans Administration has close ties with Navy). The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that, regarding the VA, the Navy understands that there has to be coordination to the extent that City staff can work with the VA to leverage their infrastructure and develop that relationship, not just in terms of regulatory process, but also with actual physical improvements and infrastructure. With regards to the Lawrence Berkeley Lab's requests for proposals for land to host their second campus, the City is prepared to submit a proposal in coordination with the Navy. The Interim City Manager added that the City is prepared to respond to the Lawrence Berkeley Lab RFP process with a very competitive proposal. There are opportunities to have strategic alliances as a result of the DOE and the Navy that makes Alameda Point uniquely competitive. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated that staff will be providing the Board with updates at the monthly ARRA meetings. Vice Chair deHaan inquired if the Navy is willing to do phased conveyance. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that the Navy is exploring the boundaries, the pros and cons of phased conveyance, and that the Navy is open and listening to ideas. There was discussion from the Board about the management of the utilities at Alameda Point and whether there was a formal decision made about it. The Assistant General Counsel - ARRA stated that there has never … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-10-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-11-03.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-11-03 | 3 | ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-11-03.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-12-01.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2010-12-01 | 3 | The Interim City Manager suggested adding an element to the process -- a community forum for principle stakeholders and other governmental agencies/bodies focused on government regulations. Member Tam requested that this issue be included as a future item where the Board can give direction. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services replied that it will be placed on the February agenda. 7. REFERRALS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 8. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member Gilmore reminded staff that she requested a presentation regarding the commercial real estate market as it exists. Vice Chair deHaan stated that the ARRA should be involved in the City of Oakland's discussions regarding the Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the Oakland A's stadium in Jack London Square. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services informed Vice Chair deHaan that Alameda city planning staff is aware of the NOP and will be following it. 9. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 9:11 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2010-12-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-01-05.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-01-05 | 3 | 3 7. REFERRALS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY (11-005) Referral from Chair Gilmore to change the order of the ARRA meetings. Member Johnson moved to approve the referral to change the order of the ARRA meetings. Member Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote 5. 8. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY (11-006) Member Tam commented that with the emerging opportunities, the ARRA should focus on reshaping its Going Forward process and be more "shovel ready"- more prepared with property, parcels, and infrastructure to maximize its competitiveness at Alameda Point. Chair Gilmore requested a timeline of the Going Forward process so that the Board and the public can makes comments and any changes necessary. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated that an update will be presented at the 2/2 ARRA meeting, and the ARRA predevelopment budget would be presented at the 2/15 mid year budget adjustment. Member deHaan asked if staff has interfaced with the new owners of Catellus, TPG Capital LP. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services replied that the Economic Development Director and City Manager were getting up to speed with the new partner. A designated project manager is working with staff. TPG Capital will likely need to come to the Council/CIC because they are changing the development entity in agreement with the CIC. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services discussed that there will be a staff report, update, and presentation from the new partner in the next couple of months. Member deHaan inquired about the interview timeline for the Alameda Point RFQ consultants. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that there were two days of interviews with four consultants: real estate economics, master planning, sustainable design and green infrastructure consultants, and transportation consultants. Contracts will be negotiated in January and will be brought back as part of the mid year budget adjustment to demonstrate to the ARRA how the project will be paid for. There… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-01-05.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-02-02.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-02-02 | 3 | Chair Gilmore inquired where the developer's economic incentive would come from. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services discussed initial ideas, including fee development and private development to land adjacent, and that it was structured in the RFQ to ask each of developers to put forth recommendations. Member Johnson commented that the zero cost idea is worth it to have LBNL at Alameda Point. Member Johnson stated that the project should have a defined, tight design and review process. The Planning Services Manager discussed various ways to structure a design and review process that would give the community assurance of high quality design buildings that would fit within the design expectations of the city and minimize the time and energy LBNL would have to spend in a normal design and review process. Member Tam discussed LBNL's expectation that the ARRA will engage an entity with appropriate development experience. Member Tam inquired whether LBNL could be part of the developer evaluation process so that there is an even playing field with everyone else. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that LBNL clearly stated that a developer team was not required in the initial process but that the project team would check to see if LBNL would like to weigh in on the evaluation so that the ARRA doesn't end up with a partner that could be of a disadvantage. Speakers: Rob Ratto, Elizabeth Greene, Seth Hamalian, Phil Owen, Karen Bey, Nancy Hird. Vice Chair Bonta asked for clarification on the $14M in benefits to the city, inquired about the time period and the assumptions. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that the $14M is based on an economic impact study done for the second campus, and contemplates 800 jobs in the first phase. The economic development manager stated that the study is based on facilities in Walnut Creek and Emeryville, and how much revenue and impacts there were on those host communities. Since that study was done, the LBNL's conception of the second bas… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-02-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-03-02.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-03-02 | 3 | Chair Gilmore inquired where the developer's economic incentive would come from. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services discussed initial ideas, including fee development and private development to land adjacent, and that it was structured in the RFQ to ask each of developers to put forth recommendations. Member Johnson commented that the zero cost idea is worth it to have LBNL at Alameda Point. Member Johnson stated that the project should have a defined, tight design and review process. The Planning Services Manager discussed various ways to structure a design and review process that would give the community assurance of high quality design buildings that would fit within the design expectations of the city and minimize the time and energy LBNL would have to spend in a normal design and review process. Member Tam discussed LBNL's expectation that the ARRA will engage an entity with appropriate development experience. Member Tam inquired whether LBNL could be part of the developer evaluation process so that there is an even playing field with everyone else. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that LBNL clearly stated that a developer team was not required in the initial process but that the project team would check to see if LBNL would like to weigh in on the evaluation so that the ARRA doesn't end up with a partner that could be of a disadvantage. Speakers: Rob Ratto, Elizabeth Greene, Seth Hamalian, Phil Owen, Karen Bey, Nancy Hird. Vice Chair Bonta asked for clarification on the $14M in benefits to the city, inquired about the time period and the assumptions. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that the $14M is based on an economic impact study done for the second campus, and contemplates 800 jobs in the first phase. The economic development manager stated that the study is based on facilities in Walnut Creek and Emeryville, and how much revenue and impacts there were on those host communities. Since that study was done, the LBNL's conception of the second bas… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-03-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-04-06.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-04-06 | 3 | Member Tam concurred with Chair Gilmore and added that economic underpinnings are critical at Alameda Point. Member Tam and Chair Gilmore expressed their appreciation to staff and the community for all their time and effort in the Community Planning Process. 5. ORAL REPORTS (11-039) Oral Report from Member deHaan, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) Representative - Highlights of March 3, 2011 RAB Meeting. Member deHaan reported that the RAB discussed the San Francisco Estuary Regional Monitoring program, a program that monitors 22 water sites in bay, and 47 sediment sites. The RAB would like the program to take on one area of Alameda Point to monitor. The OU2A site, adjacent to Encinal High School, was also discussed. Surface remediation was done, and final remediation will be completed. Tomorrow's meeting (3/4) will include an update on the Seaplane Lagoon. 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS (11-040) Update on Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Second Campus Request for Qualifications. The Deputy City Manager-Development Services gave a presentation on the LBNL Campus opportunity. Representatives from the development teams introduced themselves to the Council: Joe Ernst, SRM; Mary Pampuch, Lankford & Associates, Inc. Speakers: Robert Todd Member Tam inquired whether any of the 21 applicants that had responded have the same type of potential development partner in RFQ process, in particular inquired if Alameda's partners are unique to Alameda. The Deputy City Manager-Development Services responded that to her knowledge, the other sites are already owned by developers or have already teamed with private property owners; the other applicants did not go through an RFQ process for a developer like Alameda, and none of the other teams are teamed with the other sites. Vice Chair Bonta inquired when the announcement of the short list will be made and how short is the short list. The Deputy City Manager-Development Services replied that the call can come throug… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-04-06.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-06-01.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-06-01 | 3 | more improvements needed. Staff is also working with Alameda Municipal Power (AMP) on the calculations. AMP will be able to serve the first phase without a lot of improvements. Vice Chair Bonta inquired what the average number of participants was for the community engagement events and how the information is being disseminated. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that the Transportation Workshop was not well attended, as there was a League of Women Voters event on the same night. There were fewer than 20 people at the Transportation Workshop, and approximately 50 people attended the webinar (35 people attending online with approximately 10-15 present in person). The recording of webinar is available online, and the pdf of presentations will also be posted online. Vice Chair Bonta inquired if the Sustainability workshops will be recorded, stating that the community would take the opportunity to participate and view if it were available online, and that there is value to holding the events in Chambers so that they can be broadcast and recorded. Member deHaan agreed, stating that the community watches meetings on the City's channel 15, and although the audience is small in chambers, there are a lot of home viewers and may reach more people. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services explained that with the Sustainability Workshop in particular, the element of interaction from community is needed. Vice Chair Bonta expressed his appreciation for staff's efforts regarding the July 13th event and inquired about other smaller events for community outreach. The Deputy City Manager - Development Services stated that the team has a calendar of events scheduled. They have met with the Chamber of Commerce, and plan to attend and present at several joint mixers with the WABA, PSBA, Rotary, League of Women, Business Association newsletters, Concerts at the Cove etc. Member Johnson suggested giving a presentation to school board. Member Tam suggested including the Peralta Community College District Board… | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-06-01.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-10-05.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-10-05 | 3 | 82 None. 9. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary Regular Meeting ARRA September 7, 2011 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-10-05.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-11-02 | 3 | Response to Comments on Status Update for the ARRA Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority Meeting - November 2, 2011 Time Comment Marker Response Comments by Dale Smith, Alameda Point Restoration Advisory Board Community Co-Chair 33:49 The residential standards are for groundwater only, and they At Alameda Point, cleanup to residential standards means are not for soil. So the soil has high levels of lead, mercury, that the health risk and health hazard from both soil and cadmium, vanadium, and other toxic metals in the soil that is groundwater (combined) are health-protective for single- not being addressed. family residential land use; which is the most stringent land- use standard. This principle applies to both the CERCLA (Full Comment: The talk of residential standards, when I talk and Petroleum Programs. Accordingly, the concentrations of to community members, they seem to get confused because toxic metals in soil are explicitly considered by the Navy the residential standards are for groundwater only, and they and the environmental regulatory agencies in deciding are not for soil. So the soil has high levels of lead, mercury, whether soil remediation is needed to allow residential land cadmium, vanadium, and other toxic metals in the soil, and use and, if so, the type and extent of that remediation. that is not being addressed as far as we can tell.) 34:14 Slide 13 represents the CERCLA sites only. There are Contamination in soil and groundwater at Alameda Point is petroleum sites that move in and out of CERCLA. One addressed by either the CERCLA or Petroleum Program, month they'l be in, and the next month they'l be out. For whichever appears to be most appropriate. For example, a example, the plume under Kollmann Circle originally was in site with petroleum contamination is typically managed the petroleum site, got put in the CERCLA site. under the Petroleum Program, unless non-petroleum contamination also is present. Occasionally, management of (Full Comment: The graphs in the document, according to a … | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-11-02.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-12-07.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2011-12-07 | 3 | 9. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY Member deHaan gave a brief report on the December 1 RAB meeting. The main issue was the RAB's plan for ongoing years, specifically the schedule and frequency of meetings. The Navy proposed to meet on a quarterly basis to cut back on operations costs. Various options are still being explored, including teleconferencing capabilities. The RAB elected Dale Smith as Co-chair and Carol Gottstein as Vice Co-chair. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Gilmore adjourned the meeting at 8:13 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary Regular Meeting ARRA November 2, 2011 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2011-12-07.pdf |
AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2012-01-04.pdf,3 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority | 2012-01-04 | 3 | 7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS The Executive Director re-emphasized the news of the ARRA receiving portions of Alameda Point at a No-Cost Conveyance. 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 7:49 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Irma Glidden ARRA Secretary Regular Meeting ARRA January 4, 2012 | AlamedaReuseandRedevelopmentAuthority/2012-01-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-01-04 | 3 | (05-012) - Resolution No. 13807, , "Authorizing Open Market Purchase from Allied Sweepers, Inc., Pursuant to Section 3-15 of the Alameda City Charter, of Green Machine Sidewalk Cleaning Equipment. " Adopted. Sherri Stieg, West Alameda Business Association (WABA) thanked the Council for their efforts with the Webster Street project. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that she was happy to see the project progressing; she would like to see the trees replaced as soon as possible. Councilmember deHaan stated that he is pleased with the progress; requested periodic progress reports on the Streetscape Project. Mayor Johnson stated schedule updates should continue to be provided. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ( *05-013 - ) Resolution No. 13808, "Approving Parcel Map No. 8401 (2340 and 2350 North Loop Road). " Adopted. (*05-014) Resolution No. 13809, "Reappointing T. David Edwards as Trustee of the Alameda County Mosquito Abatement District. " Adopted. (05-015) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Subsection 3-28.9 (Payment In-Lieu of Taxes - PILOT) ; Adding a New Subsection 3-28.10 (Return on Investment in Enterprise Funds) of Section 3-28 (Payment of Taxes) of Chapter III (Finance and Taxation) and Adding a New Subsection 18-4.10 (Exemptions) of Section 18-4 (Sewer Service Charge) of Article I (Sewers) of Chapter XVIII (Sewer and Water) . Introduced. Councilmember Daysog stated that increasing the Return on Investment (ROI) to 3% could cause some impacts; encouraged the Council not to vote tonight and place the matter as an action item for the next City Council meeting; $782,000 would be received from Alameda Power & Telecom (AP&T) by staying at the original proposal of 1% ROI; if the $782,000 is relayed back to the rate payer, the monthly bill could be increased from $1.53 to $2.03. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 January 4, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-01-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-01-18 | 3 | (*05-035) Public Hearing to consider Amendment to Zoning Map to rezone approximately 7,800 square feet (1/5 acre) at 1410 Everett Street, APN 070-170-15, from R-5 Hotel Residential to C-C Community Commercial and (*05-035A) - Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map to Designate APN 070-170-15, Approximately One-Fifth Acre, from R-5 Hotel Residential to C-C Community Commercial, on Central Avenue at Everett Street. Continued to February 1, 2005. (*05-036 - ) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Planning Board's denial of Variances, V04-0006, 0007, 0008 and 0010, and denial of Major Design Review, DR04-0026, for all development projects at 3017 Marina Drive; and adoption of related resolution. The site is located within an R-1, Single-Family Residential Zoning District. The development project includes expansion of the residence into the estuary and installation of rear yard decks. Approval is being sought for the following: 1) Variance to AMC Subsection 30-4.1(d) (3) (Maximum Main Building Coverage exceeding 48%) i 2) Variance to AMC Subsection 30-4.1(d) (7) and Section 30-2 (Rear Yard) because the building extends across the rear property line into the estuary 3) Variance to AMC Subsection 30-5.7(a) (Roof Eaves) and 30-5.7(d) (Bay Windows) because the roof leaves above the bay windows encroach to within 3 feet from the side property line and bay windows are not permitted to encroach into side yards; 4) Variance to AMC Subsection 30-5.7(c) (1) (Rear Yard) , Subsection 30-2 (Definitions) (Yard-Rear) and Subsection 30- 4. 1 (d) (7) (Rear Yard) because decks over 36-inches in height extend into the required side and rear yard setbacks 5) Variance to AMC Subsection 30-5.14(c) (Barrier Heights) because the windscreens around the patios exceed the maximum permitted - -foot height. The Planning Board found that the Variance for the bay window encroachment be withdrawn because encroachment is in compliance, subject to Design Review approval. Applicant/Appellant: Rita Mohlen. To be noticed for a later date… | CityCouncil/2005-01-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-01-31 | 3 | (06-040) Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications and authorize Call for Bids for Bayport Alameda Community Building and Park Project. The Redevelopment Manager provided a brief presentation. The Acting Recreation and Park Director presented drawings outlining the schematics for the proposed park site. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the restrooms would be separate from the community building. The Acting Recreation and Park Director responded that the restrooms would be separate for park access. Councilmember deHaan stated the adjacent school property area has asphalt; inquired whether the area would be accessible at all times, to which the Acting Recreation and Park Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the proposed trees are appropriate for the climate, to which the Acting Recreation and Park Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson inquired whether there would be adequate drainage. The Acting Recreation and Park Director responded in the affirmative; stated adequate drainage has been stressed throughout the design process. Mayor Johnson inquired whether sprinkler systems would cover the infield area. The Acting Recreation and Park Director responded that the specifications would address specific sprinkler systems for the site. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that the older parks have a lot of tree root issues; inquired whether root guards were considered. The Acting Recreation and Park Director responded in the affirmative stated the design team was very conscience of tree type and placement. Councilmember deHaan inquired what was the square footage of the multi-purpose room, to which the Acting Recreation and Park Director responded 1,700 square feet. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 January 17, 2006 | CityCouncil/2005-01-31.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-02-01 | 3 | involves the exercise of the right to purchase the entire Alameda Belt Line property, not just the 22-acre site. Mayor Johnson stated that the purchase of the right-of-way for the linear park was separate from the down zoned area [Measure D, 2000]. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the curb on Ralph Appezzato Memorial Parkway was under the City's jurisdiction, to which the Public Works Director responded the street from curb to curb is within the public right-of-way Councilmember deHaan inquired whether improvements have been made to the area, to which the Public Works Director responded that there were no improvements on the south side of Appezzato Memorial Parkway because the City only owns the area to the curb; the Alameda Belt Line property runs from the back of the curb to the fence line. ouncilmember deHaan moved adoption of the Resolution. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (*05-055) Resolution No. 13814, "Approving Submittal of a Revised Application, Incorporating a Flat Parking Lot and Budget Adjustments, to the Office of Library Construction Under the California Reading and Literacy Improvement and Public Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act of 2000. Adopted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS ( 05-056) - 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 Everett Street in the C-C Community Commercial and R-5 Hotel Residential Zoning Districts. Appellant: John Barni, Jr. Applicant : Park Centre Animal Hospital. The Supervising Planner provided a brief overview of the project. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether rezoning from R-5 to C-C would make the existing property conform to the General Plan designation, to which the Supervising Planner responded in th… | CityCouncil/2005-02-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-02-15 | 3 | Recreation and Park Commission should be reviewed. Mayor Johnson stated the matter could be reviewed; commissions are established by ordinance and Council has flexibility to make changes boards established by Charter would be difficult to change. Councilmember deHaan stated having seven members provides flexibility to bring people with different expertise aboard. Mayor Johnson concurred the matter should be reviewed. Vice Mayor Gilmore moved introduction of the ordinance. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (05-081) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of $2,110,000, including contingencies to Ghilotti Brothers, Inc. for Park Street Streetscape and Town Center Project, Phase I, No. P. W. 10-02-13, and authorize the allocation of additional funds from the Merged Areas Bond Issuance of 2003. Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association (PSBA). stated the new streetlights will look like 1927 streetlights on the outside, but are state-of-the-art inside; hopefully, a later phase to complete Alameda Avenue will happen quickly; urged Council to approve the Contract. Mayor Johnson stated that she is pleased with how well the Webster Street Streetscape project is going; that she has not received any complaints. Councilmember deHaan stated the City decided to replace the entire sidewalk on Webster Street; inquired how the decision was made regarding Park Street. The Public Works Director responded the entire sidewalk on Park Street is not being replaced due to cost and basements extending into the public right of way; stated replacing the Park Street sidewalks would require roofs to be built above basements, which would be very expensive; PSBA agrees with the approach. Councilmember Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 February 15, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-02-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-03-01.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-03-01 | 3 | (05-099) Establishment of a Task Force that will propose strategies to prevent future mass evictions from rental housing complexes in the City of Alameda. The Interim City Manager outlined the suggested structure and mission of the Task Force; stated the Task Force would meet on a regular basis and report back to the Council within 90 days. Carol Martino, Alameda, stated that she would like to serve on the Task Force. Steven Edrington, Rental Housing Association, stated that the matter should not overly politicized to ensure progress is made and there is a balanced committee. Kathy Lautz, Apartment Owners Association, volunteered to serve on the Task Force. Lorraine Lilley, Harbor Island Tenants Association, stated that new laws are necessary to protect tenants; suggested that the committee have two Harbor Island Tenant Association representatives and two ar-large tenants. Councilmember deHaan inquired how the nominations would be made. Mayor Johnson responded that she would like to receive input from Council; that Council should submit names for potential Task Force members. Councilmember Daysog stated there should be a specific period of time for application submittals. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Task Force would be an informal committee, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative. (05-100) Ordinance NO. 2936, "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) Finally passed. Councilmember deHaan moved final passage of the ordinance. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 1, 2005 3 | CityCouncil/2005-03-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-03-15 | 3 | certain materials should not be prohibited as technology and materials progress; the focus should be on the design and appearance criteria, not the material. The Supervising Planner stated that a new fiberglass window has been manufactured which is superior to the wood clad windows in many ways; the guidelines are intended to be a living document and can be amended; staff is recommending adoption of the guidelines for a year. Vice Mayor Gilmore thanked staff and the community for the time, energy, and effort given to the guidelines stated that the guideline pictures are useful for understanding what is and is not permitted. The Supervising Planner thanked AAPS for all of their input. Mayor Johnson stated that staff was working on the guidelines when she was on the Planning Board years ago; stated a voice vote, rather than ordinance, is a good process. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (*05-116) - Recommendation to authorize the Mayor, City Manager and/or Designee to send letters opposing the proposed suspension of mandated cost reimbursements. Accepted. (*05-117) Resolution No. 13822, "Upholding the Planning Board's Decision to Readopt ZA04-0002 to the Webster Street Design Guidelines, Known Henceforth as the Webster Street Design Manual. " Adopted. Councilmember deHaan commended the West Alameda Business Association (WABA) for taking the lead; urged the Park Street Business Association (PSBA) to adopt a similar guideline. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (05-118) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Planning Board's denial of Major Design Review DR04-0082 and Variance V04- 0014 to permit the conversion of an existing detached garage to be used as a dwelling unit. The site is located at 1608 Santa Clara Avenue within the R-4, Neighborhood Residential District. Applicant/Appellant Michele and Frank Mulligan; and (05-118A) - Resolution No. 13823, "Upholding the Planning Board's denial of Major Design Review DR04-0082 and Variance V04-0014 to Regular Meeting 3 Alameda City Coun… | CityCouncil/2005-03-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-05 | 3 | (05-144A) Resolution No. 13826, "Upholding the Planning Board's Recommendation to Approve Rezoning R04-002, Variance V04-018, Use Permit UP04-013 - and Major Design Review, DR04-101, for Construction of a Veterinary Clinic, with an amendment to include that the Applicant has a dog walking policy and that kenneling is limited to clients. Adopted. The Supervising Planner provided a brief presentation on the project. Mayor Johnson opened the Public Hearing. Proponents (In favor of appeal) : John Barni, Jr., Appellant (provided diagram) ; Monica Pena, Alameda; Heather Beales, Alameda; and Joe Meylor, Alameda. Opponents (Not in favor of appeal) : Lawrence Henderson, Alameda; Susan Corlett, Alameda: Helen Mohr Thomas, Alameda; Diane Schaffer, Oakland; Cathy Wydner, Applicant; Steve Busse, Park Centre Animal Hospital Geni Manchester; Mary Applegate, Applicant; Nancy Matthews, Alameda (submitted letter) ; and Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association (PSBA) There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the Public Hearing. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the Public Works Department reviewed the current site plan and verified that the plan met vehicle standards for safety and setbacks. The Supervising Planner responded that there are hundreds of instances where buildings are up to the edge of the sidewalk in the commercial districts; stated that she would assume there were no restrictions since the Public Works Department reviewed the plan and did not raise the issue. The Acting City Manager stated that the Engineering Department would have commented if the site distance were a problem. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the commercial area was willing to have dogs walk in the area, to which Mr. Ratto, PSBA, responded absolutely. Councilmember deHaan stated dog walking in neighborhoods has always been a problem; that he feels more comfortable with the concessions [made by Applicant regarding dog walking] that have been made tonight ; that he is very satisfied with the architectural design Regular Meeting … | CityCouncil/2005-04-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-04-19 | 3 | Commission (BCDC) regarding requirements for a pathway Councilmember deHaan inquired whether having an approximate $300,000 delta will limit the capabilities of carrying on with the project. The Acting City Manager responded there would be limitations in getting a larger share of the land; discussions with the developer and grant approval would determine how much land the City could obtain; staff must recommend proceeding because the project is shown in the General Plan. Councilmember deHann moved approval of the 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 [paragraph no. 05-166] and Adoption of Resolution Approving the Application for Land and Water Conservation Fund Estuary Park Project [paragraph no. 05-174]. Under discussion, Mayor Johnson inquired whether the grant was the same one the City previously applied for and did not receive and whether the chances for approval were better. The Acting Recreation and Park Director responded the current grant was from the Land and Water Conservation Act; the previous grant was under the Roberti-z'Berg-Harris Urban Open Space and Recreation Program; the State prefers to fund developments rather than acquisitions. Mayor Johnson requested staff to advise Council on whatever efforts are needed to succeed. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Matarrese stated that it is important to acquire the last strip of property before the Bay Farm Bridge because the property completes the Bay Trail and precludes building another house at one of the choke points of the City; the development of Estuary Park should move forward with whatever money is left; when the opportunity comes up with the developer, money can be found. The Acting City Manager stated there are ways to work with the developer to maximize the amount of land the City can obtain; the matter would be discussed with the devel… | CityCouncil/2005-04-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-03 | 3 | Counci lmember Daysog moved final passage of the ordinance. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous voice vote - -5. (05-209) Recommendation to accept the West Alameda Neighborhood Improvement Concept Plan. The Community Programs and Housing Division Manager gave a Power Point presentation on the Plan. Mayor Johnson stated the Plan would make important changes to the area; requested staff to review ways to accelerate the Plan; stated that a member of the Housing Task Force Committee recommended that the Committee review the Plan, provide input, and delay the vote. Councilmember deHaan stated that the quality of life at the West End is important because of the high population density; the Boys' and Girls' Club brings positive steps to the area; funding sources are important; he is always concerned with transportation issues; the Transportation Commission needs to be engaged; requested to see more detail on the sources of estimates for varied activities; stated that he has no problem with delaying the acceptance of the Plan; inquired whether the Plan could be delayed. The Community Programs and Housing Division Manager responded there has been an extensive public comment process the draft plan was presented at a community meeting in February; Board and Commission input has been requested; there is no problem in delaying the acceptance; acceptance of the conceptual Plan is requested; different components would be brought back to Council at various times. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the short-term, simple projects could be accomplished quickly. The Community Programs and Housing Division Manager responded in the affirmative; stated there is funding available for planting additional trees on an infill basis, and installation of trash receptacles at the Webster Street and Poggi Street corridor. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the trash receptacles would be selected by Public works. The Community Programs and Housing Division Manager responded that BMS Design would select the trash r… | CityCouncil/2005-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-12 | 3 | outside attorney would need to sign off on [approve as to form] the contract if Council wanted to give the City Attorney a raise. Mayor Johnson stated the entire contract should be reviewed; the Council needs to know whether a new contract or an addendum to the existing contract would be needed if the Council wanted to give the City Attorney a raise. Councilmember deHaan stated that he did not have a problem with proceeding. Councilmember Daysog stated that he would like to protect the Council's bargaining prerogative; there could be some matters of interpretation in the course of bargaining; inquired whether the outside attorney would be a go-between for the Council. Mayor Johnson responded the Council would define the outside attorney's role. The Assistant City Attorney stated that the City Attorney directly represents the Council; the proposed Agreement [with Meyers, Nave, Riback, Silver and Wilson for consultation services] would be executed by the City Attorney's office. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Assistant City Attorney had a copy of the Agreement. The Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated only the City Attorney can hire outside attorneys under the City Charter. Councilmember Daysog stated that the meeting tonight is the result of a review of the City Attorney's budget; that he wants to process to maintain the Council's prerogative. Mayor Johnson stated that the Council maintains all prerogatives and would not give up anything. Councilmember Daysog noted an outside attorney involved could have a possible conflict; stated that he does not want an outside attorney to encroach on budget issues. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that she did not realize that an Agreement was already drafted; that she does not want to agree to something that she has not reviewed. Mayor Johnson stated that she would like to review the scope of work in the Agreement inquired who drafted the Agreement. Special Meeting Alameda City Council 3 May 12, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-12.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-05-17 | 3 | Mayor Johnson introduced the Friends of Wuxi Committee : Nancy Li, Chair; Hans Wong, Vice-Chair; and Otto Huang, Honorary Chair. Mayor Johnson read the resolution, which the translator also read in Chinese. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Mayor Johnson and Wang Zhuping signed the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) . Mr. Zhuping stated he is happy to sign the MOU to establish sister City relations with Alameda and hopes relationships will develop further. Mayor Johnson stated the entire community is proud to be moving forward with the Sister City relationship, particularly residents of Chinese heritage and ancestry. The delegation presented gifts to the City. Mayor Johnson presented a pewter plate with the City seal. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to authorize installation of an All-Way Stop Control [paragraph no. 5-235 ] was 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. . ] ( * 05-230 - ) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on May 3, 2005 and the Special City Council Meeting held on May 4, 2005. Approved. ( * 05-231) - Ratified bills in the amount of $3,161,657.93. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 May 17, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-05-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-06-07 | 3 | [Items so enacted or adopted are noted by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. ] ( *05-264) - Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting held on May 12, 2005; and the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on May 17, 2005. Approved. (*05-265) Ratified bills in the amount of $3,017,578.09 (*05-266) Recommendatior to authorize the Acting City Manager to execute a temporary Agreement with Alameda County for the exclusive provision of ambulance services by the City of Alameda Fire Department to the City of Alameda. Accepted. (05-267) Recommendation to accept the City of Alameda Long-Term Park Use Policy. Loretta Ferraro, Alameda, requested that there be a provision in the Alameda Municipal Code (AMC) which would allow the Gold Coast Coffee Mobile Expresso owner (proposed vendor) to use a parking space at the Lower Washington Park area and operate his truck in Alameda. Michael Ferraro, Alameda, urged acceptance of the staff recommendation; stated that there is no ordinance permitting mobile vendors to operate within the City; provided a handout regarding a Recreation and Parks Department public hearing on June 9, 2005. Councilmember Daysog stated that the Council has been in contact with the proposed vendor and staff has been requested to look into the operational issues. Susan Potter, Alameda, stated that other trucks are doing business in Alameda without licenses which causes revenues leave the City. Councilmember Daysog stated that the ordinance allows ice cream trucks to roam through the City; the proposed vendor's request is for parking; inquired whether the Recreation and Park Commission would address the matter. The Acting City Manager stated that there is an ordinance that addresses mobile vendors; the proposed vendor's request is working its way through the system. The Assistant City Manager stated that there is a section in the AMC that prohibits rolling stores from using City streets, with the exception of selling fruit, vegetables, packed or labeled ice cream, peanuts or popcorn; the propos… | CityCouncil/2005-06-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-06-21 | 3 | unanimous voice vote - 5. (05-306) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Historical Advisory Board's approval of a Landscaping Plan for planting two Coast Live Oak trees on the vacant property at 301 Spruce Street. The submittal of a Landscaping Plan, as part of new development proposals, was required by the Historical Advisory Board as a condition for the removal of one Coast Live Oak tree in 2001. The site is located at 301 Spruce Street within the R-4 Neighborhood Residential Zoning District. Applicant : Bill Wong for Hai Ky Lam. Appellant: Patrick Lynch and Jeanne Nader; and (05-306A) Resolution No. 13857, "Upholding the Historical Advisory Board's Approval of a Landscaping Plan for Planting Two Coast Live Oak Trees on the Vacant Property at 301 Spruce Street. Adopted. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the Hearing. Proponent (In Favor of Appeal) : Patrick Lynch, Appellant. Opponents (Opposed to Appeal) : Joanne Lam, Applicant; Ivan Chiu, Bill Wong Engineering & Design Christopher Bowen, Project Arborist. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the Hearing. Councilmember Matarrese inquired what percentage of the composite sample came from the piles of fill versus the areas under the drip line of the tree, to which Mr. Bowen responded about half of the soil was from the piles. Councilmember Daysog noted that the Appellant stated that the laboratory scientist was not accredited; inquired to what extent the matter would be an issue. Mr. Bowen stated that the laboratory would supply the Title 22 limits which include heavy metals; the laboratory is reputable and is recommended in the arborist field. Councilmember Daysog inquired how to address the concern that the laboratory is not accredited to perform Title 22 soil testing. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 June 21, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-06-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-06-28.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-06-28 | 3 | the Mayor's request and would return with an oversight proposal. Chair Johnson stated that the direction to operate consistently with what the Charter provides has already been given to the City Attorney. The City Attorney concurred with Chair Johnson; stated that the attorney retained by the Council in 1989 provided an analysis of the direction regarding retention of outside counsel. Chair Johnson stated that the Council also gave direction regarding the Charter stating that the Council consent is required to hire outside attorneys. The City Attorney stated that the consent has been given through the budget in the past 16 years; the policy can be changed and would be discussed on July 5th. Commissioner/Board Member Daysog stated that the budget enables the City Manager and department heads to hire individuals; the Council does not need to be involved in the actual hiring but might want to be involved in instances above or below certain thresholds; stated that the Council is moving in the right direction. Commissioner/Board Member deHaan stated the initial clarification would be with the Charter; noted there is dispute between the City Attorney and the Council; the Council feels that they have the authority to consent to the hiring of outside legal counsel. Chair Johnson stated that there is no need to hire an attorney to provide an opinion on the language of the Charter; the language of the Charter is very plain and clear. Commissioner/Board Member deHaan stated the Council could move forward if the language of the Charter has been determined. Chair Johnson stated that there is a $470,000 litigation contingency in Risk Management and an additional $350,000 for Alameda Power & Telecom; noted that the City Attorney is stating that the Council has consented to the hiring of outside counsel by approving the line items in the budget over the past 16 years; the Council has given a blanket authorization to the City Attorney to hire outside counsel and that is not the level of oversight that the Charter intends ; the Ch… | CityCouncil/2005-06-28.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-07-05.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-07-05 | 3 | CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Matarrese 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 ] ( *05-327) - Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting of June 14, 2005, Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on June 21, 2004, and Special City Council Meeting of June 23, 2005. Approved. (*05-328) Ratified bills in the amount of $7,377,422,92 (*05-329) Resolution No. 13862, "Annual Adjustment of the Citywide Development Impact Fee by the Construction Cost Index. Adopted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (05-330) - Resolution No. 13863, "Adoption of Resolution Reappointing Randall S. Miller as a Member of the Historical Advisory Board. " Adopted; (05-330A) Resolution No. 13864, "Reappointing Edward Depenbrock as a Member of the Housing and Building Code Hearing and Appeals Board. " Adopted; (05-330B) Resolution Nos. 13865 and 13866, "Reappointing Nancy W. Gormley and Garnetta S. King as Members of the Housing Commission. " Adopted; (05-330C) Resolution Nos. 13867 and 13868, "Reappointing Ruth K. Belikove and Alan D. Mitchell as Members of the Library Board. " Adopted; (05-330D) Resolution Nos. 13869 and 13870, "Reappointing Rebecca L. Kohlstrand Parsons and Margaret McNamara as Members of the Planning Board. " Adopted (05-330E) Resolution Nos. 13871, 13872 and 13873, "Reappointing Stewart Chen, Karen Hollinger Jackson, and Cynthia Wasko as Members of the Social Service Human Relations Board. Adopted; Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of resolutions. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 July 5, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-07-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-07-19 | 3 | Mayor Johnson inquired whether the art would be done in limestone. Mr. Nagase responded in the affirmative; stated the angle of the forms would catch the morning and afternoon light. Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (05-349) Recommendation to authorize the Fire Chief to accept the $404,087 Awarding of the Assistance to Firefighters Grant for a firefighting training trailer and authorizing funding for the City's matching portion of $80,817 from the General Fund Reserves. Mayor Johnson requested that future reports include on-going maintenance and operating costs. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether there was an order of magnitude for the maintenance and operating costs for comparison purposes. The Fire Chief responded that the maintenance costs are expected to be low; the majority of the cost would be for propane gasi there would be an additional cost for moving the trailer out of the area because a diesel truck trailer would be needed. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the City has a tractor. The Fire Chief responded that he has not checked with the Public Works Department; using a City tractor would be the first choice. Mayor Johnson stated training locally might provide a cost savings. The Fire Chief stated the closest facility for live fire training is Livermore, which is too far away for on-duty personnel: the community was concerned with the smoke generated by the live fire training at the LinOaks Motel. Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (05-350 - ) Recommendation to adopt specifications and authorize Call for Bids for replacement of three (3) marked police vehicles. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 July 19, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-08-02.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-08-02 | 3 | (05-383) - Recommendation to authorize the Mayor to send a letter to the United States Postal Service regarding the City's interest to relocate the distribution function of the Alameda Post Office from Shoreline Drive to another site in Alameda. Mayor Johnson stated that the City Manager would revise the draft letter. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he is in favor of relocating the distribution center; that there is no reason for a warehouse and parking lot to enjoy one of the best views of the entire East Bay; stated that the City should retain some sway over what would be placed at the site; there is no need for another carwash or retail-type enterprise that would not take advantage of the location; efforts should be made to retain a retail front within the South Shore Center for mail transactions. Councilmember Daysog stated that he has a concern with the possibility that the Post Office would be relocated at Alameda Point. Mayor Johnson stated that the intent was to have the retail portion of the Post Office remain at the South Shore Center and have the sorting portion of the facility move to a more appropriate location. Councilmember deHaan stated that the relocation of the distribution center is a great opportunity for the City. Mayor Johnson stated the relocation is not certain; the matter has been discussed for years. Vice Mayor Gilmore moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor Johnson - 4. Abstentions Councilmember Daysog - 1. ( * 05-384) Recommendation to adopt specifications for Vehicle Tow Contract for abandoned vehicles for the Police Department Accepted. (*05-385) Recommendation to amend the Consultant Contract with Signet Testing Labs, Inc., modifying the scope of work and increasing the Contract price in the amount of $54,000 for the New Main Library Project, No. P.W. 01-03-01. Accepted. (05-386) - Adoption of Resolution Empowering the City Attorney t… | CityCouncil/2005-08-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-08-16.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-08-16 | 3 | Mayor Johnson stated a lot of signs are attached to the poles the signs detract from the attractiveness of the poles and should be avoided if possible. Councilmember deHaan moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ( *05-405) - Resolution No. 13883, "Requiring City Council Approval of Any Amendment to the Employment Contracts of the City Manager or City Attorney. Adopted. (*05-406) Resolution No. 13884, "Amending the Alameda City Employees (ACEA) Salary Schedule by Establishing Salary Range for the Position of Senior Combination Building Inspector. Adopted. (*05-407) Resolution No. 13885, "Amending the Management and Confidential Employees Association (MCEA) Salary Schedule by Establishing Salary Ranges for the positions of Information Systems Network Analyst and Safety Officer. " Adopted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (05-408) Public Hearing to consider Appeals of the Planning Board's approval of a Use Permit and Design Review for the parking garage and new Cineplex components of the proposed Alameda Theater Project on Oak Street and Central Avenue. This site is located at 1416 Oak Street and 2305 Central Avenue (Video Maniacs site) within the C-C-T (Community Commercial Theater Combining) District. Applicants: City of Alameda (DSD) and Kyle Conner, Alameda Entertainment Associates, LP . Appellants: Ani Dimusheva and Valerie Ruma ; (05-408A) Resolution No. 13886, "Upholding the Planning Board of the City of Alameda's Decision to Approve Design Review DR05-0028 and Use Permit UP05-0008 for the Proposed New Civic Center Parking Garage. Adopted; and (05-408B) Resolution No. 13887, "Resolution Upholding the Planning Board of the City of Alameda's Decision to Approve Design Review DR05-0041 for the Proposed Cineplex at 2305 Central Avenue. Adopted. The Development Services Director gave a brief presentation. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the Hearing. Proponents (In favor of project) : Kathy Moehring, Alameda (not Regular Meeting Alame… | CityCouncil/2005-08-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-09-06.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-09-06 | 3 | Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Ms. Hardie thanked the Council for the resolution; stated that it has been her pleasure and privilege to be involved with the new library project. ( 05-429 - ) Resolution No. 13889, "Appointing Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft as a Member of the Economic Development Commission. Adopted (05-429A) Resolution No. 13890, "Reappointing Robert F. Kelly as a Member of the Economic Development Commission. Adopted; and (05-429B) Resolution No. 13891, "Reappointing Anthony M. Santare as a Member of the Golf Commission. Adopted. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolutions Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes : Councilmembers Daysog, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 4. Absent: Councilmember deHaan - 1. [Note: Councilmember deHaan was away from the dais when the matter was voted upon. ] The City Clerk administered the Oath and presented certificates of appointment to Ms. Ashcraft and Mr. Santare. (05-430) Public hearing to consider Introduction of Ordinance "Amending Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Chapter XIII (Building and Housing) by Repealing Article I, Section 13-4 - (Alameda Electrical Code) in Its Entirety and Adding a New Article I, Section 13-4 (Alameda Electrical Code) to Adopt the 2004 California Electrical Code and Approve Certain Amendments Thereto. Introduced. The Acting Planning and Building Director gave a brief presentation. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the Hearing. There being no speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the Hearing. Councilmember deHaan moved introduction of the Ordinance. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 September 6, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-09-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-09-20.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-09-20 | 3 | Alameda; $6,000 in stationery supplies was spent out of Alameda; requested that the check register include totals for goods purchased both in and out of Alameda and totals for services purchased both in and out of Alameda. Councilmember deHaan stated that various vendors have secondary buyers; vendors should be encouraged to buy in Alameda. Councilmember Daysog stated that a $6,000 purchase would generate $60 in sales tax; bulk purchases may save more money. Mayor Johnson stated that jobs and support for Alameda organizations and non-profits are benefits in addition to the sales tax; all factors need to be balanced. Councilmember Daysog moved ratification of the bills in the amount of $3,807,630.92 Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ( *05-451) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Financial Report for the Period Ending June 30, 2005 (Year-end) Accepted. ( *05-452 ) Recommendation to adopt Specifications and authorize Call for Bids for three marked police vehicles. Accepted. ( *05-453) Recommendation to reject the Bids, adopt the modified Specifications, and authorize a second Call for Bids for Cyclic Sewer Repair Project Phase 4, No. P.W. 05-03-11. Accepted. (*05-454) Recommendation to amend the Construction Contract with Ghilotti Brothers by increasing the contingency amount by $120,000 for the Park Street Streetscape and Town Center Project, No. P. W. 10-02-13. Accepted. (*05-455) Recommendation to approve a Subdivision Improvement Agreement with FOCIL-BP, LLC . Accepted; and (*05-455A) Resolution No. 13894, "Approving Final Map and Accepting Certain Dedications and Offers of Dedication and Easement Vacations for Tract 7512. " Adopted. (*05-456) Resolution No. 13895, "Approving Parcel Map and Accepting Dedication of Easements for Parcel Map No. 8725 (Bridgeside Shopping Center) . " Adopted. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 September 20, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-09-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-10-04.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-10-04 | 3 | The Assistant City Manager responded the rolling store provisions address the use of City streets. Councilmember Matarrese stated other people are using City streets for the very same purpose; the City needs to allow for the use of City streets or ticket the people in violation of the law. The City Manager stated that staff would get back to the Council on the matter Councilmember deHaan stated that the Recreation and Park Commission was requested to review the use of public activities in parks; requested an update from the Recreation and Park Commission. (05-486 - ) Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed light rail and disaster preparedness. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS ( 05-487) - Consideration of Mayor's nominations for appointment to the Civil Service Board, Commission on Disability Issues, Economic Development Commission, Historical Advisory Board, Housing and Building Code Hearing and Appeals Board, and Recreation and Park Commission. Mayor Johnson nominated Avonnet M. Peeler to the Civil Service Board; Audrey M. Lord-Hausman to the Commission on Disability Issues; and, Janet W. Iverson to the Historical Advisory Board. (05-488) Councilmember deHaan stated that there is an unusual, glob-like substance in the southern and eastern portion of the City; requested staff to investigate the matter. (05-489) Mayor Johnson stated that many senior citizens are not participating in the Citizen Emergency Response Team (CERT) Program because a waiver releasing the City from any liability is required; requested that staff review the matter; stated the senior citizens are willing to sign the waiver for liability during a disaster, but are not willing to sign a blanket waiver. (05-490) Mayor Johnson stated some cities' animal shelters place pictures on the internet; people can use the internet to look for pets or look to adopt inquired whether the internet is utilized. The City Manager responded that staff would look into the matter. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 October 4, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-10-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-10-18.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-10-18 | 3 | The Project Manager responded that the proposed roof would not require annual maintenance; the roof and paint materials have a 25- year guarantee; the architect stated that a coating could be applied if the paint starts to fade after 25 years; cleaning, priming and repainting would be done after 25 years and an additional 25 years would be guaranteed; the cost is between $3 and $6 per square foot, which would amount to approximately $25,000 to $30,000. Mayor Johnson inquired what was the cost difference between a copper roof and the proposed roof. The Project Manager responded the cost difference is approximately $60,000 stated the copper roof was a deductive alternative in the bid package. the architect put in a series of deductive alternatives and add alls in response to budget concerns; the roofing deductive alternative was an approximate $20,000 value; all add alls were rejected and all deductive alternatives were accepted. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the cost difference for installing the cooper roof was $60,000. The Project Manager responded in the negative; stated the value engineering cost was $60,000 there is currently no price on the installation of a copper roof; the contractor stated that work would need to be stopped for 45-65 days until the current subcontract was extinguished, a new subcontract was executed, materials were acquired, and the roof installed the contractor wants to start putting in the heating and cooling duct work; the duct work could get wet if installed before closing the building. Councilmember deHaan inquired what was the roof's base metal. The Project Manager provided a handout responded that the base metal is 24-gage galvalume steel composed of 45% zinc and 55% aluminum. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether there would be deterioration of the base metal without the protective shield. The Project Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the color coating was also warranted for 25 years. Councilmember deHaan stated that copper roofs bleed; inquired whether copper could st… | CityCouncil/2005-10-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-11-01.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-11-01 | 3 | (05-524) ) Public Hearing to accept new, revised preliminary designs for the cineplex and a 352-space parking structure at the corner of Oak Street and Central Avenue, within the C-C T (Community Commercial Theater) Zoning District. The Development Services Director gave a brief presentation on the project. Mr. Towey with Komorous-Towey Architects gave a Power Point presentation. Councilmember deHaan stated there are seven parking levels; inquired whether the elevator tower reached up to the seventh level. The Architect responded in the negative; stated the previous and current designs are the same; the seventh level was extended to make up for some lost spaces. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the highest peak would be the elevator tower and whether the roof level was now 70 feet. The Architect responded that the top of the elevator tower was the highest point. Councilmember deHaan stated that the canopies look industrial ; inquired whether other options were considered. The Architect responded that the industrial nature of the canopies could be valid, depending on execution; the historical period being evaluated had very flat and thin awnings many were roll out awnings; the intention is to keep the metal very flat and thin as opposed to having a sloping top; the corrugated metal would not be visible; the canopies could be executed to look finished. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether there was another design which could pull back the 20 inch protrusion. The Architect responded that the previous design studied what would occur if the protrusion had to be pulled back; twenty-five seats and a few feet off one of the screen's sides would be lost; his charge was to work with the approved floor plans. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing. Proponents (In favor of the design) : Pauline Kelley, Alameda; Pete Halberstadt, Alameda (read a list of 33 people in favor of the design) ; Chuck Millar, Alameda; Marilyn Schumacher, Alameda; Sherri Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 November 1, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-11-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-11-15.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-11-15 | 3 | Supervisor Lai-Bitker responded that the City of Oakland would be approving the request. Mr. Allen stated that the City of Emeryville would address the matter at its December 6 City Council meeting; the City of Berkeley was having a preliminary discussion tonight. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the survey questions would address only the lead abatement program. Mr. Allen responded that the survey would provide a sense of what a palatable fee would be; results would determine whether to seek a two-thirds majority vote of the electorate or a simple majority of the property owners involved in the fee payment; Proposition 218 has certain requirements on how the election should be run; the property owners' vote would be weighted based on the number of units owned. Councilmember Daysog stated there were unrelated add on questions regarding waste related issues when polls were conducted in the past; City dollars should be spent for the lead abatement poll and not for a candidate. Mr. Allen stated that conducting a poll for a candidate would not be appropriate for a public agency. Mayor Johnson inquired whether a list of the questions would be available, to which Mr. Allen responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated there was a short timeframe if the poll results favor a 2006 General Election. Supervisor Lai-Bitker stated the consultant intended to conduct the poll in December the timeframe has been delayed; a mail-in - ballot could be done in the spring. Mr. Allen stated that conducting the poll was still a possibility at the end of December; the process has taken some time; stated he would inform the Council on the projected date. Councilmember Daysog stated that he was concerned that the person potentially running the poll was the political consultant for the candidate he was running against. Mayor Johnson stated that the Joint Powers Authority (JPA) had concerns about how the consultant selection process occurred and was not happy with the process. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 November 15… | CityCouncil/2005-11-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-12-06.