pages_fts
18,746 rows
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Link | rowid ▼ | text | pages_fts | rank |
---|---|---|---|---|
101 | 101 | MINUTES OF THE CONTINUED JULY 6, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- -JULY 20, 2021-6:59 - P.M. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 7:48 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Herrera Spencer, Knox White, Vella, and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5. [Note: The meeting was conducted via Zoom] Absent: None. CONTINUED CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM (21-479) Resolution No. 15801, "Amending Resolution Nos. 15728 and 15739 Amending the 2021 Regular City Council Meeting Dates." Adopted. The City Clerk gave a brief presentation. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she was not on Council when the meeting dates changed; noted correspondence has been received on the matter; stated that she is not available for the proposed September 22nd meeting date; proposed keeping the September 1st meeting date and reverting to the September 21st date; stated the proposal appears to accommodate different requests. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed concern about changing the meeting dates due to religious holidays. Councilmember Knox White expressed support for the September 1st and 22nd meeting dates; stated the League of California Cities has programming the evening of September 22nd until 7:00 p.m.; noted the Regular City Council meeting starts at 7:00 p.m.; Council can make a good faith determination that a large portion of the City has conflicts due to meaningful cultural events; residents have requested Council honor the conflicts; he does not support moving the meeting dates back; September 21st is the first night of Sukkot and September 7th is the first night of Rosh Hashanah; expressed support for September 1st and September 22nd and for moving away from September 15th, which is the most problematic date proposed. Councilmember Herrera Spencer expressed support for Councilmember Knox White's proposed dates. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated there are many ways to participate in a Council meeting; there are also ways to have comments incorporated into the record; members of the public do not vote on matters; many events are held in the… | 10419 | |
102 | 102 | Councilmember Knox White stated missing Eid Al Adha was a mistake; he reviewed the inter-faith calendar for the year in order to avoid major conflicts; he will not support moving the dates back and creating harm; outlined an argument provided by City of Dublin related to flying a rainbow flag for Pride Month; stated Council can address the matter with the meetings identified as having a conflict within the community and send the matter to SSHRB for policy development; Council can do the right thing by a large portion of the community, allowing full engagement in the process. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the analogy of flying the rainbow flag is not applicable; inquired whether additional dates have been proposed to be moved for cultural holidays. Councilmember Knox White responded had he known Eid Al Adha was in conflict, he would have proposed the meeting date be moved; stated he has not requested any other dates be moved; the two meeting dates in September happen to be prominent. Vice Mayor Vella inquired the original meeting dates, to which the City Clerk responded the meeting dates were adopted in December 2020 and modified in January 2021 to be the first and third Wednesday in September; the meeting dates went from September 7th and 21st to September 1st and 15th Vice Mayor Vella expressed concern about taking a stance in terms of policy; stated should a policy be developed and should apply to all Boards and Commissions, not just Council; expressed concern about flip-flopping on the confirmed dates due to substantial business coming before Council; stated that she has a conflict on September 1st; the original proposal created a scheduling conflict with an important high holiday; she wants to find a way to accommodate all community members; scheduling conflicts will be created; it is problematic to throw dates out at the current meeting in hopes for a date that works for all. Councilmember Daysog stated most residents have the expectation of City Hall working on the first and third Tuesday's of the month; expre… | 10419 | |
103 | 103 | Under discussion, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the motion includes direction to staff to have the matter brought before SSHRB in the future; stated that she agrees with Vice Mayor Vella that the consideration is not solely for Council meetings but for all Boards and Commissions. Councilmember Daysog stated that he has no preference for or against bringing the matter to SSHRB in the future; he is fine with the proposal should the majority of Council desire. Vice Mayor Vella made a friendly amendment to the motion to direct the SSHRB to look into the matter; stated any recommendation from SSHRB should be brought back to Council. Councilmember Daysog accepted the friendly amendment. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: No; Knox White: No; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 3. Noes: 2. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft adjourned the meeting at 8:01 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Continued July 6, 2021 Meeting Alameda City Council July 20, 2021 3 | 10419 | |
104 | 104 | MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY--JULY 20, 2021- -7:00 - P.M. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft convened the meeting at 8:01 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Herrera Spencer, Knox White, Vella, and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 5. [Note: The meeting was conducted via Zoom] Absent: None. AGENDA CHANGES (21-480) The City Clerk announced the Dreyfuss lease [paragraph no. 21-507 would not be heard. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she would like the legal notices referral [paragraph no. 21-500] moved as far up in the agenda as possible; time is of the essence. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated a motion is needed to move the matter. Councilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of moving the legal notices referral as high up in the agenda as possible. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether Councilmember Herrera Spencer is proposing moving the matter above the Regular Agenda items, to which Councilmember Herrera Spencer responded in the affirmative. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft expressed concern about moving the matter above the Regular Agenda items. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Knox White stated moving time sensitive matters has occurred in the past. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated the item can move to the end of the Regular Agenda. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated the matter should be heard before or after the Consent Calendar. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: No; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: No. Ayes: 3. Noes: 2. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 20, 2021 1 | 10419 | |
105 | 105 | PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA None. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Herrera Spencer recorded a no vote on the Resolution Continuing the Emergency Declaration [paragraph no. 21-498]. Councilmember Herrera Spencer moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Knox White seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] (*21-481) Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting, the Special Joint City Council and Successor Agency to the Community Improvement Commission Meeting and the Regular City Council Meeting Held on June 15, 2021.Approved. (*21-482) Ratified bills in the amount of $8,591,408.64. (*21-483) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute Two Contract Amendments Totaling $300,000 as follows: 1) Second Amendment with Kaiser Permanente Medical Center, Substantially in the Form of Exhibit 3, for Three Years in an Amount Not to Exceed $260,000 for City of Alameda Occupational Medical Services; and 2) Second Amendment with Preferred Alliance, Inc., for Three Years in an Amount Not to Exceed $40,000 for Drug Testing Services in Conjunction with Services Provided by Kaiser Permanente Medical Center. Accepted. (*21-484) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Easement Amendments for the Pathway Located Between 3227 and 3329 Fernside Boulevard and the Pathway Located Between 3267 and 3301 Fernside Boulevard, Substantially in the Form of Exhibits 1 and 2. Accepted. (*21-485) Recommendation to Approve an Updated Slate of Recreation and Parks Department Community Events. Accepted. (*21-486) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute an Animal Shelter Operator Agreement with the Friends of the Alameda Animal Shelter (FAAS) for an Amount Not to Exceed $997,818 in Fiscal Year 2021-… | 10419 | |
106 | 106 | To 10 Years. Accepted. (*21-487) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute Four, Five-Year Agreements in the Amount of $150,000 Each per Fiscal Year to Bellecci & Associates, BKF Engineers, Kier + Wright, and Sandis for On-Call Land Surveyor Services for a Total Cumulative Amount Not to Exceed $750,000 For Each Agreement. Accepted. (*21-488) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a First Amendment to Agreement with Schaaf & Wheeler for the Preparation of Engineering Documents for the Upgrade of the City of Alameda Sewer Pump Stations, Phase 5, to Extend the Term of the Agreement for Two Additional Years without Amending the Agreement Amount. Accepted. (*21-489) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Five-Year Agreement with Omega Pest Control for Pest Control Services at City of Alameda Facilities for a Total Five Year Amount Not to Exceed $145,572. Accepted. (*21-490) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a First Amendment to Agreement with Precision Emprise, LLC, dba Precision Concrete Cutting to Increase Compensation by $175,000 for Sidewalk Trip Hazard Removal for a Total Aggregate Compensation Not to Exceed $995,000. Accepted. (*21-491) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Second Amendment to the Agreement with Civicorps Schools for Three Years, in an Amount Not to Exceed $33,600 Per Year, for a Total Five Year Amount Not to Exceed $168,000, for Shoreline Trash Removal Services. Accepted. (*21-492) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Five-Year Agreement with Clean Water Fund for Targeted Zero Waste Technical Assistance for Commercial Food Vendors in an Amount Not to Exceed $289,000. Accepted. (*21-493) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Third Amendment to the Agreement with SCS Engineers for Targeted Zero Waste Technical Assistance for Commercial Businesses and Multi-Family Accounts in an Amount Not to Exceed $1,334,978. Accepted. (*21-494) Recommendation to Authorize the City… | 10419 | |
107 | 107 | Homeless Population in an Amount Not to Exceed $149,717 for Fiscal Year 2021-22. Accepted; and (*21-496 / A) Resolution No. 15802, "Amending the General Fund Budget to Appropriate an Additional $27,317 for Operation Dignity to Provide Mobile Outreach Services.' Adopted. (*21-497) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Approve the Purchase of Multiple Network Switches and Wi-Fi Access Points from SHI International Corp, a Reseller of the Cisco Network Switches and Meraki Access Points, to be Located at Various City Owned Buildings in the Amount of $220,334. Accepted; and (21-497A) Resolution No. 15803, "Amending the Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget by Increasing Appropriations for the Information Technology Internal Service Fund (606) by $220,334." Adopted. (*21-498) Resolution No. 15804, "Continuing the Declaration of the Existence of a Local Emergency in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic, Consistent with Government Code Section 8630(c). Adopted. Note: Councilmember Herrera Spencer recorded a no vote, so the item carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Knox White, Vella and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft - 4. Noes: Councilmember Herrera Spencer - 1. (*21-499) Ordinance No. 3302, "Approving a Third Amendment to the Greenway Golf Lease Agreement for Operation of the Corica Park Golf Complex." Finally passed. COUNCIL REFERRAL (21-500) Consider Reviewing the Decision to Award the Contract for Legal Notices to the Alameda Journal, including a Possible Re-Vote to Terminate the Contract and Discuss Ways to Tide Over the Alameda Sun. (Councilmember Daysog) Councilmember Daysog gave a brief presentation. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she received emails from angry residents; one of the eligible uses of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds is assistance for small local business, which could include the Alameda Sun; direction to staff could include exploring allocating ARPA funds to help sustain the small local business. Councilmember Daysog stated the Referral was written to contemplate a scenario where Coun… | 10419 | |
108 | 108 | if possible, to allow Council to vote to have the contract go to the Alameda Sun and also explore the designation of ARPA funds to the small business. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the motion is for both reassigning the contract and giving the funds. Councilmember Herrera Spencer responded Council would vote on how to handle it when the matter returns; staff should research both. In response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the City Attorney stated for a Council Referral, the decision is to ask staff to bring back an analysis and not make a final decision. The City Clerk concurred. The City Attorney stated Council should provide direction about what should be reviewed and staff would return with a matter to vote on at the next meeting. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the City Clerk and City Attorney have sufficient direction, to which the City Clerk and City Attorney responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Vella requested that the direction look at the price differentials and whether there is a way to lower the amount due to lower circulation. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated keeping the contract with the Journal would be more prudent due to the greater circulation; she would like to review what can be done to backfill the revenue loss with ARPA funds. In response to Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft's inquiry, the City Attorney stated a vote is needed. The City Clerk restated the motion. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether an option would be to keep the contract with the Journal and use ARPA funds, to which the City Clerk responded all of the analysis would return. Councilmember Knox White stated that he does not want to waste staff's time if Councilmember Daysog is not going to reconsider awarding the contract. Councilmember Daysog stated that he would do so; he wants to accommodate Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft and does not know what the City Attorney will say in his legal analysis. Councilmember Knox White seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated Council would not need to revisit the matter if it de… | 10419 | |
109 | 109 | Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she is interested in having the contract awarded to the Alameda Sun regardless of the ARPA funds; she wants both issues to come back. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Ayes; Knox White: Aye; Vella: No; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: No. Ayes: 3. Noes: 2. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (21-501) Recommendation to Provide Direction on Constructing or Installing Temporary Shelters, Transitional Housing, and/or Permanent Supportive Housing in the City of Alameda; and Provide Direction on the Type of Homeless Housing Project to Pursue. The Community Development Director gave a brief presentation. Councilmember Daysog inquired how the Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) system works for the pallet construction; stated Alameda Point can be cold at night. The Economic Development Manager responded the pallet option has heating and air conditioning as part of each unit; the systems will need to be connected to utilities. Councilmember Herrera Spencer requested clarification on the funding sources for each project; inquired the reason staff did not bring back a bigger discussion about funding sources and working with the Alameda Housing Authority (AHA). The Community Development Director responded the funding sources require further investigation; stated ARPA funding information has not yet been determined; Council may choose to allocate funding during the ARPA discussion [paragraph no. 21-503]; Project Home Key is developing; applications will not be able to be submitted until fall; staff estimates potential eligibility of $10 million for a larger project; the rules related to the fund have not yet been finalized; staff will explore all funding options and return to Council for a discussion of options; staff will be working with AHA on a potential agreement for affordable housing vouchers. Councilmember Knox White requested clarification on location choices; inquired what details create a succ… | 10419 | |
110 | 110 | staff has considered overall costs, long-term operating costs and utilities; staff will include pros and cons of each site when presenting to Council; staff considers equity in site placement. Expressed support over the spending plan; stated the proposals are clear; questioned the role played by the City within the larger regional approach to homelessness; expressed concern about the hotel acquisition and operations; stated hotel operation is costly and will not be reduced causing General Fund money to be spent: Nancy Shemick, Alameda. Expressed support over the proposals; stated the Marina Village Inn transformation is most viable; the proposal is a logical use; urged Council approve the necessary expenditures to convert the Marina Village Inn to a permanent facility; expressed support for the facilities including a resiliency center where both residents and members of the Alameda public have access to counseling and access to resources, including financial assistance, behavior and physical health services, transportation, legal, nutrition and food access, and shower and laundry facilities; urged Council to provide space for community gardens at proposed locations; outlined the possibility of losing a home; urged Council take the step toward eliminating homelessness in the community: Cheri Johansen, Alameda Progressives. Stated there are many well-considered options for the community; expressed support for the Marina Village Inn project; stated Project Room Key is a short-term project; she hopes the City will leverage Project Home Key and take an existing building, which is connected to plumbing, to allow for temporary, transitional housing; the need to end homelessness is both urgent and long-term; urged Council to use funds to invest in something durable; Marina Village Inn is close to grocery stores and transit: Grover Wehman-Brown, Alameda. Expressed support for comments made by speaker Wehman-Brown; stated it will be valuable to use the Marina Village Inn site: Marilyn Rothman, Alameda. Urged Council suppor… | 10419 | |
111 | 111 | way to get the most units online; the location will provide opportunities and access to transit; there can never be enough new housing; housing is desperately needed; expressed concern about the lack of restrooms in the pallet shelters; stated having an in-unit bathroom provides human dignity and privacy: Josh Geyer, Renewed Hope. Expressed support for the matter; stated long-term unhoused residents of Alameda deserve to have a safe and secure place to live; urged Council to consider thinking about the Marina Village Inn and modular or pre-fabricated options; stated the projects are all eligible under Project Home Key; existing facilities can have many inherent problems; pre-fabricated units can be put together off-site and brought to appropriate locations: Marguerite Bachand, Operation Dignity. Expressed support for the comments of previous speakers; stated the motel purchase is a good idea; the City needs to take permanent housing seriously; many of the unhoused are people who previously had homes; rising rents have forced many out of their homes; transitional housing works for those who have been homeless long-term; transitional housing projects always mean there is an attempt at getting long-term housing; permanent housing is a challenge; the motel is the best option; the City needs to focus on creating permanent housing for people in need: Laura Thomas, Renewed Hope. Expressed support for the purchase of the Marina Village Inn; stated the location is smart; stabilizing people earlier in their crisis is far more effective; discussed her experience with housing insecurity as a senior living on a fixed-income; stated that she appreciates the plan for a mental health center at the Alameda Hospital; there is a need for a resiliency hub located in central Alameda; noted many renters do not learn about relevant resources early enough; people are being displaced without receiving aid; urged Council to consider land trust purchases of rental complexes: Catherine Pauling, Alameda Renters Coalition. Expressed support f… | 10419 | |
112 | 112 | cost more; however, the facility will be better than a modular house in the long run; Council should not miss the opportunity to do something bold; the environment is conducive in allowing families to make a recovery; another element which make the location ideal is the proximity to the job-rich Marina Village business park; Council should encourage staff to figure out ways to work with businesses in Marina Village to get families into jobs; outlined businesses in Marina Village; stated the area is in close proximity to transit; outlined the nearby free Alameda shuttle and Alameda County (AC) Transit bus system; stated the wealth of natural and social amenities makes the Marina Village Inn an ideal place to have the facility; Council will have to perform due diligence related to costs; expressed support for the Marina Village Inn project; stated much of the community has helped families in need; outlined a previous Alameda shelter for homeless women; stated the project should be in a place that will help transition people out of crisis. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she and Councilmember Daysog see eye-to-eye; there is a serious shortage of appropriate housing for families; outlined modular housing in San Jose; stated transitional family housing is needed in Alameda; the Marina Village Inn project can provide many opportunities; costs for rehabilitation are needed; questioned the value of providing children and families a good, safe, and healthy place to grow up; outlined comments of Marina Village residents and Project Room Key; stated that she applauds the neighbors, City and County staff, and members of Building Futures who worked to ensure an environment respectful of everyone; outlined a Town Hall organized by Supervisor Wilma Chan; stated the response has been heartwarming; the City will need to provide communication; the project should be pursued; multiple funding sources will be coming down the pike; the City should seize the opportunity and make a difference in people's lives; she is partial to the hou… | 10419 | |
113 | 113 | number of opportunities for transitional housing; the Marina Village Inn project will not be enough; opportunities for permanent affordable housing or permanent transitional housing should be sought; she looks forward to the staff report related to project administration; a number of different options exist; there is a difference between permanent affordable housing and providing services needed to operate temporary or transitional housing sites; expressed support for a more fleshed out recommendation; stated that she likes the idea of modular home options; however, the option has limitations. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft noted there are currently at least 57 children within Alameda Unified School District (AUSD) which come from homeless families. Councilmember Herrera Spencer discussed funding reports from Alameda Housing Authority (AHA); stated AHA could purchase 18 very-low and low income homes for very-low and low income families; AHA could bid competitively on a land disposition purchase from AUSD to house 30 affordable family housing apartments; AHA could use $8 million to expedite the first two phases of federal funding for the North Housing Development; AHA could buy existing units and restrict the units to at least 80% of the area-median income; AHA could generate nearly 30 units of deeply rent-restricted apartments for $10 million; it is important for City staff to work with AHA to see the viable options; expressed concern about a disregard of costs in the Marina Village Inn project; stated the focus has to be on the limited amount of funds; she prefers permanent housing versus temporary housing; she does not think it is appropriate not to have bathrooms inside housing units; some of the proposed sites have brought revenue to the City over the years; the last five years of revenues, such as the Transit Occupancy Tax (TOT), should be provided to show any potential revenue losses; she would like to see an estimate for upgrades to the facilities; the total costs must be reviewed; Council must keep options open and … | 10419 | |
114 | 114 | sense. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated San Jose City staff indicated that a lot of outreach to neighbors occurred; there is a combination of security and constant outreach and communication; much of the ground work was laid with the Marina Village Inn being a Project Room Key hotel; expressed support for building upon the existing ground work; inquired whether staff has sufficient direction provided from Council. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she would be interested in looking at the Carnegie Library as a viable housing site. The Community Development Director responded staff would be better assessing the Group Delphi option for transitional housing for the short-term; stated staff can conduct further financial analysis around the Marina Village Inn, bottle parcel and any other sites which lend themselves to something comparable; by the fall, staff will need to know what to apply for through the County; staff needs to be cognizant of timing. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated Council is ready for staff to bring the matter back as soon as possible. *** Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft called a recess at 9:24 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:40 p.m. *** (21-502) Recommendation to Receive Direction from City Council Regarding Uses for a Potential Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention Grant Award. The Economic Development and Community Services Manager gave a brief presentation. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 20, 2021 11 | 10419 | |