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-12-06 | 3 | Review. Accepted. (*05-561) Recommendation to accept Impact Fee Report for Police and Fire services. Accepted. (*05-562) Recommendation to accept the Annual Investment Report for the 2004-2005 Fiscal Year. Accepted. (*05-563) Recommendation to award Restaurant Concessionaire Contract to Tom Genanekos, Owner of Jim's Coffee Shop, for exclusive right to sell food and beverage service at the Chuck Corica Golf Complex. Accepted. (*05-564) Resolution No. 13910, "Authorizing Open Market Purchase from Sungard Pentamation, Bio-Key International and Omega Group Pursuant to Section 3-15 of the Alameda City Charter in the Amount of $307,804 for Pentamation Finance Plus and Community Plus Software, Bio-Key Fire Records Management Software and Fireview Software. " Adopted. ( *05-564A) Resolution No. 13911, "Authorizing the Purchase of Storage Area Network System Using the State of California Department of General Services, Procurement Division, Competitive Bid Award. " Adopted. (*05-564B) Resolution No. 13912, "Authorizing the Execution and Delivery of a Master Equipment Lease-Purchase Agreement, an Escrow Agreement and Separate Equipment Schedules with Respect to the Acquisition, Purchase, Financing and Leasing of Certain Equipment for the Public Benefit; Authorizing the Execution and Delivery of Documents Required in Connection therewith; and Authorizing the Taking of all Other Actions Necessary to the Consummation of the Transactions Contemplated by this Resolution. Adopted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (05-565) Resolution No. 13913, "Appointing Morris H. Trevithick as a Member of the Economic Development Commission (Real Estate/Land Development Seat) " Adopted. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the Resolution. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. The City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented Mr. Trevithick with a certificate of appointment. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 December 6, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-12-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2005-12-20.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2005-12-20 | 3 | Mayor Johnson requested that the update be provided in January. Councilmember deHaan stated that a trend could be developing which could have a major impact on the overall budget and general funds ; inquired whether adjustments could be made to put the money into the right quarter. The Finance Director responded in the negative. Councilmember deHaan inquired what was the forecast. The Finance Director responded that the forecast looks on target but would need to be reviewed after the next quarterly report. Councilmember Daysog requested background data on comparing second quarter 1999 to second 2004. The Finance Director stated data is available. Mayor Johnson requested an analysis be provided every six months ; stated that businesses have suffered during the construction process; the goal of economic development is to generate more revenue; the Bay Area experienced a 2.3% growth and there was a 4.5% growth Statewide; Alameda is not keeping up; redevelopment projects should help increase revenue in Alameda. Councilmember Daysog stated that he would not be surprised that construction along Webster Street and Park Street influenced the downturn. Councilmember deHaan requested that the analysis be provided every quarter with an eye on the forecast; stated that he could not pinpoint any particular reason for the decline; a decline appeared in areas that were not under construction. Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (*05-580) - Recommendation to appropriate in the General Fund the 2005-2006 Citizen's Option for Public Safety Program (COPS AB 3229) Grant Funding to supplement frontline police services. Accepted. (*05-581) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of $386,969.05 to Libramation, Inc. for a Materials Security Inventory System including five years of maintenance for the Alameda Free Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 December 20, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-12-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-01-03.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-01-03 | 3 | (06-005) Recommendation to accept the work of Golden Bay Construction, Inc. for the Webster Street Renaissance Project, No. P.W. 07-02-07. Councilmember deHaan requested the item be addressed together with the recommendation to approve an increase for the Construction Contract with Ghilotti Brothers [paragraph no. 06-006]. Councilmember deHaan stated the Webster Street Renaissance Project involved five blocks; the project was very successful; the vast majority of Webster Street has improved; the Park Street Streetscape Project involves two blocks; a lot of the work still needs to be done; inquired how much funding was provided by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). The Public Works Director responded each project received approximately $1 million. Councilmember deHaan stated that the remainder of the funding came from various other sources such as redevelopment and Alameda Power and Telecom (AP&T) The Public Works Director stated that AP&T paid for all of the Park Street joint trenching for electrical and cable wiring some Measure B money covered the Webster Street sidewalk repair. Councilmember deHaan stated the money was well spent; he has concerns about the next phase; inquired whether more dollars were in the cue now. The Public Works Director responded in the affirmative. stated a $700,000 federal grant would go to the Park Street Streetscape Project specifically; he is working with the Park Street Business Association (PSBA) and Development Services Department to determine how the money will be spent; PSBA would like the money to go toward more street trees and lights. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the MTC funding needs to go toward transportation-oriented activities. The Public Works Director responded that the funding is flexible. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether matching funds need to be obtained for the federal grant, to which the Public Works Director responded in the negative. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the federal grant would Regular Meeting Alameda City Council … | CityCouncil/2006-01-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-02-07.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-02-07 | 3 | process is quiet involved. Councilmember Daysog stated a plan seems to be in place for the transition. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that she understands the desire to keep one of the branch libraries open full time; the branch libraries are small and would not accommodate the number of people who use the interim Main Library; she is not sure of the additional benefit in opening a branch library for seven days. The Acting Library Director stated that extended hours are being planned for the branch libraries during the closure in October. Councilmember Matarrese inquired what are the closure days, to which the Acting Library Director responded March 6 through March 19. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the closure could be in the summer. The Acting Library Director responded in the negative; stated summer closure would not provide enough time for tagging and would impact the summer reading programs. Mayor Johnson inquired how much time is needed for the tagging. The Acting Library Director responded that two-thirds to three- quarters would be completed during the closure. Mayor Johnson inquired when the process would be completed, to which the Acting Library Director responded hopefully October. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the school schedule would be affected. The Acting Library Director responded in the negative; stated Donna Fletcher, Alameda Unified School District, advised her that the proposed closure dates are the best time to perform the tagging the School District is helping to get the word out through a newsletter. Mayor Johnson requested staff to review the possibility of keeping one of the branch libraries open during the two-week closure of the Main Library if there is a huge outcry over closure. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether future rains would affect the progress of the project, other than brickwork. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 February 7, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-02-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-02-21.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-02-21 | 3 | one employee in each pool. The Human Resources Director responded there are eleven classifications stated more employees could take advantage; four Customer Service Representatives are listed but six could take advantage of the Golden Handshake. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the City is required to handle the program in a certain manner. The Human Resources Director responded that PERS has specific requirements; classifications could be designated by department and division. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the number of employees in a classification could be limited. The Human Resources Director responded only if the department, division, and area were narrowly defined. Councilmember deHaan stated that he hopes there are no consequences by having too many employees take advantage of the program. Mayor Johnson stated fewer employees would be eligible if the classification is narrowly defined. Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (06-084) Recommendation to adopt the Long-Term Park Use Policy. The Acting Recreation and Parks Director provided a brief report. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the Recreation and Park Department could contract with a third party to conduct a program in one of the parks, to which the Acting Recreation and Park Director responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that she liked that for-profit groups would not be considered; the application states that property owners and tenants would be notified to attend a neighborhood meeting; inquired whether the Acting Recreation and Park Director was aware of what the notification process would entail. The Acting Recreation and Park Director responded in the affirmative; stated the notification process has been done in the Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 February 21, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-02-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-03-07.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-03-07 | 3 | Councilmember Daysog inquired whether redevelopment money could be used instead; stated the interest earned on Measure O funds could be used for branch libraries; redevelopment money can only be used in redevelopment areas. The Project Manager responded Council approved the contingency funding on December 21, 2004 the order of funding was Measure O interest, branch library funding, and then redevelopment. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether branch library funding would be guaranteed if redevelopment money were used for the add- back. Councilmember Daysog stated the best approach would be to move forward with the change order and leave flexibility for staff to iron out the details. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that she understood that the $670,000 line item was earmarked for branch library upgrades; the concept was to dip into the branch library funding if the New Main Library ran over budget. The Project Manager stated $2 million was allocated for branch library funding. Mayor Johnson inquired whether branch library funds would be used if the New Main Library ran over budget or whether alternate sources would be used. The Project Manager responded branch library funds would be used if the New Main Library runs over the $375,000 [Measure O interest ] ; stated the final funding source would be redevelopment funds Mayor Johnson stated the Council could move forward with the change order and address the financing issue at a later point. Councilmember deHaan stated that only going $200,000 over on a $20 million project is incredible. Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the change order. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated money should be saved for the branch libraries; Alameda can have a great Main Library and great branch libraries. The Project Manager stated he is lobbying to use the $2 million Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 March 7, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-03-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-03-21.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-03-21 | 3 | (*06-146) Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications and authorize Call for Bids for installation of rubberized sidewalks, No. P. W. 02-06-05. Accepted; and *06-146A) Resolution No. 13935, "Authorizing Open Market Purchase Pursuant to Section 3-15 of the Alameda City Charter for Rubberized Sidewalks. Adopted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (06-147 ) Ordinance No. 2947, "Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding a New Subsection 30-5.7 (M) (Extensions of Roof Pitch and Roof Ridges) to Section 30-5.7 (Projections from Buildings and Roof Planes, Permitted Encroachments and Treatments of Minimum Required Yards) of Chapter XXX (Development Regulations) to Add a Process for Allowing Additions to Existing Dwellings with Nonconforming Height. Finally passed. Councilmember deHaan moved final passage of the ordinance. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Matarrese stated that the ordinance recognizes the work of the Task Force. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent: louncilmember Daysog - 1. ] (06-148) - Public Hearing to consider Zoning Amendment R 05-0002 to add a Planned Development overlay to a property located within the R-4 (Neighborhood Residential) Zoning District and to consider Parcel Map, PM 06-0001, to allow the division of an existing 14,602 square foot residential lot into two parcels, each with an existing detached duplex. The project site is located at 1810 and 1812 Clinton Avenue; (06-148A) Introduction of Ordinance Reclassifying and Rezoning Certain Property Within the City of Alameda by Amending Zoning Ordinance No. 1277, N.S., from R-4 (Neighborhood Residential) Zoning District to R-4-PD (Neighborhood Residential Planned Development) Zoning District for that Property Located at 1810 and 1812 Clinton Avenue. Introduced; and (06-148B) Resolution No. 19336, "Approving Parcel Map PM 06-0001 to Allow the Division of a 14,602 Square Foot Parcel into Two Lots at 1810/1812 Clinton Avenue. " Adopted. Mayor Johnson opened the … | CityCouncil/2006-03-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-04-04.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-04-04 | 3 | staff would report back to Council next month. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the review would affect the project's timeline, to which the Project Manager responded in the affirmative. The City Manager stated that she discussed the matter with the Finance Director; leasing may not be cost-effective; a computer equipment replacement fund is being considered for the up-coming budget and would cover replacements every three years. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the grand opening hinged on having the computers in place, to which the Project Manager responded in the negative. Councilmember Matarrese stated that the matter could be brought back to the Council. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the computers are scattered throughout the building, to which the Project Manager responded in the affirmative. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the computers are a standard model, to which the Project Manager responded in the affirmative. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the City partners with a large computer company. The Finance Director responded the City does not partner, but that COMPAQ computers are exclusively purchased for replacement part standardization and to allow the City to purchase at a bulk rate; mass purchasing is usually done through the State Department of General Services. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether costs are similar to educational pricing, to which the Finance Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson stated the Requests for Proposals should move forward if a cost comparison has already been reviewed; inquired whether a separate maintenance agreement would need to be purchased if the computers are leased. The Finance Director responded a 90-day warranty would be issued on leased equipment. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the 68 computers are the full compliment. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 April 4, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-04-04.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-04-18.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-04-18 | 3 | Councilmember Matarrese stated reallocated funds are approximately 10% of the total budget; inquired whether a 10% carryover is anticipated for Fiscal Year 2007-2008. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded hopefully not; stated money would be spent on the Woodstock to Webster Street Project in the upcoming fiscal year. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether there was a 10% decrease in federal funding from the previous allocation, to which the Development Services Division Manager responded the decrease was approximately 9.5%. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing. Karen Hollinger-Jackson, Social Services Human Relations Board (SSHRB) Member, stated the SSHRB unanimously agrees with the staff recommendation. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the hearing. Mayor Johnson thanked the SSHRB for input on funding issues. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether a one-year funding cycle occurred in the past. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded two-year funding cycles were done in the past; a one-year funding cycle was used most currently; the recommendation is to return to the two- year funding cycle. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether funding was in jeopardy. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded funding is always in jeopardy; CDBG funding cuts are recommended [at the federal level] every year; the funding has strong bi-partisan - support; 10% to 30% cuts are anticipated next year. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether funding adjustments have been made. The Base Reuse and Community Development Manager responded the second year funding cycle is contingent upon the allocation; the CDBG program caps social service expenditures at 20% of the total allocation. Mayor Johnson stated the federal government still works on a one- Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 April 18, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-04-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-05-02 | 3 | affirmative. Mayor Johnson inquired why the owner has not moved forward. The Project Manager responded that the owner states that there are delays with the Health Department. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether other City departments could help with the process to save Gim's historic structure. The Project Manager responded that he would work with the Planning and Building Departments to facilitate an evaluation of the structure. Richard W. Rutter, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (AAPS) , stated that AAPS voted to appropriate $500 toward painting Gim's historic structure if the owners cannot get the money themselves; stated he was the architect for the Independent Order of Odd Fellows façade renovation; façade grant money was not received until progress billings were provided. Councilmember Matarrese stated the library project and LEEDS required insulation is impressive; requested that a fireproof viewing port be considered; a building in Red Bluff had a glass cut out which provides a view of the fireproofing. The Project Manager stated that he would work with the other departments to find a solution. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that a mock up could be placed in a shadow box and hung on the wall to look like a cross section of the walls layers. Councilmember Matarrese stated that the community should see proposed alternatives. (06-222) Announcement regarding need for Poll Workers and general voting information for June 6 election. Mayor Johnson read a statement regarding the election and urged voters to work at the polls; suggested that the information be posted on the City's website. The City Clerk stated that May 22 is the last day to register; election results will be available the morning after the election instead of election night because paper ballots will be used; the Registrar is working on solutions for the November election. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 May 2, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-05-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-05-03.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-05-03 | 3 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY- - -MAY 3, 2006- -6:31 P.M. Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 7:25 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Chair Johnson - 4. Absent : Commissioner Daysog - 1. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider : (06-017) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Name of case : Community Improvement Commission V. Cocores Development Company. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Chair Johnson announced the Commission received a briefing regarding the existing litigation and gave direction to legal counsel. Adjournment There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission May 3, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-05-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-05-16 | 3 | homes ; an application to build homes was submitted by the property owner. The City Attorney stated the process is long; studies would be conducted to provide adequate information to the Planning Board to consider the application. Mayor Johnson stated the process is in the early stages the City is involved because the City wants to have the consultant perform the work for the City. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated an application for 104 homes does not mean that 104 homes would be built; 104 homes are the maximum but less could be built; the project may never be built because of community and City concerns. Councilmember Daysog stated that he would abstain on the matter he is concerned with on-going negotiations with the Port of Oakland. building additional homes at Harbor Bay could injure the City's position regarding airport expansion; information is needed to make an informed decision. Councilmember Matarrese stated he supports the recommendation in order to provide current information to the Planning Board. Councilmember deHaan stated hopefully the report will provide needed information; the recommendation does not commit the City to the project; concerns will be aired. Councilmember Matarrese stated the staff recommendation commits the City to engage the appropriate firm to conduct the study. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor Johnson - 4. Abstentions Councilmember Daysog - 1. (*06-259) Recommendation to appropriate $16,000 from the Curbside Recycling Fund and award a Contract in the amount of $72,582, including contingencies, to AJW Construction for installation of Rubberized Sidewalks, No. P.W. 02-06-05. Accepted. (*06-260) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of $436,000, including contingencies to SpenCon Construction, Inc. for the Fiscal Year 2005-06 Repair of Portland Cement Concrete Sidewalk, Curb, Gutter, Driveway and Minor Str… | CityCouncil/2006-05-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-05-30.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-05-30 | 3 | Councilmember Daysog stated that he would caution listing items, such as the Webster Street garage and park and ride, prior to obtaining community consensus; the policy discussion should take place prior to reviewing funding. Councilmember deHaan requested that centralizing City Hall be added to the list of Challenges. The City Manager concluded her presentation. Kevin Kennedy, City Treasurer, discussed deferred maintenance, staffing levels and the 10-year financial model tool. Kevin Kearney, City Auditor, raised questions about un-funded staff positions and discussed the 10-year plan. Councilmember Daysog stated where the funds for infrastructure would come from should be clear streets ratings do not need to be A or A+. Councilmember Matarrese requested that a disproportionate amount of new funding for Fiscal Year 2006-2007 go to Public Works. Mayor Johnson requested that the figure showing how much additional funding is available for each fiscal year be provided. Mayor Johnson requested that the numbers be provided for the chart showing the number of full time employees. Councilmember Matarrese stated a new ground rule should be established to not call department head positions un-funded ; further suggested that any un-funded positions, other than department heads, be eliminated. Councilmember deHaan requested the job descriptions of the positions currently not funded. Vice Mayor Gilmore suggested that discussion on the positions take place when the de-authorization of the positions is brought back to Council. Mayor Johnson requested the numbers be added to pie charts; further requested review of the City Charter regarding Council's ability to approve AP&T'S budget. Councilmember deHaan requested that the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) budget be revisited. Special Meeting Alameda City Council 2 May 30, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-05-30.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-06-06.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-06-06 | 3 | Maintenance Management Contract for the City of Alameda Island City Landscaping and Lighting District 84-2 - Marina Village. Accepted. [Note: Councilmember Matarrese abstained from voting on the recommendation to authorize the execution of Landscape Maintenance Management Contract. ] (*06-290) Recommendation to appropriate $155,300 in Urban Runoff Funds and award a Contract in the amount of $643,779, including contingencies, to Ghilotti Brothers for the Fernside Boulevard Pedestrian Access Improvements near Lincoln Middle School (Safe Routes to School), No. P.W. 11-02-15. Accepted. (06-291) Recommendation to set Hearing date for delinquent integrated Waste Management charges. Councilmember deHaan stated he is concerned about how collection would impact individuals; requested clarificatior prior to the Hearing date on how last year's collection issues were resolved; stated rates were changed and individuals did not think the process was fair. Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 4. [Absent Mayor Johnson - 1. ] (06-292) Resolution No. 13967, "Authorizing the Filing of an Application for Federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program Funding for Electric Fleet Vehicles and Charging Stations, Committing the Necessary Non-Federal Match for the Project and Stating the Assurance of the City of Alameda to Complete the Project. Adopted; and (06-292A) Resolution No. 13968, "Authorizing the Filing of an Application for Federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program Funding for Otis rive/Doolittle Drive/Island Drive Signal Coordination, Committing the Necessary Non-Federal Match for the Project and Stating the Assurance of the City of Alameda to Complete the Project. Adopted. Councilmember Matarrese stated he requested that the item be pulled from the Consent Calendar to focus the public on the issue; applauded the Public Works Director for pursuing electric vehicles; stated t… | CityCouncil/2006-06-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-06-07.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-06-07 | 3 | Dr. Manross outlined sampling and accuracy levels. Chair Johnson inquired the reason for having both community at large and registered voters. Dr. Manross responded the groups represent two distinct populations; the community at large has one set of core values and collective wishes; the electorate has a different set of core values; if a funding mechanism were entertained, the City would want to know where the electorate stands and where the electorate agrees with and differs from the community at large. In response to Chair Johnson's inquiry regarding whether a survey done today would be relevant in a couple of years, Dr. Manross stated core values do not change there can be shifts; however, benchmarks would be established. Commissioner Daysog stated if the sample is increased from 300 to 400, the cost increases from $14,500 to $15,500 suggested a sample size of 600, 300 community at large and 300 registered voters. Dr. Manross stated the recommendation was proposed in order not to exceed a $15,000 budget the proposed study typically takes 15 to 17 minutes; a 12 minute study would be restrictive as to the amount of information that can be secured; keeping the sample at 300 and increasing the time from 12 to 15 minutes, would cost $16,000, but additional information would be gathered; increasing the sample to 400 and the time to 15 minutes would cost $17,000; suggested the Commission consider a higher sample amount or longer survey. Commissioner Daysog stated the survey should be as accurate as possible. Dr. Manross stated an economic development and redevelopment study is typically 400 participants and 15 to 17 minutes, which would be his recommendation. Commissioner deHaan stated the City is trying to update the visioning process and the Economic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP) i the City did not use a questionnaire last time; inquired why a survey should be used now and whether future funding mechanisms would be included. The Development Manager responded the budget was over $100,000 for the EDSP and downto… | CityCouncil/2006-06-07.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-06-20.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-06-20 | 3 | helping the City through dark times. Mayor Johnson presented a certificate of Special Recognition from Congressman Pete Start and a resolution from State Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, and the City seal. Ms. Korade thanked past and present Council for the opportunity to work in Alameda; stated the City has a great staff. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Johnson announced that the recommendation to authorize filing for a $2.3 million grant application [paragraph no. 06- 314] would be 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. [Note Mayor Johnson abstained from voting on the June 6, 2006 regular meeting minutes (paragraph no. *06-310)]. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. . ] (*06-310) - Minutes of the Special City Council Meetings on May 30, 2006, May 31, 2006, and the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on June 6, 2006. Approved. [Note: Mayor Johnson abstained from voting on the June 6, 2006 regular meeting minutes. ] (*06-311) Ratified bills in the amount of $1,368,889.80. (*06-312) Recommendation to award Contract for Legal Advertising for Fiscal Year 2006-07. Accepted. (*06-313) Recommendation to reject the sole bid, value engineering and re-bid revised bid documents for the construction of the Bayport Community Building. Accepted. (06-314) - Recommendation to authorize filing for a $2.3 million grant application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission to implement the Webster Renaissance Project, Phase II. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 June 20, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-06-20.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-07-05.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-07-05 | 3 | Mayor Johnson thanked the George's for the beautiful clock; stated the George's wanted to donate the clock for many years; the clock adds to Park Street's character and appearance. Debbie George thanked Development Services for handling the process swiftly and professionally. Mayor Johnson requested that the City hold a dedication ceremony and install a plaque recognizing the George's. Frank George thanked Council and the community. By consensus, the motion carried by unanimous vote - 5. (*06-348) Recommendation to award Contracts [with Veicon Technology, Inc. and Sirsi Corporation DBA SirsiDynix] in the amount of $417,445.56 for Information Technology in the New Main Library. Accepted. (06-349) Recommendation to appoint Rebecca A. Kozak to the Bay Area Library and Information System (BALIS) Advisory Board. Withdrawn. (*06-350) Resolution No. 13982, "Calling for a General Municipal Election to be Consolidated with the Statewide General Election, to be Held in the City of Alameda on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 and Requesting the Alameda County Board of Supervisors to Permit the County Clerk/Registrar of Voters to Render Specified Services to the City Relating to the Conduct of Said Election. " Adopted. (*06-351) Resolution No. 13983, "Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Grant Contract between the State of California Department of Boating and Waterways and the Alameda Police Department. Adopted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (06-352 - ) Resolution No. 13984, "Reappointing Roberto Rocha to the Civil Service Board. Adopted; (06-352A) Resolution No. 13985, "Appointing Michael E. Soderberg to the Civil Service Board. " Adopted; (06-352B) Resolution No. 13986, "Appointing DuWayne A. Crone to the Commission on Disability Issues. " Adopted; (06-352C) Resolution No. 13987, "Appointing Paulina Kirola to the Commission on Disability Issues. " Adopted; Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 July 5, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-07-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-07-18.