115 | 115 | In response to Councilmember Herrera Spencer's inquiries, the Economic Development and Community Services Manager stated staff has tried to create a stop gap measure for shelter; the City needs a way to put people in shelter temporarily; the cost is roughly $100 per night to have people in shelter temporarily; the cost allows staff to get some of the most vulnerable people off of the street and into temporary shelter; staff is working with a mental health provider; an agreement for services related to moderate to extreme mental health services can be created; flexible funding amounts are based on providing temporary shelter and mental health services. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired the name of the provider for mental health services, to which the Economic Development and Community Services Manager responded staff is proposing Operation Dignity. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether there is the ability to provide 24 hours a day 7 days a week (24/7) on-call services and whether Operation Dignity provides outreach services and during which hours. The Economic Development and Community Services Manager responded in the affirmative; stated services are currently Monday through Friday. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the services hours could be extended through weekends and evenings. The Economic Development and Community Services Manager responded staff can look into the recommendation instead of the mental health portion; noted Operation Dignity does not currently provide any of mental health services for the City. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the City currently provides mental health services to the homeless population. The Economic Development and Community Services Manager responded in the negative; stated the City currently provides case management. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she can see the need for a program to begin with services provided Monday through Friday; expressed support for the program hours being expanded if successful. Councilmember Knox White moved approval of the staff re… | 10419 | |
116 | 116 | The Economic Development and Community Services Manager stated the funding could span over a couple of years; flexible funds would extend over a longer period of time. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired the proposed time period. The Economic Development and Community Services Manager responded the current funding will likely last one to one and a half years; stated if Council extends the funding, the program will last approximately two years. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she is unsure whether Alameda Family Services (AFS) providing mental health services has been reviewed; noted AFS offers substantial counseling; inquired whether AFS would be eligible to help with the mental health services recommendation. The Economic Development and Community Services Manager responded staff can create a Request for Proposals (RFP); stated the City does not have to work with the proposed entity; AFS is interested in providing services, but not of the type proposed. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated AFS has the capability to perform 24/7 service; inquired whether the allocation of funds is the best use; stated that she is unsure since she does not know the basis of the formula used; expressed support for flexible funds; inquired whether the City can reallocate any funds received based on costs and needs. The Economic Development and Community Services Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the proposed cost for services would be $1,250 per week based on a full weekly schedule, including weekends. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired the length of the term, to which the Economic Development and Community Services Manager responded the term would span one year. Councilmember Herrera Spencer expressed support for some flexibility and for keeping people in their homes. Vice Mayor Vella stated the unhoused population has grown; there is a significant need for members of the day shelter; many people do not have a place to go at night; the recommendation is a good opportunity; the proposal will likely be substantially… | 10419 | |
117 | 117 | On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Daysog: Aye; Herrera Spencer: Aye; Knox White: Aye; Vella: Aye; and Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye. Ayes: 5. (21-503) Recommendation to Assign a Portion of the $28.68 Million of Funding from the Federal Government through the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) of 2021 to Assist with Recovery from the Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic. The Assistant City Manager gave a Power Point presentation. Councilmember Knox White inquired whether the current budget includes $8 million in revenue loss or whether the recommendation is new funding not considered in the current budget, to which the Assistant City Manager responded the recommendation is new funding not considered in the current budget; stated staff will bring the matter back as part of a mid-year or mid-cycle update depending on when Council directions and actions occur. Stated groups have met to discuss how to use ARPA funds; Transform Alameda believes the City has a once in a generation opportunity to use ARPA funds to establish comprehensive, integrated public services for a safe, healthy, and thriving community; ARPA was created in response to the public health and economic crisis which has impacted the poor and marginalized populations; the goal of ARPA is to lift up members of the community in ways which support and sustain well-being; urged the City to use ARPA funds directly to address the community's inter-connected needs and struggles, specifically around housing, mental health, economic security and climate vulnerability; expressed support for the Marina Village Inn project; urged the City to consider looking into funding a community land trust in order to preserve housing; expressed support for a mental health clinic, a resiliency hub and a UBI which fits Alameda's specific needs: Josh Geyer, Transform Alameda. Stated Renewed Hope stands in full support of the priorities submitted in a letter; expressed support for the priorities provided by speaker Geyer; stated th… | 10419 | |
118 | 118 | options related to cost effectiveness and for looking at the social and equity impacts, not costs: Nancy Shemick, Alameda. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification on the strictness of ARPA reporting requirements. The Assistant City Manager stated the reporting requirements are frequent; staff must update the federal government on the use of funds on a quarterly basis; the federal government has stressed the importance of adhering to the eligible project list and ensuring accountability for dollars spent; the funds are meant to be an investment in the community; the City must ensure good care is being taken of the public dollar; the overall intent is for local government to do their very best to be transparent with the community and invest in a way that is consistent with the interim final rule from the United States (US) Department of Treasury. The Finance Director displayed a calendar for reporting dates; stated August 31st is the first due date for an interim report; there are many strict requirements; by October 31st , staff will need to complete a second and third quarter report. Councilmember Knox White expressed support for coming back with concepts; stated that he is supportive of the housing proposal; he is open to considering some form of hybrid which includes business assistance; business assistance does not include grants; the one-time funds are meant for rebuilding the resilience of the business areas; expressed support for permanent draws to business districts in order to strengthen the local economy; stated that he will only consider the matter be placed into revenue loss, if the City has flexibility to use funding on desired projects; expressed concern for back- filling the budget; stated that he appreciates the one-time only costs; the housing proposal is the most impactful; he agrees that the funding is a one-time opportunity and should be used to have ongoing and strong future outcomes; expressed concern about squandering funds. Councilmember Herrera Spencer expressed concern about dedicatin… | 10419 | |
119 | 119 | ALAMEDA GOLF COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING Wednesday, September 21, 2005 1. CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Tony Santare called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in Room #360, Alameda City Hall, 2263 Santa Clara Avenue. 1-A. Roll Call Roll call was taken and members present were: Vice Chair Tony Santare, Secretary Betsy Gammell, Commissioner Ray Gaul, Commissioner Bill Schmitz and Commissioner Jane Sullwold. Absent: Chair Sandré Swanson and Commissioner Bob Wood. Also present were General Manager Dana Banke and Head Golf Professional Matt Plumlee. 1-B Approval of Minutes - Regular Meeting of August 17, 2005 The following correction was made: Item 1-A, line 4 Commissioner Sullwold was present and Commissioner Wood was absent. Item 3-A, line 33 90' should be 90°. Item 3-C, line 9 Cooridinator should be Coordinator. Item 5-D, line 15 Omission of the word "to" before City Council. The Commission approved the minutes unanimously with the aforementioned changes. 1-C Adoption of Agenda The Commission approved the agenda unanimously. 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 3. AGENDA ITEMS: 3-A Approval of the Golf Complex Policy Board. (Action Item) The General Manager stated that the policy board was originally slated as an Action Item at the last meeting and was changed to a discussion item. Decided at the meeting was to have the policy board in the Pro Shop instead of on the first tee of the courses so that customers can read them while checking in to play golf. The question was raised as to whether the Risk Manager has seen the policies and approves of them. The General Manager stated that he has reviewed the policies Page 1 of 6 | 10419 | |
120 | 120 | with the Risk Manager and they are appropriate to post. It was mentioned that people might not know what the phrase "pace of play" represents. The General Manager responded that the volunteer marshals on the tee explain the pace of play policy to the customers. The General Manager also mentioned that the Complex is looking at purchasing clocks to place on the courses to help with the pace of play. The clocks will be on #1, #6, #12, and #18 of the 18 hole courses and when the golfer arrives at those holes the clock should read their tee time if they are playing at the correct pace. The suggestion was made to have a prize for golfers who play in less than 4 hours, possibly a ball marker. Also suggested was to include the phrase "keep up with the group in front of you" in the golf carts. After discussion the following changes were made to the policy board: To make your experience enjoyable the following rules apply: 1. All players and spectators must check in at the Pro Shop before starting play. 2. Do not enter water hazards or sloughs. 3. AED Medical Response units are located at EF #9, JC #5, Pro Shop and Driving Range buildings. 4. Please cooperate with golf course marshals at all times. 5. Observe all pace of play policies. Please play "ready" golf. 6. 90-degree cart rule in effect at all times, unless otherwise specified. 7. No spectators allowed unless approved by professional staff. 8. Players under the age of 10 years must be accompanied by an adult or have approval of professional staff. 9. Golf or tennis shoes only. No multi-purpose athletic cleats allowed. 10. Proper golf attire required. 11. Please observe appropriate cell phone etiquette. 12. No coolers. Outside alcoholic beverages are prohibited. 13. Players and spectators use golf facilities at their own risk. 14. Failure to follow all the rules of this Golf Complex may result in your removal from the facilities. The Commission approved the amended Policy Board unanimously. 3-B Approval of the Revised Golf Course Management Practice Regarding a Polic… | 10419 | |
121 | 121 | The purpose of this management practice is to establish and clarify procedures regarding the use of a medical/disability flag for golf car access to the Golf Complex courses (excludes Mif Albright). Policy It is required that the Golf Complex provide to customers with a valid medical disabilities card a rental golf car to reasonably access the golf courses. Procedures Unrestricted access when weather and/or maintenance conditions permit. When maintenance conditions restrict golf car access to cart paths only, customers with valid disability cards may access the golf course under the 90-degree restriction. (Drive parallel to fairways from cart paths and rough, then perpendicular across fairway to ball.) Recipients of Medical/Disability flags will be identified by staff writing the word "medical" on the golf car liability acceptance form and the golf car windshield. Recipients will also be issued a blue flag to be attached to the golf car. When it is no longer safe to traverse fairways, areas near sloughs, lakes, tees, and green banks due to inclement weather conditions, no access to fairways will be permitted. The Commission approved the amended the Management Practice #2 unanimously. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A Golf Shop and Driving Range activities report by Head Golf Professional Matt Plumlee. The Head Golf Professional reported that the Complex recently hosted a Taylor Made Demo Day at the Driving Range that went very well. Ken Jones is conducting free instruction clinics every Thursday morning for the Alameda Women's Golf Club. Also reported was that on Sunday, September 26, 2005 the range balls will be replaced with new ones. 4-B General Manager Dana Banke's report highlighting maintenance and operational activities for the month at the Golf Complex. Page 3 of 6 | 10419 | |
122 | 122 | The General Manager reported that he has been given authorization to hire employees that are 16 years old. Employees previously had to be 18 years old. The Request for Proposals (RFP) for the Restaurant Services was completed and 19 RFPs were sent out. The General Manager has spoken to many of the recipients. The team consisting of Chair Swanson, Commissioner Gammell and Commissioner Sullwold will review the proposals along with the General Manager to decide which one is best for the facility taking into consideration various criteria. Once the proposals have been reviewed and ranked the General Manager will meet with the City Attorney to negotiate with the concessionaire. The General Manager met with the General Manager of Alameda Power and Telecom, Val Fong to discuss producing and running some commercials on various cable channels. The General Manager will be meeting with Dan Bieber of Sports Restaurant, Inc. to go over the particulars of winding down their contract and vacating the premises. 4-D Beautification Program by Mrs. Norma Arnerich. No report given. 5. COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS 5-A Marketing and Promotions, Secretary Gammell. Commissioner Gammell reported that Ken Jones started the Ladies Clinics on Thursday mornings before the weekly tournament. Although the participation is low it should pick up. The ladies are very happy about the two for one coupon that was sent to the membership recently. New promotions being considered for the winter months include offering monthly ticket holders the option to hit a bucket of balls instead of golfing during inclement weather. 5-B Golf Complex Financial Report, Commissioner Gaul Commissioner Gaul reported that the rounds on the Mif Albright Course were down 22% from last month. Commissioner Gaul thanked the Maintenance Crew for fixing the rubber on the bridge on #5 of the Earl Fry Course. The suggestion was made to contact past tournament groups to encourage them to reserve times for next year. Also mentioned was the possibility of renting a corporate tent to set u… | 10419 | |
123 | 123 | Club Board of Directors meeting on August 18, 2005. The meeting consisted of the nominations for 2006. The nominees were President- George Humphreys, Secretary/Handicap Chairman-Marty Martinez, Treasurer-Ralph Bertelsen and Director of Weekly and Tournament play- George Newkirk. The ballots were sent to the membership on August 28, 2005. Other items discussed were the tournament format and revisions to the by laws. Commissioner Santare also attended the Alameda Golf Club general meeting on August 30, 2005 at the Chuck Corica Golf Complex. The meeting included the results of the putting tournament and club news. Also discussed were the Alameda Point Golf Project and the Front Entry/Tower Project. A representative from the Golden State Warriors stating that the Men's Club could qualify for group discount tickets to the basketball games. 5-D New Clubhouse Project, Commissioner Schmitz. Commissioner Schmitz reported that the next step in the project is the completion of the Financial Projection Report from John Ritchie, CPA. The report will not be distributed in DRAFT form and will not be presented until it is completed. The General Manager reported that he is looking at ways to increase revenue while cutting expenditures to pay the debt service. Some of the ideas being considered are increasing fees and reducing the amount contributed to the General Fund yearly. Should the report show no changes in the revenue and expenditures over the next 5 years it would show no way to repay the debt. The final report will include suggestions and projections with changes to the fee structure and expenditures. Also reported, the proposals for the Phase I and Phase II Environmental Report have been received and work on that should start soon. 5-E Maintenance, Buildings, Security, Albright Course and Driving Range, Commissioner Sullwold. Commissioner Sullwold complimented the Maintenance Crew for the repair on the bridge on #5 of the Earl Fry Course. She inquired on the status of the men's restroom on #9 of the Earl Fry Course. The … | 10419 | |
124 | 124 | Fire Tower. He toured the building recently and found it structurally sound, although there are windows stuck open that need to be closed due to potential moisture damage. 5-H Golf Complex Restaurant Report, Legends & Heroes. No report given. 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON AGENDA (Public Comment) No report given. 7. OLD BUSINESS None to report. 8. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Included in the Commission packet was a memorandum to the Finance Department showing the surcharge payment for August 2005 of $16,219. The year-to-date total to the General Fund is $36,637 for the fiscal year 2005/2006. 9. ANNOUNCEMENTS/ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:27 p.m. The agenda for the meeting was posted 72 hours in advance in accordance with the Brown Act. Page 6 of 6 | 10419 | |
125 | 125 | Transportation Commission Special Meeting Minutes Wednesday November 18, 2015 Commissioner Michele Bellows called the Transportation Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. 1. Roll Call Roll was called and the following was recorded: Members Present: Michele Bellows (Chair) Eric Schatmeier (Vice Chair) Jesus Vargas Christopher Miley Michael Hans Gregory Morgado Members Absent: Thomas G. Bertken Staff Present: Staff Patel, Transportation Engineer Staff Payne, Transportation Coordinator 2. Agenda Changes None. 3. Announcements / Public Comments 3.A. Transportation Commission Meeting: Wednesday, January 27, 2016 at 7 pm Commissioner Schatmeier stated that AC Transit has been actively compiling a service enhancement plan that impacts the City. Commissioner Schatmeier provided a memo summarizing the items that were discussed. He explained three priorities came about from the discussion: 1. funding should stay local; 2. maintain existing AC Transit Line O on Santa Clara Avenue and if they shorten the route as originally proposed by AC Transit then savings should stay local; and 3. in the absence of transfers, AC Transit should maintain direct service to Fruitvale BART Station on the current lines despite the additional cost of doing SO. He recommended that the topic be agendized for the January 2016 meeting so the Commission can discuss the priorities. Staff Payne stated that the City has been working with AC Transit and the City supports their expansion plan. She further explained that the biggest priority is the restoration of the Line 19, Page 1 of 17 | 10419 | |
126 | 126 | which is in the northern waterfront area and a new development will be built in the area. She said last week she went to an AC Transit hearing and summarized the need for restoration of the Line 19. 4. Consent Calendar 4.A. Transportation Commission Minutes - Approve Meeting Minutes - May 27, 2015 Commissioner Schatmeier stated he had a change to Item 5b discussion of the Central Avenue Complete Streets proposal. He said that the minutes state Webster Street and Central Avenue eastbound traffic on Central Avenue has a large amount of vehicles turning right onto Webster Street. He explained that he meant to say was westbound traffic on Central Avenue has a large number of vehicles turning right onto Webster Street and he was concerned about how that would be treated. 4.B. Transportation Commission Minutes - Approve Meeting Minutes - July 22, 2015 Commissioner Miley moved to approve the minutes of May 27, 2015 with the corrections provided by Commissioner Schatmeier and approve the minutes of July 22, 2015. Commissioner Schatmeier seconded the motion. The motion was approved 6-0. 5. New Business 5.A. Review Quarterly Report on Activities Related to Transportation Policies and Plans Staff Patel presented the quarterly report and introduced Rochelle Wheeler, Alameda Public Works, to present an update on the Cross Alameda Trail. 5.B. Recommend City Council Approval of the Central Avenue Concept Including Safety and Other Street Improvements Jennifer Ott, Chief Operating Officer for Alameda Point, presented the report and introduced Staff Payne to discuss the public outreach, staff recommendations and next steps. Jennifer Ott also presented Jean Finney, Deputy District Director of Caltrans District 4, who spoke at the end of the presentation. Commissioner Vargas said having worked with Caltrans there are design manuals and guidelines and there are design exceptions for similar facilities that Caltrans has granted with lane widths of 10.5 feet. Jean Finney replied yes and the standard width for this type of roadway is 1… | 10419 | |
127 | 127 | support a walk and roll event every year to show and emphasize the need to be healthy and safe. He also said the City of Alameda has worked hard to partner with them on numerous fronts and he along with his colleagues support the plan. Commissioner Schatmeier stated that he thought staff did a good job on outreach and the presentation was conducted well. He said Jennifer Ott talked about safety improvements and the disproportionate number of collisions the corridor is responsible for and he felt that was an interesting case. He wanted to know if there will be a report on the before and after statistics as a result of the project. Staff Payne replied she would like to report back about the impacts after construction. Commissioner Schatmeier stated that the presentation commented on the delays in traffic in the year 2035 and he wondered how much of the delays and growth attribute to traffic growth that would take place if the City did nothing. He wondered if that would be a similar level of delay and growth. He also wanted to know if staff attributes the delay growth to the project or the fact that the City will get bigger and there will be more traffic in the year 2035. Staff Payne replied the numbers for the year 2035 do assume that all the planned development is within the estimate including no mode shift and the project is built. Commissioner Schatmeier replied the data reflects the assumption that the project is built, but does the data also assume growth delays in the corridor if the project was not built so there would be no net impact on delays. Laurence Lewis, Associate Planner Kittelson and Associates, said the comparison that Staff Payne mentioned was in addition to the growth that would happen from upcoming development. He explained there was a comparison with the same level of traffic in the year 2035 meaning existing conditions and with what was proposed without mode shifts. Commissioner Schatmeier said the benefits listed included the improvements to bus access and he wanted more detail regarding thi… | 10419 | |
128 | 128 | Commissioner Miley said to follow up on Commissioner Schatmeier's comments about 8th Street and Central Avenue the intersection is tricky and he lived on 8th Street growing up. Overall, he felt the project improves safety throughout the corridor, but staff could look to do more. He wondered if staff could look at having the bike lane encroach into the park because it is concerning what driver behavior would be like at the intersection, especially making that right or left turn onto 8th Street going northwest. Staff Payne replied staff looked at this option. She said the advantage is a more protected space, but the disadvantages are conflicts with bicyclists getting into the park because there is a park facility with a preschool and after care with a lot of parking activity at that intersection. Commissioner Bellows replied staff could move the right turn lane over further and keep the orientation the way it is and that could provide more room for the westbound traffic to not merge. Staff Payne replied there is also a concern when you get to the 8th Street intersection as a cyclist how would you get across since you would not be orientated to go eastbound again. Commissioner Miley said the lineup would not be ideal. Commissioner Miley made a motion to accept staff recommendations with additional requests and move the plan to City Council for review. He requested that staff conduct additional analysis at the 8th Street intersection and to further review the short merge or if there is any way to extend that. He also requested that staff provide the City Council with some analysis that shows what encroaching into the park would look like, so they have some options in front of them. Additionally, he asked that when the project is eventually implemented staff would present an annual review to the Commission. Commissioner Schatmeier seconded the motion. Commissioner Vargas made an amendment to the motion that included having the engineering department review the concept as it evolves, so they are officially in the loop.… | 10419 | |