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-07-18 | 3 | National Campaign. Adopted. The Supervising Planner provided a brief presentation. Mayor Johnson stated that plug-in - vehicles are in line with the City's vehicle replacement program; she would prefer to have an Alameda Power and Telecom representative on the Task Force. The Supervising Planner stated that a Public Utilities Board representative would be on the Task Force. Mayor Johnson inquired whether a Planning Board Member was interested in serving on the Task Force. The Supervising Planner responded the Boards and Commissions have not been approached; stated various Planning Board Members are on subcommittees. Mayor Johnson stated the Task Force composition could be brought back to Council for review. The Acting City Manager stated the Public Utilities Board President volunteered to be on the Task Force last night. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether any other cities have moved forward on the initiative. The Supervising Planner responded all cites are moving forward together data is being collected; the next process will be reviewing the data and setting local and regional goals. Mayor Johnson stated that most Alameda County cities are moving forward with the initiative; the Alameda County Conference of Mayors endorses the ICLEI portion. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the meeting. Proponents (In favor of resolutions) : Carol Stone, Alameda; Karen Butler, League of Women Voters (submitted handout) ; Joyce Mercado, Alameda. Edward Thorp, Alameda; Stanley M. Schiffman, Alamedans for Climate Protection; Ron Silberstein, Alameda; Herb Behrstock, Alamedans for Climate Protection; Michael J. Krueger, Alameda; Jodie Van Horn, Plug-In - Bay Area; Marc Geller, Plug-In - America/Electric Auto Association (submitted handout) ; Jon Spangler, Alameda Recycling Coalition; David Teeters, Alamedans for Climate Protection. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 July 18, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-07-18.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-07-26.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-07-26 | 3 | The Development Services Director responded she was not sure whether the sign could be animated within budget. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether another scheme reduced the parking garage size to four levels plus the roof. The Development Services Director responded said scheme was not evaluated but could be a cost savings to the project; stated the project could be constructed within the existing budget if the parking garage size was reduced to four levels. louncilmember/Commissioner deHaan stated he was leaning towards a five-screen theater and a five-level parking garage, which would provide more seats and might not jeopardize retail as much; numbers could be extrapolated to reduce the cost by $2 to $2.5 million. The Development Services Manager continued with her presentation. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the HUD loan had certain parameters. The Development Manager responded job generation is one of the major criteria. The Development Services Director stated the HUD program no longer exists. Councilmember/Commissioner Daysog inquired whether an increase in retail square footage would increase jobs. The Development Services Director responded possibly; stated the HUD application cannot be re-evaluated and re-ranked at this time. Vice Mayor/Commissioner Gilmore stated the City risks losing $7 million in HUD funding if the City gets too far away from the approved project parameters. The Development Services Director stated the developer has agreed to take on all the operating costs for the Historic Theater because of the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) conditions and projected revenue generation; funds would need to be taken out of the General Fund if the City took over operation and maintenance. Councilmember/Commissioner deHaan inquired whether deferred interest was one of the benefits of the HUD loan. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and 3 Community Improvement Commission July 26, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-07-26.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-08-01.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-08-01 | 3 | ( *06-387) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on July 18, 2006, and the Special City Council Meetings held on July 20, 2006 and July 26, 2006. Approved. (*06-388) Ratified bills in the amount of $8,054,736.54 (*06-389) Recommendation to adopt Specifications and authorize Call for Bids for the Purchase/Lease of two greens mowers, two reel mowers, one tractor, five electric utility vehicles, one sweeper, and one self powered aerator. Accepted. (*06-390) Recommendation to amend Agreement with Masayuki Nagase to modify the dates of deliverables for Library Art Work for the New Main Library Project. Accepted. (*06-391) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Deleting Section 2-63.10, Third Party Claims, and by Adding a New Section 2-65, Disposition of Property Consisting of Sections 2-65.1 through 2-65.5, to Article V, Administrative Policies and Procedures Introduced. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (06-392) Public Hearing to consider Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding Article XVIII Earthquake Hazard Reduction in Existing Wood Frame One and Two Story Residential Structures to Chapter XIII (Building and Housing) Introduced. The Building Official gave a Power Point presentation. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether upgrades would be required for hazardous plumbing, mechanical, electrical, and fire/life safety systems, to which the Building Official responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Matarrese inquired what was the rationale for a flat fee, to which the Building Official responded a flat fee would provide an incentive to homeowners. Vice Mayor Gilmore opened the public portion of the hearing. David Kirwin, Alameda, stated multiple units should be included in the proposed program; he fears that seismic retrofitting would become mandatory; the 88,000 housing units referenced by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) already have survived more than a 6.9 magnitude earthquake on the Hayward Fault. Regular Meeting Alameda City … | CityCouncil/2006-08-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-08-15.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-08-15 | 3 | time coming and will be a fresh start for the West End. Don Petersen, Alameda, stated that he supports the staff recommendation noted that Wilver is the correct first name; recommended using the name Wilver "Willie" Stargell. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he liked the idea of using both the given name and famous name; inquired whether Councilmember Daysog would support the idea. Councilmember Daysog responded in the affirmative; stated all the hard work should be attributed to the Encinal High School Alumni Association. Councilmember deHaan stated he had the privilege of attending school with Willie Stargell he is pleased to have such a fine person representing Alameda's gateway. Mayor Johnson stated the correct spelling of the given name should be verified; she liked the idea of using the given name and famous name. Henry "Nick" Evans, Alameda, commended Council for honoring one of Alameda's greats. Councilmember Daysog stated that everything written indicates that Willie Stargell was a great baseball player and humanitarian; Alameda owes a great amount of gratitude to Willie Stargell. other young players are carrying on the tradition. Mr. Cabral stated Willie Stargell gave stars out every time he hit a homerun; suggested placing a star before and after his name. Councilmember deHaan stated Willie Stargell had the nickname "Pops" which indicated how his fellow teammates felt about him; Willie Stargell was involved with a Sickle Cell Anemia campaign. Councilmember Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation with direction to use the name Wilver "Willie" Stargel] and place a star before and after the name. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (06-413) Ordinance No. 2949, "Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Deleting Section 2-63.10, Third Party Claims, and by Adding a New Section 2-65, Disposition of Property Consisting of Sections 2- 65. 1 through 2-65.5, to Article V, Administrative Policies and Regular Meeting 3 Alameda City Council August 15, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-08-15.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-09-05.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-09-05 | 3 | (*06-434) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report for the Period Ending March 31, 2006. Accepted. ( *06-435) Recommendation to amend the Consultant Agreement with Consolidated Construction Management extending the term, scope of work and price for the Alameda Free Library, New Main Library Project, No. P.W. 01-03-01. Accepted. ( (*06-436) Recommendation to reject Bids for the Modular Recreational Building and Site Improvements at Washington Park. Accepted; and (*06-436A) Resolution No. 14006, "Authorizing Open Market Negotiation of Contract Pursuant to Section 3-15 of the Alameda City Charter for the Modular Recreational Building and Site Improvements at Washington Park, No. P.W. 05-06-17, and Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into Such an Agreement for $650,000, Including a 10% Contingency. Adopted. (06-437) Resolution No. 14007, "Authorizing Open Market Purchase of Twelve Vehicles from Good Chevrolet, Alameda in an Amount Not to Exceed $251,230.00. Adopted. Councilmember Matarrese stated the staff report indicates the alternate fuel vehicle policy was considered but alternate fuel vehicles are not recommended; inquired whether the use of mini pickups was analyzed; stated a mini pickup was used for a recent dedication ceremony and an electric flatbed could have been used. The Public Works Director responded use is reviewed and discussed with departments; stated the Recreation and Parks Director indicated a flatbed could not have been used at the dedication ceremony based on bed size; the vehicles being replaced carry equipment, tools, parts and chemicals for pool maintenance, which could not be accommodated by the size of the electric flatbed. Public Works mini trucks travel outside of the City; the most reliable electric flatbeds on the market only travel 25 miles per hour, which would not work for travel out of Alameda. Councilmember Matarrese requested that the level of detail provided by the Public Works Director be included in staff reports in the future; inquired whether diesel fuel was… | CityCouncil/2006-09-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-09-19.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-09-19 | 3 | voice vote - 5. (06-468) Resolution No. 14012, "Approving Amendment No. 2 to the 1986 Alameda County Transportation Expenditure Plan. Adopted. Councilmember Daysog stated the issue has been controversial in the City of Hayward; the City is being asked to join other Alameda County cities in voting for a change to the Measure B funding program; some people do not want to widen Mission Boulevard; stated he would abstain on the matter. Mayor Johnson inquired whether any other projects were remaining, to which the Public Works Director responded two projects remain. James O'Brien, Alameda County Transportation Authority (ACTA) Project Control Team, stated the Hayward Bypass project was more controversial ten capital projects were listed in the Expenditure Plan; Amendment 1 addressed the first segment of the Route 238 and Route 84 project and was replaced with a set of improvements to address the congestion problems within the corridor; Amendment 2 addresses the connection between Mission Boulevard and Interstate 880; Union City and Fremont originally opposed the connection; the Expenditure Plan Amendment is needed because of the significant variance from the plan description. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Board of Supervisors voted on the amendment. Mr. O'Brien responded the ACTA Board voted four to one; stated Supervisor Haggerty voted no. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Mayor of Hayward voted. Mr. O'Brien responded the Mayor of Hayward voted in favor of the amendment stated the matter needs to go to cities representing the majority of the population in incorporated Alameda County; the matter has been approved by ten of the fourteen cities; Alameda's vote would push the vote over the 50% line. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Fremont and Union City approved the amendment, to which Mr. O'Brien responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Daysog moved adoption of the resolution. louncilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (06-469) Resolution No. 14013, "Establishing Guid… | CityCouncil/2006-09-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-10-03.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-10-03 | 3 | Mayor Johnson stated over 100 years was a worthwhile wait. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Johnson announced that the Minutes [paragraph no. 06-495] and Public Hearing [paragraph no. 06-503] were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilmember Daysog 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. . ] (06-495) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Public Utilities Board Meeting held on September 14, 2006; the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA), Community Improvement Commission (CIC) , and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners Meetings, the Special Joint City Council, ARRA and CIC Meeting and the Regular City Council Meeting held on September 19, 2006; and the Special City Council Meeting held on September 26, 2006. Councilmember Daysog stated that he provided corrected language for the September 19, 2006 minutes to the City Clerk; corrected the September 26, 2006 minutes to reflect that he arrived at 7:45 p.m. Councilmember Daysog moved approval of the minutes with noted corrections. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Note: Vice Mayor Gilmore and Councilmember Daysog abstained from voting on the Special Joint City Council and Public Utilities Board minutes) PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS (06-496) Proclamation declaring October as Disability Awareness Month. Mayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Ed Cooney, Chair, Mayor's Committee on Disability Issues and Toby Berger, Committee Member. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 October 3, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-10-03.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-10-17 | 3 | ( *06-518) Resolution No. 14029, "Authorizing the Purchase of Two New Type-3 Fire Ambulances Using the North County Fire Protection District's Competitive Bid Award and Approving a Purchase Agreement with Leader Industries in an Amount Not to Exceed $268,925.29. Adopted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (06-519) Public Hearing to consider a General Plan Amendment (GP05-0001) to remove a 4.6-acre portion from the 10-acre planned Estuary Park in the MU-5 (Specified Mixed Use - Northern Waterfront, Willow Street to Oak Street), and rezoning (R05-003) for properties located at 2241 and 2243 Clement Street from M-2 General Industrial (Manufacturing) District to R-4/PD Neighborhood Residential/Planned Development Combining District in order to allow for residential development of up to 242 dwelling units. The properties are located north of Clement Street, west of Oak Street, and adjacent to the Dakland-Alameda Estuary. Applicant Francis Collins dba Boatworks and (06-519A) Introduction of Ordinance Rezoning Portions of Property Located at 2241 and 2243 Clement Avenue from M-2, General Industrial (Manufacturing) District to R-4, Neighborhood Residential and PD, Planned Development Combining District (R- 4/PD). Introduced. The Supervising Planner provided a brief presentation. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing. Proponents (In favor of General Plan Amendment) : Robert McGillis, Philip Banta Associates Architecture (provided handout) ; Greg Harper, Attorney for Applicant. Opponents (Not in favor of General Plan Amendment) : Joseph Woodard, Estuary Park Action Committee (EPAC) (provided handout) ; Dorothy Freeman, EPAC; Sue Field; Alameda Jay Ingram, Alameda; Deb Greene, EPAC; Doug Siden, East Bay Regional Park District; Jon Spangler, Alameda: Jason Snyder, Alameda. *** ouncilmember Daysog left the dais at 8:26 p.m. and returned at 8:28 p.m. *** There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the hearing. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 October 17, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-11-01.