129 | 129 | Staff Payne replied that would be the lawn space and they would be moving to the two kiosks further south out of the path of the bikeway. Commissioner Miley asked about the Webster and 8th Street intersection. He explained the intersection is where the highest pedestrian incidents were observed. He wondered if there were any treatments or improvements made within the 10 years. Staff Payne replied there were four pedestrian injuries at Webster Street and Central Avenue over the past 10 years and since that time staff has improved that intersection. She said staff created a new marked crosswalk on the east side and they felt that would improve the intersection moving forward. She went on to say that half of the injuries occurred before the intersection improvement and half occurred afterwards, but she felt that did not occur on the eastern side. Commissioner Miley inquired about Washington Park from Page Street to 8th Street, where the bike lane would discontinue. He wondered if staff looked at going into the park to accommodate a lane there. Staff Payne replied staff reviewed the option and decided not to pursue that because park space is very limited and they weighed that as a higher concern. Commissioner Bellows opened the floor to public comments. Kyle Long, Alameda west end student and east end resident, said he took a bicycle safety class and obeys all traffic laws. He said he feels unsafe when bicycling and feels safer when there is a dedicated bike lane. Jay Katter, Alameda Community Learning Center (ACLC) student, said his friend who also bicycles was hit by a car when riding to school. He felt having bike lanes on Encinal Avenue would be very nice. Jay Lucy stated that he does not support the project. He felt the elimination of the parking spots and road access at the intersection of Central Avenue and Webster Street will be a business negative and poor use of City funds. He asked for a loading and unloading study to be conducted and he said West Alameda Business Association (WABA) does not support this p… | 10419 | |
130 | 130 | Kathy Neilson, Central Avenue resident and parent to an Encinal High School student, said she was surprised by the low collision incidents reported at the corner of Encinal Avenue and St. Charles Street because she felt there are more collisions that took place than was actually reported. She was happy to hear about the inclusion of curb extensions and crosswalks because they will be effective. She felt that the loss of one parking spot in front of her home makes up for increasing community safety. She was also happy to see the Sycamore trees would stay and beautify the street. She wondered if the plan includes redirecting activity to go from Santa Clara to Central Avenue. She also wondered if the school district considered changing the school hours. She thought potentially staggering school start hours would reduce the traffic. Colin Wainmain, Academy of Alameda student, said he rides his bike to school 3.5 miles each way. He said he likes to ride in the bike lanes because they do not honk at him and the bike lanes allow him to focus on riding safely and follow the laws. He explained that after school, he often rides down to Webster Street to get a snack and then rides over to soccer practice at Alameda Point. He said he would ride along Shore Line Drive after soccer practice, but his coach would not let him ride in the dark because it is too dangerous. Jim Strehlow, Alameda resident, stated that plans have changed from initial presentation from workshop to workshop to tonight. He said what was shown tonight was new material not previously shown to the public so #1, 2, 3 and 4 became 1, 2a, 2b and 3 from sections A-K. He felt there should be more meetings on the project now that there are new revisions and the community should review and have the opportunity to present questions and receive answers. He asked staff how many citizens along sections A-F have stated that they want a cycle track in front of their house or business, especially since it will be more difficult for them to enter and exit their home or bu… | 10419 | |
131 | 131 | Susan Sperry, Alameda resident, asked the Commission to reconsider the plan and carefully look at the issues of the street. She came before the Commission because she was devastated to see what happened to Shore Line Drive. She carefully gathered newspaper editorials about Shore Line Drive and she is a property owner on Shore Line Drive as well. She said in the past she was able to see the ocean from her window and now there is parking lot. Bruce Kibbe, Santa Clara Avenue resident, felt the plan is excellent and to go ahead with it because this plan is looking towards the future. He said every bicycle equals one less car and one less parking space that needs to be provided by merchants. Commissioner Miley said it was great to see so many young kids out tonight to speak and attend the meeting and he said they were brave to bike to school. Commissioner Bellows replied it was great to see the Alameda Unified School District (AUSD) produce such articulate children. Matt Winn, Central Avenue resident, said one of his kids attends Franklin Elementary School and he does not see the school on the study. He went on to say that there is a whole subset of parents who live on the north side and have kids who attend Franklin Elementary School. He stated that there are four traffic lanes and when crossing the intersection you have to wait 30 seconds or so until one of the lanes notice and stop. However, by that time motorists start getting impatient because there are three other lanes that need to stop and you must wait for all four lanes to stop in order to go. He explained that he uses Central Avenue to get across the City as a motorist and he would gladly give up a lane to see this plan go through, so he recommended the plan. Scott Mace, Central Avenue resident between Webster Street and 8th Street, said he bicycles a lot throughout the island. He felt bikes belong on the street because they are traffic too and motorists need to respect that and most motorists do. He explained that some of the proposed bike lanes are too na… | 10419 | |
132 | 132 | stoplights especially by the school to regulate traffic. He said currently, there are two poles with bright orange flags and that is the only way to get across the street safely. He exclaimed that safety is the most important thing. Commissioner Bellows asked that the speakers with children line up so she can pull their speaker slips in light of the current time. Cosma Hatragi, Maya Lin School student, said he bikes to school every day. He said he sometimes ride his bike after school to Franklin Park Pool to his sister's swim lessons. He explained during his ride there are many fast moving cars and he rides on the sidewalk, which is not safe for pedestrians. He thinks there should be bike lanes on Central Avenue. Deena Hatragin, mother, cyclist and Alameda resident, said she moved to Alameda because it is a bike able town and she uses her bicycle for everyday transportation. She felt very strongly to have her children ride bicycles as well and she hopes that more people will get out of their cars and onto bicycles. She heard over and over again that the City needs to make the island safe enough for everyone to ride, SO she approved the plan. Marissa Wood, Alameda Community Learning Center student, said she regularly shops at the farmer's market and Webster Street businesses. She explained when coming from the west end and approaching onto Webster Street she attempts to bike onto Santa Clara Avenue, but the part of Santa Clara Avenue west of Webster Street has many stop signs and the road is hard to share with cars. So, she stated that when she does not bike down Santa Clara Avenue, she will bike down Central Avenue which is very dangerous. She felt the project would help all members of the community because there will be parking spaces for motorists and the plan will reduce speed limits benefitting pedestrians. Jerry Cevente, 5th Street resident, thanked the Commission and staff for embarking on the study. He said he and his wife have been to all of the public workshops and he has lived on 5th Street for 25 years… | 10419 | |
133 | 133 | impacts on traffic going into the tube even with the development of the adjacent housing project. He wondered how the planners figured there would not be a problem going into the tube. He recommended that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) be conducted in order to look at the number of items that have not been pushed here. He also said that a study of the changes to Shore Line Drive has not been published. Jerry Harrison, Alameda resident, stated that he supports the proposal. He also explained that he has cycled from coast to coast and the one place that makes him uncomfortable is riding on Central Avenue between Sherman and Webster Streets. Diane Brock, west end resident, said she is concerned about recommending the plan without the research data. She explained that staff at the last public workshop said the Planning Department would conduct a traffic study on what is happening at Southshore. She asked that the study be done before moving forward with this plan because the public does not need vague statistics. She also felt a project of this size should have an EIS and she needed data before any recommendation should be considered. Dave Maxi, Bay Street resident, said he is not against cyclists, but he is wary of the narrow traffic lanes and the behavior of cyclists. He went on to say that cyclists would arrive at the Chestnut Street and Central Avenue stop sign and not stop. The cyclists would then go off to the sidewalk or crosswalk and then back onto the bicycle lane. He questioned whether the narrow lanes would create congestion for truck, delivery and vehicular traffic because many delivery trucks double park. He also stated that it is illegal to enter the center lane to pass cars and the extra street trees will take up the car space and create more maintenance issues. Dan Wood, Alameda resident, said he is in favor of the project and he heard a lot of people who are in support of the project. He also heard the community speak about issues which are relevant as well. However, he felt that the City sh… | 10419 | |
134 | 134 | riding on Fernside Boulevard after including the cycle track there and he felt Central Avenue will have the same outcome. Bernie Matthews, west end resident, gave a shout out to Jennifer Ott because she's a true professional. However, he felt there are many similar issues to Shore Line Drive where parts of the community, especially renters, feel the plan is ugly and inefficient. He felt Appazatto Way is a freight train coming down the track and the project is like my way or the highway. He said he has been a resident of the west end for 18 years and cycles often. He encouraged the Commission and staff to take a look at the traffic on Central Avenue because he does not trust the data. He also pointed out that the bike group must have partnered with this project, which felt like a conflict of interest. Kelly Jackson, Central Avenue and 8th Street resident, stated that she generally supports the project, but she has a problem with the plan along the Central Avenue and 8th Street segment. Last year, she wrote the City about the intersection and she was surprised with the relatively low number of reported accidents. She felt it was a step backward for this intersection and people will speed to jockey past each other to get ahead because there is a quick merge ahead of the intersection. She also felt this is an effort to compromise, but this is putting everyone at risk including residents and visitors. Julie Connor, Bay Street resident, said she understood the variety of interests and circumstances that come into play. Were it not for the road diet proposed at 4th and Sherman Streets, she would be in support and she felt the Commission should have more information about this intersection. She referred to slide 7 of the presentation and noted there were three injuries on Sherman Street within a 10 year span and one accident within the 10 year span. She said only Lincoln and Central are thoroughfares and to cross Central Avenue is already difficult. She brought up the survey data and noted that 25 percent of 4th and Sher… | 10419 | |
135 | 135 | and he can now ride his bicycle with his family. He stated that his children will start Franklin Elementary and crossing Central Avenue is a barrier to get to the school. He also explained that he would patronize the businesses on Webster Street more, but he does not want to take the car. Overall, he supported the plan. Karen Ratto, Caroline Street near Central Avenue resident, said she rides her bike around and felt the grant money could cover the EIS. She also feared that San Antonio Avenue will take on more traffic and she didn't hear much about the viability of using Santa Clara Avenue as a bicycle route. Dave Kimball, Advocacy Director for Bike East Bay, said safety is a huge reason to support this project and the community receives a net gain of parking which is a first. He explained if the City received an endorsement from Caltrans then that says something, so they need more partnerships like that including working with the schools. He said his organization conducted shopper intercept surveys to see how modes of travel relate to consumer spending when consumers walk, bike or take public transit. There were two studies conducted locally in downtown Berkeley and Oakland's Temescal neighborhood in order to have local shopper data which support projects like this. Jeffrey Berneford stated that two lanes in both directions offer a lot of flexibility for garbage and delivery trucks to move around vehicles. He felt once the project is in place, a 1.6 minute delay will produce a domino effect because there are three 20-second traffic signal cycles. He suspected that the plan will be very unusable and he did not support the plan. Benty Peterson, Burbank Street resident, said she has two children and she enjoys living in Alameda because they can bicycle. Therefore, she supported the plan, but she had concerns with the gap. Carol Gottstein, disabled Alameda resident, said she was struck by staff's lack of outreach towards the disabled community. She explained that the disabled rely heavily on vehicles and she had con… | 10419 | |
136 | 136 | Lisa Foster stated that she does not live far from tonight's meeting location and she bikes with her 1 and 5 year olds frequently. She said she regularly goes west towards Washington Park, the library and other establishments. However, when she hits Sherman Street they have to go over to Santa Clara Avenue, a busy street with buses, so she would love to stay on Central Avenue. She also said when going past Webster Street and staying on Central Avenue she is okay with that, but the cars that are stuck behind her are probably not okay because they have to negotiate around her. Overall, she felt the proposal is a step in the right direction. John Spangler, Alameda resident and a League of American Cycling Instructor, stated that he rides his bicycle, drives, walks and takes public transit. He explained that he lived on San Antonio and Encinal Avenues so he understood the different perspectives. He said Monday through Friday from 6-7 am and 6:53 pm he has been stuck in the tube going to the Capital Corridor Station in Oakland. He said the intersection of 8th Street and Central Avenue is the chokepoint, but if they can save 16 people from being killed or injured over the next few years, then 96 seconds is not a big price to pay. He was disheartened to hear former chief of police Bernie Matthews say that traffic was more important to him because he was sure his heart bled every time someone was in a collision or victim of a crime. He felt there are too many preventable collisions and injuries and he supported the project. Yet, if the plan had to be revised and there are no bikes lanes created the safest thing is to take the curb side lane, which is the same thing as having a bike lane. Lucy Gigli, Director of Advocacy for Bike Walk Alameda, stated that Central Avenue is not Alameda's main highway it is a neighborhood because the corridor contains housing, schools, parks and businesses. She said currently it is a four lane roadway with an average of seven collisions per year. Staff has done an incredible job composing a… | 10419 | |
137 | 137 | (four lanes of traffic and uncontrolled crosswalks) as the area around Maya Lin School. He said kids think it is safe to go and someone driving 35 mph can take them out. He felt two lanes with a center turn lane is a big difference than a two lane road. He explained that he use to live south of Central Avenue and motorists only have to go across one lane to get into the center lane and merge. He went on to say if Caltrans approved a project it is not a takeover of the bicycle groups. Ultimately, he supported the project. Karen Bay, 5th Street and Taylor Avenue resident, said she is a 15-year ferry rider. She explained that she attended a transportation meeting on November 16 and was told that the ferry experienced a 30 percent increase in the last two years and she has seen it. She has also seen a lot of people riding their bikes to the ferry and a lot of children riding their bikes to school. She said the problem with Santa Clara Avenue is that it is not safe infrastructure for cyclists. So, she approved the project because it is important for students and commuters going to the ferry and for Alameda Point as whole. Peter Baron stated that he organized the first bicycle symposium in Cambridge Massachusetts in the 1970s and he spent his career doing waterfront redevelopment and restoration. He said he has never seen a town with more bikeway and pedestrian potential unrealized than Alameda. He felt the potential for the Alameda Point circumference trail is extraordinary and people will be coming across the island and around the state to go there. Lee Huo, Bay Trail Project Planner, said he supports completing the trail along Central Avenue. He explained that the idea of the trail is to get along the shoreline on a Class I separated trail as often as possible. He pointed out that you do see alignments such as Central Avenue where the project essentially completes the trail between Pacific Avenue and Crown Drive. He thanked City staff and the consultants who worked diligently with the concept. Furthermore, he said t… | 10419 | |
138 | 138 | establishment that needs the loading zone or has a lot of loading. She explained that the merchant is not interested in having a loading zone because that would restrict parking. So, she said double parking occurs and that can still happen with this cross-section. She went on to say that loading/unloading would occur in the bike lane in the painted buffer and motorists could go around. She understood that this configuration is not ideal, but it happens all the time and staff felt having the bike lane blocked every now and then to load and unload was the tradeoff for having a bike lane. She also mentioned that this is a corner establishment so they could still have loading and unloading occur southbound on Webster Street. Commissioner Miley asked staff if the bulb-outs at the corner of Webster Street and Central Avenue will impact delivery vehicles from being able to turn whether they are going north or south on Central Avenue from Webster Street. Staff Payne replied staff does not believe SO and the plan was designed to accommodate trucks. Commissioner Miley recommended that staff work with the business district in order for the streetscape to be designed appropriately for that intersection. Staff Payne replied staff can do that, but they are not at that level of design. Additionally, from what she has heard the area was designed a little tight so it is hard to get in and out when trying to park on Webster Street. Commissioner Miley said people shop online a lot and as a result FedEx and UPS double park and take the travel lane. He asked Alameda Police Department if a car double parked is in the travel lane is it against the law to go around using the center lane. Commissioner Bellows repeated the police officer's answer and said a vehicle cannot drive into the center lane just to pass a double parked vehicle, the vehicle must wait. Commissioner Miley asked Staff Payne what is the cost of conducting an EIR for the project. He also explained that this plan is talking about paint and curb extensions. So, he wondere… | 10419 | |
139 | 139 | Staff Payne replied they are under constrained situations and curb to curb it is 56 feet in width for most of the corridor. She explained that was the best they could do and this is not a best practice bike way due to the door zone. Therefore, staff will have to implement public education around this issue. Additionally, she felt having a separate bike space is much better than what is available today. Commissioner Miley asked staff about the 7 foot parking spaces and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) concern raised by Carol Gottstein. He said when he viewed the map he saw some blocks with 7 foot and 8 foot spaces and he understood that some portions along Central Avenue are constrained. He wondered if there will be ADA parking spaces added to the plan. Staff Payne replied there would be six ADA parking spaces added and staff has looked at the corridor and they believe six would be most appropriate. The parking spaces would be located west to east in front of Encinal High School, Patton Elementary, two parking spaces near the Webster Business District, one parking space by Washington Park and one by the Weber Commercial District. Commissioner Miley asked staff how many ADA parking spaces are currently present within the corridor. Staff Payne replied none. Commissioner Miley replied so this is an addition and they would be 8 feet. Staff Payne replied when the area is 7 feet they would encroach into the landscape strip. Commissioner Miley replied so staff would not encroach into the bike lane or into traffic it would be into the landscaping. Staff Payne said she met with WABA and they liked the two ADA parking spaces at the foot of Webster Street on the east and west sides. She explained that would be accommodated without any change and staff has not produced an exact placement, but that is the direction and their highest priority is to place the spaces at the foot of Webster Street. Commissioner Bellows made a motion to continue the meeting since the time was now 10 pm. Commissioner Schatmeier seconded the… | 10419 | |
140 | 140 | what studies are needed and he wanted to hear from Staff Patel about his perspective on some of the technical issues that are involved. Jennifer Ott replied that they hired Kittelson and Associates who performed the traffic analysis. So, Staff Patel could talk about what Caltrans might inquire about, but she would like Kittelson and Associates to talk about what analysis was performed. Commissioner Vargas stated that Caltrans was looking for additional traffic studies in order to grant the City design exceptions. He explained they only cover the part between Webster and Sherman Streets, which is a state route, and the rest does not need approval but falls on the City. However, for continuity sake he asked staff to talk about the studies Caltrans is inquiring about and the studies that have been done so far, including what are the challenges this project has from an engineer's perspective. Staff Patel replied since this project is only a study they have not done detailed traffic operation analysis. However, from Caltrans' or the City's standpoint staff is conducting analysis on each and every traffic signal along the route and the proposed signals along the route. Yet, that level of detail Kittelson and Associates may have done as an overview. He explained that design exceptions usually go to the headquarters, which is why staff ended up having this route under the City because they were asking for a standard shoulder width and the City did not have the standard width. Commissioner Miley asked staff if the traffic and operational analysis include a review of shifts in vehicle traffic or only show the Central Avenue traffic or also movements to other streets. Staff Patel replied that staff would look into the shifts in vehicle traffic. Commissioner Miley asked staff when the plan would go over to engineering for detail design. Staff Patel replied staff reviewed the conceptual plan and made comments, but the plan is turned over to engineering for detail design when the final plan is approved by the Transportation Co… | 10419 | |
141 | 141 | discovered there was a 1.2 minute increase in travel time going 25 mph from one end of the corridor to the other stopping at all the traffic signals and experiencing delays there. He pointed out that the limitations did not account for people shifting to cycling or walking or account for people diverting to other routes. He heard several comments about the 8th and Webster Street intersection and some of the compromises made for the bike lanes were for vehicular operations and level of service. When he met with the Commission earlier in the year there was a level of service identified at the location. He said they reviewed the intersection in consultation with the community and the City and revised the concept so the intersection could operate at the level of service. Commissioner Schatmeier stated that several intersections were called out as needing attention. He wondered how staff analyzed those intersections, specifically whether traffic signals or new treatments were necessary. He said one speaker stated there should be a light at 6th Street and Central Avenue another speaker stated a traffic signal is needed at 5th Street and yet another | 10419 | |
142 | 142 | Apd ALAMEDA RECREATION AND PARK COMMISSION MINUTES FOR REGULAR MEETING DATE: Thursday, October 11, 2012 TIME: 7:02 p.m. Called to Order PLACE: City Hall Council Chambers 1. ROLL CALL Present: Vice Chair Delaney, Commissioners Lola Brown and Ann Cooke Absent: Chair Restagno and Commissioner Sonneman Staff: Amy Wooldridge, Recreation & Parks Director 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approve the Minutes of September 13, 2012 Recreation & Park Commission Regular Meeting M/S/C Brown, Cooke (unanimously approved) 3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, AGENDA Speaker - Robert "Bob" Ploss, of the Aquatic Task Force, an Ad Hoc Volunteer group, addressed the Commission as an individual by stating he would like to see an aquatic center as part of the Beltline project. He would like to be involved in the process. Speaker - Dorothy Freeman, of the Jean Sweeney Open Space Committee (JSOSC), is very interested in being involved with this project and being part of the process. She provided a brief on how dedicated Ms. Sweeney was to acquiring the land and keeping it open space. Speaker - Helena Lengel, Biology Department of the College of Alameda, stated she also worked with the JSOSC on the ballot measure to acquire the property. She would like to stay involved with the development of the land. She would like to see the students of the College be involved from a scientific study standpoint and learning environment, such as sample testing and measurements. Speaker - Jim Sweeney, husband of Jean Sweeney, delighted this project coming to fruition. Jean never gave up on this, which started in 1998 at a meeting at Mastick Senior Center. The result was that everyone wanted open space for walking, and bike paths and she was able to get 1,000 signatures and the initiative passed. Jean was lucky enough to find the original contact for the buy-back and she was there every step of the way. 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None 5. NEW BUSINESS A. Beltline Property - Staff Wooldridge provided a map handout of the Beltline project [Attachment A] and the land to be develope… | 10419 | |