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-11-01 | 3 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA) MEETING WEDNESDAY- - -NOVEMBER 1, 2006- -6:00 P.M. Mayor/Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 6:05 p.m. Roll Call - Present : Councilmembers/Authority Members Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor/Chair Johnson - 5. Absent : None (06-529) Conference with Labor Negotiators: Agency negotiators; Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee organizations : Alameda City Employees Association, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers IBEW) Management and Confidential Employees Association, Executive Management Group, and Police Association Non-Sworn. (ARRA) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Name of case : Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, ASBCA No. 54684 - Under Contract No. N62474-97-RP-00P68. Following the Closed session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor/Chair Johnson announced that regarding Labor, Council received an update on the status of negotiations with the various bargaining units; stated Council has reached a tentative agreement with IBEW; regarding Existing Litigation, the Authority reviewed potential terms of settlement and direction was given regarding potential settlement terms. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor/Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:00 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 Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority November 1, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-11-01.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-11-14.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-11-14 | 3 | (06-543) Public Hearing to consider a proposal by Warmington Homes, California for a General Plan Amendment (GP05-002) rezoning (R05-004), Master Plan (MP05-001), Tentative Map (TM05-002), and adoption of a mitigated Negative Declaration (IS05-0003) for a development of forty (40) new, detached single-family residences, and related utilities, streets, open space and visitor parking and an appeal of certain conditions of approval on Development Plan and Design Review permits (PD05-02) . The project site is located at the northwest corner of Grand Street and Fortmann Way at 2051-2099 Grand Street. Continued; (06-543A) Adoption of Resolution Adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program for the Grand Marina Village Development Located at the Northwest Corner of Grand Street and Fortmann Way (State Clearinghouse #2006-04-2145) . Not adopted; (06-543B) Adoption of Resolution Approving General Plan Amendment (GPA-05-02) - for Grand Marina Village to Amend the General Plan Land Use Diagram to Change the Designation of Approximately 8.3 Acres to Specified Mixed Use and Amend Sections 2.2, 2.3, and 2.6 and Associated Tables of the Land Use Element to Reflect the Specified Mixed Use Designation. Not adopted; (06-543C) Introduction of Ordinance Reclassifying and Rezoning Property Located Adjacent to the Oakland Estuary and Grand Street from M-2, General Industrial (Manufacturing) District to MX, Mixed Use Planned Development District (MX). Not introduced; (06-543D) Introduction of Ordinance Approving Master Plan MP05-01 for a Mixed Use Development Including Single-Family Residential, Recreational Marina, Maritime Commercial, and Open Space Uses, Located within a Project Area Encompassing Approximately 8.36 Acres of Land and Water at the Intersection of Grand Street and the Oakland Estuary. Not introduced; (06-543E) Adoption of Resolution Approving Tentative Map, TM05- 0002, for Property Located Between Grand Street, Fortmann Way, and the Oakland Estuary. Not adopted; and (06-543… | CityCouncil/2006-11-14.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-11-21.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-11-21 | 3 | Corps of Engineers does not have funds for the repair nor the authority to do seismic retrofitting; 1990 and 1996 legislation changed the Corp's emphasis; along with the last administration; the Army Corps of Engineers is being encouraged to get rid of any property that is not used; stated the scouring occurs naturally; dredging is not necessary because the depth stays the same. The Project Manager stated that the Army Corps of Engineers still has the responsibility for the Tidal Canal because the Canal is part of the Oakland Harbor project; the Port of Oakland is the sponsor for the Oakland Harbor project and would need to request the Army Corps of Engineer to perform the maintenance. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether dredging has been done in the last twenty years. The Project Manager responded that he does not think soi stated spot dredging was performed over twenty years ago. Councilmember deHaan stated that he recalled some dredging in support of some operations above High Street. The Housing Authority Executive Director stated a homeowner near the High Street Bridge had some dredging done because of storm water discharge into the Estuary. Councilmember deHaan inquired who paid for the dredging, to which the Housing Authority Executive Director responded the homeowner. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether the Army Corps of Engineers experienced a similar situation where a bridge was at risk of being demolished because of lack of legislation; further inquired how long it takes to implement the legislation. The District Counsel responded the Sacramento District had a big push to transfer a bridge that was connected to West Sacramento; stated special legislation was needed for the non-federal sponsor to take over the bridge the legislation took over a year; she would ask the Coast Guard if statutory authority was invoked to order bridge owners to remove bridges. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Army Corps of Engineers would be responsible for abandoned boats and debris. The District Counsel responded the… | CityCouncil/2006-11-21.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-12-05.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-12-05 | 3 | (06-592) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal of the Planning Board's Approval of Major Design Review DR06-0002 for 3292 Washington Street; and (06-592A) Resolution No. 14047, "Approving to Send the Design Back to the Planning Board for Consideration to Make the Addition More Compatible with the Single Story Characteristics of the Neighborhood; i.e., , Setting the Second Story Back in a Fashion that Would Not Affect the Appearance from the Street. " Adopted. The Supervising Planner gave a brief Power Point presentation. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired how far back the bulk of the second- story addition is from the property line, to which the Supervising Planner responded approximately twenty feet. Vice Mayor Gilmore requested an explanation on the historic and non-historic design review guidelines. The Supervising Planner stated the residential design review guidelines have a series of guidelines for second stories the subject building is non-historic; additional guidelines address historic building additions. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the guidelines are more specific to certain structures, to which the Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Daysog stated photos show shading on December 5 at 11:30 a.m. and September 30 at 10:00 a.m. i inquired what would be the current shade at 8:00 a.m. and how the shade would change with a two-story structure next door. The Supervising Planner responded reflected light would be less with a two-story structure; stated the sky would be less visible; no one has argued that the addition would not affect the neighbor's livability. Mayor Johnson inquired what is the existing square footage of the house, to which the Supervising Planner responded approximately 1,000 square feet. Councilmember deHaan stated a comparison is easy because a large home already exists next to similar property; noted that there was full sun at 10:00 a.m. today; stated similar structures were in full shade; the kitchen and eating areas are in the center of the house. Mayor Johnson op… | CityCouncil/2006-12-05.pdf |
CityCouncil/2006-12-19.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2006-12-19 | 3 | CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [ Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number. . ] (*06-606) - Ratified bills in the amount of $3,960,702.16 REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS None. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the meeting at 9:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 December 19, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-12-19.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-01-02.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2007-01-02 | 3 | Councilmember deHaan inquired whether office space is still available on the second level, to which the Planning and Building Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of resolution. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether said motion included customer and employee restrictions, to which Councilmember Matarrese responded in the affirmative, as recommended. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (07-011) Public Hearing to consider an Appeal for Major Design Review, 06-0081, for Building 300 at 2245 South Shore Center; and Major Design Review, 06-0096, for Building 500 at 2246 South Shore Center. Appellant: Harsh Investment Properties; and (07-011A) Resolution No. 14055, "Upholding the Appeal by Harsch Investment Realty for Major Design Review, DR06-0081, Building 300, Located at 2245 South Shore Center. Adopted and (07-011B) Resolution No. 14056, "Upholding the Appeal by Harsch Investment Realty for Major Design Review, DR06-0096, Building 500, Located at 2246 South Shore Center. Adopted. The Planning and Building Director provided a brief Power Point presentation. Councilmember Gilmore requested an explanation of the overlay showing the added square footage. The Planner III stated the overlay is for the Building 400 and 500 area; the blue, crossed-hatched square building is the former Velvet Grill building proposals are to demolish the building and push the area down for connection to the existing Petco building Building 400 would become an appendage to Building 500 and is a little over 100 square feet less than the existing two buildings Building 300 is the same footprint approved by Planned Development and Design Review in 2003; the difference is that the front portion has a second story and has increased by approximately 4,600 square feet. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the net square footage gain is a little less than 7,100 square feet compared to what was approved in 2003. The Planner III responded 7,100 square feet repre… | CityCouncil/2007-01-02.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-01-16.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2007-01-16 | 3 | The Business Development Division Manager responded anyone could participate; stated usually, a $250,000 to $300,000 threshold is needed. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the City ever carried bonds before. The Business Development Division Manager responded the City has never carried bonds for private development. Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether other communities have a high participation level. The Business Development Division Manager responded the Program is new; stated there is no cost; a lot of cities have joined because the Program provides an economic tool for future development. Mayor Johnson stated the Program is a financial tool that would benefit the community. Vice Mayor Tam moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (*07-031) Public hearing to consider approval of Tentative Map Tract 7846 (TM06-0006) for the purpose of establishing eight residential lots within four buildings located at 626 Buena Vista Avenue within the R-4-PD Neighborhood Residential Planned Development Zoning District. and (*07-031A) Resolution No. 14060, "Approving Tentative Map Tract 7846, TM06-0006, for the Purpose of Establishing Eight Residential Lots within Four Buildings Located at 626 Buena Vista Avenue. " Adopted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (07-032) Public Hearing to consider a proposal by Warmington Homes, California for a General Plan Amendment (GP05-002), Rezoning (R05-004), Master Plan (MP05-001), Tentative Map (TM05-002), and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration ( IS05-0003) for development of forty new, detached single-family residences, and related utilities, streets, open space and visitor parking; and an appeal of certain Conditions of Approval on Development Plan and Design Review permits (PD05-02) The project site is located at the northwest corner of Grand Street and Fortmann Way at 2051-2099 Grand Street; Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 January 16, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-01-16.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-02-06.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2007-02-06 | 3 | gas have factory-type installations. The Police Chief responded technology will continue to advance in the next few years; stated alternative fuel sources would be monitored at trade shows. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the meter enforcement vehicles are gas or electric, to which the Police Chief responded electric. Councilmember Matarrese stated more creativity is needed as the City replaces fleet vehicles; the Crown Victoria was the standard at a time when gas was cheap police departments around the world use smaller, more Fuel-efficient cars. Vice Mayor Tam moved approval of the staff recommendation with the notation that staff evaluated potential alternative fuel source vehicles. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ( *07-051) Recommendation to authorize the Fire Chief to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement with the City of Oakland to participate in the California Task Force #4 Urban Search and Rescue Team. Accepted. (*07-052) Resolution No. 14065, "Appointing an Engineer and an Attorney for Island City Landscaping and Lighting District 84-2. " Adopted. ( *07-053) Resolution No. 14066, "Appointing an Engineer and an Attorney for Maintenance Assessment District 01-1 (Marina Cove) . " Adopted. (*07-054) Resolution No. 14067, "Approving Revised Memorandum of Understanding Between the Alameda City Employees Association and the City of Alameda for the Period Commencing July 1, 2006 and Ending June 30, 2009. " Adopted. ( 07-055) Introduction of Ordinance to Repeal the Existing Time Limit for Incurring Debt in the Business and Waterfront Improvement Project. Introduced. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing. David Kirwin, Alameda, urged Council to give the community a choice on whether or not to use bonds. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 February 6, 2007 | CityCouncil/2007-02-06.pdf |
CityCouncil/2007-02-20.pdf,3 | CityCouncil | 2007-02-20 | 3 | unanimous voice vote - 5. (07-080 - ) Recommendation to amend Contracts with Lamphier-Gregory and Omni Means for environmental and traffic evaluations of the proposed expansion of the Alameda Towne Centre and amend Contract with Harsch Investment Realty for payment of consultant and staff costs. The Supervising Planner provided a brief presentation. Eugenie Thomson, Alameda (submitted handout) urged Council to send the scope back to the Planning Board for further discussion. Dorothy Reid, Alameda, stated she is concerned with the scope; accurate traffic numbers are needed to make a real decision. Claire Risley, Alameda (submitted handout) urged Council not to approve the requested Contract revisions; the scope of work fails to analyze the environmental impacts of the entire Target building; the project is piece mealed; the California courts make it very clear that a public agency may not divide a single project into smaller sub-projects to avoid the responsibility of considering the environmental impact of the project as a whole. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the hearing. Councilmember deHaan stated the proposed additional work is a direct outgrowth of the Planning Board, Transportation Commission and general public; inquired whether the additional scope of work is covered adequately. The Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative; stated the $12,000 referenced by Ms. Thomson is included in the existing traffic study and the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) ; the work was performed outside the original scope of work; staff has reviewed all comments received after the draft EIR; piece mealing comments have been submitted into the record; responses will be included in the final EIR. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether staff would be provided with the Planning Board, Transportation Commission and public comments. The Supervising Planner responded comments would be addressed in the future; stated the Traffic Engineer, Public Works and Planning staff, City A… | CityCouncil/2007-02-20.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]) );