143 | 143 | Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes - October 11, 2012 Page 2 This is the very start of the community input process for the project, and the Commission's task is to determine what the input process will entail. Commission will lead the process with Wooldridge. Staff suggested the following potential process: Initial community meetings in January or February with outreach including mailing to residents, press releases, posting on web and email, flyers onsite and contacting potentially interested user groups. This initial community brainstorm process would help determine the uses at the Beltline. The second step Council approval of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for a conceptual landscape design, paid by the City's available dedicated Open Space Funds. The next step would be additional community meetings to review the conceptual design. Once the conceptual design and cost estimate are complete, then Staff can apply for State Funds such as the Land and Water Conservation Fund and Prop 84. The LWCF applications are due by Nov. 1, 2013 so that goal is to complete the process prior to that. Both of these funding sources are geared toward open space, which could include active elements such as community gardens, bike and walking trails, playgrounds, etc. It does not include funding for athletic facilities such as a swim center or fields. These are harder to fund and would require other funding sources. Vice Chair Delaney - Are there limitations to lean one way or the other? Director Wooldridge - The only limitation is the Rail Banking Agreement which requires that the 30'-40' area along the length of the Beltline remain available, but there is nothing specific as to where that path is to be. Funding sources are also a factor. Member Brown - Due to the amount of time Ms. Jean Sweeney dedicated to this project we should be conscious about taking our time with the process and getting it right. By looking at the map it looks like a smaller amount of property than the full Beltline. Member Cooke - When will the project… | 10419 | |
144 | 144 | Elks Hoop Shoot event won an Elks National Award. Local youth groups and at our after school sites, will send kids who shot the most free throws out of 25 throws. These finalists will then compete in the finals in January 2013. Teens are working hard on their Haunted House at South Shore. Mastick Open House had 17 vendors and approx. 265 participants. Everyone enjoyed themselves and were encouraged to visit the vendors through a bingo game. Staff plans to increase the number of vendors next year. Good revenue and helpful information for the seniors. Receiving good feedback on the tennis courts resurfacing. Leydecker, Longfellow and Franklin have been done, with Washington underway. This is a Measure WW funded project. Ritler Park lawn is almost fully restored. Became brown due to an adjacent pump station project that cut the water and electrical lines for irrigation. Krusi Park is out to bid, information is available online. | 10419 | |
145 | 145 | Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes - October 11, 2012 Page 4 Encinal Boat Ramp - Wooldridge met with the California Dept. of Boat and Waterways for potential funding of a full renovation. If chosen, they will provide engineers to create a conceptual design and cost estimates which are then used to apply for funding in April 2013. Typically the boat ramp is non-operational in winter but these improvements would make it available year-round and potential add another dock for non-motorized craft. Also was approached by the O'kalani Canoe Club who is interested in coming back to Alameda and making their home at the Encinal Boat Ramp. City Council November 20 - Lease Agreement with Alameda Soccer Club will be discussed. These are the fields currently leased to Piedmont Soccer. Miracle League of the East Bay - Previous agreement with ARRA needs to be revisited. Waiting to hear back from Miracle League to see if they are interested. Meyers House - looking at transferring the House to the Alameda Museum. On the Historical Advisory Board agenda on 11/1/12 then going to City Council for discussion in January or February. Museum has a 5-year capital improvement plan for the house. Currently negotiating with the Ala Costa Centers to provide space for an afterschool program for developmentally disabled children. Woodstock Park baseball field renovation was funded by a 2004 State Grant and is moving forward with a community meeting scheduled for October 24th Mayor's Tree Lighting is December 1st. City website is being revamped Alameda won American's Promise Alliance 100 Best Cities for the 3rd year in a row. The second round of Recreation Specialist interviews have been completed and staff are confirmed: Dennis McDaniels, Christina Bailey and Mariel Thomas. ARPD will host an Open House for staff, Commission and Council on Halloween, 10am-Noon. Please join us if you are available. C. Other Reports and Announcements - None 8. STATUS REPORT ON ONGOING PROJECTS - None 9. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, GENERAL - None 10. ITEMS FOR NEXT AG… | 10419 | |
146 | 146 | LINCOU AVENUE 0 00 200 300 400 500 GOO 700 800 900 1000 2000 SCALE IN FEET APN: 74-905-20-03 APN: 74-905-20-03 AREA: 4, 91.07 : S.F AREA: 4,323.04 S.F. ABL PARCELS OR 0.096 ACRES OR 0.010 ACRES PARCEL 2 PARCEL 4 PARDEL 26 ATLANTIC AVE. ABL TRACK ATLAN STA.12 STEWART PARCEL 3 APN:.74-906-32-05 STA.| AREA: I 4,809.23 S.F. A. U. SCHOOL DISTRICT APN: 74-905-20-03 OR 0.340 ACRES AREA 11,527.55 S.F. P'ARCEL 26 ALASKA PACKERS OR 0.265 ACRES PARCEL | SHEET I OF 3 | 10419 | |
147 | 147 | AM P.M. 2938 E COAST LOT LOT 2 DIVISION OF THE LANDS is ALASKA BASIN AND ENCINAL INDUSTRIES INC OF LOT 3 FORTMÁN BASIN A R CLISTOD SLAND P.M. 5435 S LOT 8, P.M. 4564 - § P.M.5158 ATLANTIC AVENUE LOT 4 LOT 3 P.M.-5852 n LOT-5 LOT / LOT | LOT 2 P.M. 5158 P.M.5158 APN:74-906-32-12SAREA APN: 74-906-32 ALAMEDA BELT LINE YARD Rak AREA: 696,2 OR 15.983 AERES PARCEL 23 en MORITY || STALL STALE STAT is 15 STAJO S AUTHORITY is 51 M 2996 ALAMCOA HOUS/NG AUTHORMY 15 EVENCE EAGLE AVENUE EAGLE AVENUE EAGLE AVENUE DEL MONTE to is is I DEL/MONTE BUENA VISTA AVENUE V BUENA VISTA AVENUE BUENA VISTAjAVENUE (BUENA VISTA AVENUE une OF PACIFIC AVENUS PACIFIC AVENUE ACIFIC AVENUE OR O.518 ACRES LINCOUN AVENUE UNCOLN AVENUE LINCOUN AVENUE à SCALE: 1" = 150' O 100 200 300 400 600 700 800 900 1000 2000 500 SCALE IN FEET H DEL N is EAGLE AVENUE CLEMENT AVENUE IIAPN: 72-364-14 73.54 S.F. OR_0.0017 ACRES /PARCEL 27 (BUENA VISTA AVENI APN: 72-383- AREA: 197,33.72 5.F EAGLE AVENUE OR .453 ACRES LITT BUENA XING N 18.1.25 PARCEL S SHEET 2 OF 3 | 10419 | |
148 | 148 | E IO W 133HS 1331 NI JIVOS 000Z 0001 006 009 00Z 009 009 00€ 007 00 0 ,09 I DIVOS NI/NMOHS MOVEL NOIN IVM N30711 9661 'ON SV 00+0 ngv IV GIHOIS asvord NOINO & N t 0 7 to 1261 to St abod S & M w ] by N | 10419 | |
149 | 149 | APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Wednesday, January 7, 2009 The meeting convened at 7:25 p.m. with Chair Johnson presiding. 2-A 1. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Beverly Johnson Boardmember Lena Tam Boardmember Frank Matarrese Boardmember Marie Gilmore Vice Chair Doug deHaan 2. CONSENT CALENDAR 2-A. Approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 5, 2008. 2-B. Approve the minutes of the Special Meeting of November 18, 2008. 2-C. Approve the minutes of the Special Meeting of December 2, 2008. 2-D. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Renewal for Mariusz Lewandowski dba Woodmasters at Alameda Point. 2-E. Authorize Negotiation and Execution of a Sublease Renewal for Alameda Soccer Club at Alameda Point. 2-F. Authorize the Sale of Four Boston Whalers to NRC for $44,500. Approval of the Consent Calendar was motioned by Member Matarrese, seconded by Member Gilmore and passed by the following voice votes: Ayes: 5, Noes: 0, Abstentions: 0 3. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 3-A. Alameda Point Update - Presentation of SunCal's Draft Redevelopment Master Plan. Debbie Potter, Base Reuse and Community Development Manager, addressed several topics actively discussed in the community and clarified that tonight's update is for information only, neither staff nor SunCal has requested formal action on the Master Plan. It is an opportunity for the community to comment on the draft Master Plan and for the ARRA Board to provide feedback to SunCal. Because SunCal's plan is not consistent with the City's charter, as it proposes a mix of residential structures that include multi-family rental and condo projects, this master plan can only be approved by a vote of the people. SunCal anticipates placing its plan on the ballot for the communities' consideration in November of this year, and the ENA requires SunCal to notify the City no later than April 30 if it plans to proceed with the ballot initiative. Tonight's presentation is part of the ongoing community dialogue that will con… | 10419 | |
150 | 150 | 2) the amount of the Community Improvement Commission (CIC) investment in the Alameda Point project and whether or not that investment of redevelopment dollars adversely impacts the City's general fund which is responsible for financing critical city services. Ms. Potter discussed the Presidio conveyance model - a transfer from military ownership via special legislation to the National Park Service and was not subject to BRAC requirements - it was determined that the same conveyance model is not feasible for Alameda Point. Alameda Point is subject to BRAC, was previously screened for other federal agency uses, was screened pursuant to the McKinney-Vento act for homeless uses, and is required to be conveyed at fair market value for private ownership and reuse. The ARRA is working with the Navy to negotiate a conveyance term sheet to transfer the property and provide for its ultimate reuse as a mixed- use community that generates jobs, provides housing for all incomes, and opens up the waterfront and creates new recreational opportunities for Alameda and the region. To achieve that goal, the City entered into an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with SunCal. Ms. Potter addressed the issue of tax increment funds, clarifying that there cannot be a pledge of tax increment funds without a DDA, approved by the City Council and CIC in public following a public hearing, therefore, any approval of tax increment funding will only happen after input and participation from the community. If tax increment funds are raised through the sale of tax increment bonds, those bonds are secured and repaid solely by tax increment funds generated in the Alameda Point Redevelopment Project Area (APIP), and in no way obligate the City's general fund. Based on current projections of the property value to be created by the build-out of the master plan, staff anticipates that a maximum of $184 million of tax increment will be created over the life of the project. This number is well short of the $700 million being referenced in the community. I… | 10419 | |
151 | 151 | 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… | 10419 | |
152 | 152 | At Chair Johnson's request, Ms. Potter summarized the process and milestones of the ENA so that the public understands that this is not the end of the process. This report was for information only and no action was taken by the Board. 3-B. VA/Navy Presentation Regarding the Navy/VA Federal-to-Federal Transfer at Former NAS Alameda. Ms. Potter gave a brief overview about the 600 acres on western portion of Alameda Point property. The Navy and VA have been in discussion for many years about its plans for the development of the portion of the wildlife refuge property. She introduced Claude Hutchinson of the VA. Mr. Hutchinson gave his presentation via Powerpoint to the Board and community, summarizing the status of the fed-to-fed transfer The plans include a 50-acre above-ground columbarium, a site for a VA outpatient clinic, and a non VA-owned hospital. Other presenters included Patrick McKay of the Navy BRAC office; Dr. Ron Chun, VA outpatient clinic site manager; Don Reiker, National Cemetary Assoc. regional director; Larry Jaynes, Capital Asset Manager of the VA; and Jayni Alsep, the VA's environmental consultant from EDAW. Chair Johnson clarified for the public that the ARRA is not a part of the transaction between the Navy and the VA, and has no decision-making power in this transaction. She stated her appreciation to the VA on its presentation and all its efforts for community involvement. Chair Johnson also stated that although the ARRA has no control over this issue, we might be able to cooperate if the VA was willing to look at other areas of the base. 4. ORAL REPORTS 4-A. Oral report from Member Matarrese, Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) representative - Highlights of December 4 Alameda Point RAB Meeting. Member Matarrese stated that the Dec. 4 RAB meeting was 1/2 Christmas party and 1/2 highlights of the coming year's projects. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None. 6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY None. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 12:45 a.m. by Chair Johnson. Res… | 10419 | |
153 | 153 | MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - MARCH 15, 2016--6:00 P.M. Mayor Spencer convened the meeting at 6:01 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 5. [Note: Councilmember Daysog arrived at 6:01 p.m. and Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft arrived at 6:05 p.m.] Absent: None. The meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (16-124) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Initiation of Litigation Pursuant to Subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code. Number of Cases: One (As Plaintiff - City Initiated Legal Action). Following the Closed Session, the meeting was reconvened and Mayor Spencer announced direction was given to staff. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 7:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Special Meeting Alameda City Council March 15, 2016 | 10419 | |
154 | 154 | MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - -MARCH 15, 2016--7: P.M. Mayor Spencer convened the meeting at 7:09 p.m. A member of Troup 73 led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 5. Absent: None. AGENDA CHANGES None. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS (16-125) Mayor Spencer did a reading for the Season of Non-Violence. (16-126) Mayor Spencer announced the Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) would be holding a meeting at City Hall on April 7th at 7:00 p.m. (16-127) Proclamation Declaring March 2016 as Women in Military History Month. Mayor Spencer read and presented the proclamation to Army Veteran Julie Thelen. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (16-128) Former Councilmember Lil Arnerich, Alameda commended the former Interim City Manager and welcomed the new City Manager. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Spencer announced that the Investment Policy [paragraph no. 16-131], the Annual Report on Alameda Landing [paragraph no. 16-133], the Settlement Agreement with Renewed Hope [paragraph no. 16-135], the Two Year Port Services Agreement [paragraph no. 16-136], and the Resolution Approving the Final Map [paragraph no. 16- 138 were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilmember Oddie moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] (*16-129) Minutes of the Special Meetings and Regular City Council Meeting Held on Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 1 March 15, 2016 | 10419 | |
155 | 155 | February 16, 2016. Approved. (*16-130) Ratified bills in the amount of $2,079,295.47. (16-131) Recommendation to Approve the City of Alameda Investment Policy. Outlined changes made to the Investment Policy: Kevin Kennedy, City Treasurer. Mayor Spencer inquired what the changes are in the Section 3e. The City Treasurer responded that the section reflects the City's objectives and community desires, not just State Policy; the addition to the section is coal based industries; any coal based companies will be excluded. Mayor Spencer inquired whether the policy prohibits 51% of gross revenues from cigarettes, gambling or alcohol products, yet 0% of any coal based products, to which the City Treasurer responded in the affirmative. Mayor Spencer inquired whether the City currently invests in any coal based company. The City Treasurer responded in the negative; stated the restriction will not have an adverse effect on the risk or return of the portfolio. Mayor Spencer inquired whether CalPers has the same restriction. The City Treasurer responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Oddie stated the changes to the Investment Policy are a good statement for Alameda and impact climate change and global warming. Councilmember Oddie moved approval of the staff recommendation. Vice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (*16-132) Recommendation to Endorse the San Francisco Bay Clean Water, Pollution Prevention, and Habitat Restoration Program June 7, 2016 Ballot Measure. Accepted. [630-30] (*16-133) Recommendation to Accept the Annual Report on Alameda Landing Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program and Review the Recommendation to Expand the Transportation Management Association (TMA). Councilmember Daysog read a report on the upward trajectory of the number of people taking the shuttle; stated there has been a lot of movement with regard to Citywide transit. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 March 15, 2016 | 10419 | |
156 | 156 | Councilmember Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (*16-134) Recommendation to Approve Revision of Underground Utility District Policy to Have Four Members of the Public Appointed to the Underground Utility District Nomination Board Rather Than Three. Accepted. (16-135) Recommendation to Amend Section 4.1 of the 2001 Settlement Agreement with Renewed Hope Housing Advocates, Arc Ecology, the Former Community Improvement Commission and Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (now "the City"), the Alameda Housing Authority, and Catellus Corporation to Allow Site A at Alameda Point to Move Forward with Building Senior Affordable Housing Units Where It Had Previously Been Restricted. Stated there is a need for senior housing; Renewed Hope supports the addition of more senior housing: Laura Thomas, Renewed Hope. Vice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (16-136) Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute Documents Necessary to Implement the Terms of a Two Year Port Services Contract with Bay Ship and Yacht Company at Alameda Point. Urged acceptance of the contract with Bay Ship and Yacht; stated the company has been in Alameda for 22 years and employees 350 people: Leslie Cameron, Bay Ship and Yacht. Stated Bay Ship and Yacht is a great contributor to the Maritime industry; urged approval of the Bay Ship and Yacht contract due to the experience and relationship with the community: Michael McDonough, Chamber of Commerce. Urged approval of the Bay Ship and Yacht contract: Chad Peddy, Bay Ship and Yacht. Urged approval of the Bay Ship and Yacht contract: David Mik, Power Engineering. Stated Bay Ship and Yacht is proactive in addressing environmental cleanup for the property they took over; they are committed to remediating the property and protecting human health and the environment: Amy Wi… | 10419 | |
157 | 157 | managing the customers in the business is a part of their core structure; the company would like to continue to work in Alameda: Allen Cameron, Bay Ship and Yacht. Stated the decision making process for awarding the contract was not handled in a fair manner; there is lack of transparency; the criteria described to him significantly differs from the final analysis; additional consideration is warranted before a final decision is made: Kevin Krause, TKO Environmental and Marine Services. Stated Bay Ship and Yacht does quality work and takes care of its customers; he strongly supports the Bay Ship and Yacht contract: Robert Cullmann, Chamber of Commerce and eon Technologies. Stated Bay Ship and Yacht has a contract with College of Alameda to train people to be in the industry and create jobs upon graduation; urged approval of the Bay Ship and Yacht contract: Kari Thomson, Chamber of Commerce. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification on the issues raised by Mr. Krause. The Assistant City Attorney listed the criteria itemized in the RFP; stated that Mr. Krause's issues are that TKO was the lowest bidder, Bay Ship and Yacht adjusted their price before the interviews, and the price should have been weighted heavier than it was; TKO has as much, or more experience than Bay Ship and Yacht; outlined the steps in the bid dispute process; stated he is confident that staff followed the process; the Request for Proposal (RFP) listed 7 criteria that the City uses in the decision making. Mayor Spencer inquired what the 7 items in the criteria were. The Assistant City Attorney read the 7 criteria. Mayor Spencer inquired what responsiveness to the RFP means, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded completeness. The Assistant City Attorney stated that before the interviews of the bidders, the scope of the RFP changed; Bay Ship and Yacht lowered their price, while TKO and a third bidder kept the price the same. Mayor Spencer inquired whether Bay Ship and Yacht's original price was $54,000 while TKO was $36,750, whi… | 10419 | |
158 | 158 | Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether staff took into consideration all 7 criteria, not just price, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative. Mayor Spencer inquired whether Bay Ship and Yacht will be using a maintenance software to keep track of all the maintenance and services requested and performed; inquired whether TKO will also be using maintenance software. The Assistant Community Development Director stated TKO did not mention they would use any special software; it was compelling for the Bay Ship and Yacht proposal; the City thought the tracking device to be important. Mayor Spencer inquired if the City spoke with TKO about providing the special software if it was a deciding issue. The Assistant Community Development Director stated it was not the deciding factor, it was one of many elements. Mayor Spencer stated staff did not ask TKO if they could offer the special software. The Assistant Community Development Director stated the applicant is responsible for providing their qualifications and level of service; the City understands the sensitivity of cost; staff felt it was okay to go with the higher bidder because of the level of service; the current port manager will be paying $530,000 annually for rent. Mayor Spencer stated it does not mean that the City has an extra $200,000 to give away. The Assistant Community Development Director stated the City is not giving the money away; the City is getting a service. Vice Mayor Matarrese inquired whether only Bay Ship and Yacht adjusted their price when the scope of work was changed, not the other two bidders. The Assistant Community Development Director stated after interviews with the three applicants, the City decided to remove the Bilge Oily Water Treatment System (BOWTS) in the scope of work and Bay Ship and Yacht adjusted their cost. Vice Mayor Matarrese inquired if Patriot kept their cost the same. The Assistant Community Development Director responded that Patriot elected not to bid on the project. Vice Mayor Matarrese i… | 10419 | |
159 | 159 | bid is still higher than TKO. Vice Mayor Matarrese inquired what the total budget is for maintaining the piers and the port. The Assistant Community Development Director responded $325,000 annually for the port management services and $100,000 for maintaining the piers as a line item. Vice Mayor Matarrese inquired what is the value of the revenue that comes to the port. The Assistant Community Development Director responded the Maritime Administration (MARAD) ships pay over $2 million a year to the City. Vice Mayor Matarrese inquired whether Power Engineering is also present at the port. The Community Development Director responded Power Engineering will be moving their barge to Pier 1 and paying the City $11.00 per linear foot. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of authorizing the City Manager to execute documents necessary to implement the terms of a two year port services contract with Bay Ship and Yacht Company at Alameda Point. Vice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mayor Spencer stated the difference between the two bids is significant and staff should justify spending the difference prior to bringing it to Council. Councilmember Daysog stated Bay Ship and Yacht's proposal appears to be more thorough; he is confident that the City is making the right decision with Bay Ship and Yacht and the quality of service they provide; it is important to look at the quality of the proposal, not just the dollars and cents. Mayor Spencer stated what Bay Ship and Yacht does for the community needs to be separate from the contract. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese and Oddie - 4. Noes: Mayor Spencer - 1. (*16-137) Recommendation to Accept the Work of MCK, Inc. for Repair and Resurfacing of Certain Streets, Phase 34, No. P.W. 04-15-07. Accepted. (16-138) Resolution No. 15132, "Approving the Final Map and Bond, Authorizing Execution of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement, and Accepting the Dedicatio… | 10419 | |
160 | 160 | Councilmember Daysog stated that he voted no on the project and would remain consistent. Vice Mayor Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember Oddie seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 4. Noes: Councilmember Daysog - 1. (*16-139) Resolution No. 15133, "Confirming the Terms and Conditions for Compensation for Alameda Fire Department Responses Away from their Official Duty Station and Assigned to an Emergency Incident (Mutual Aid)." Adopted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (16-140) Resolution No. 15134, "Appointing Michaela Tsztoo as a Member of the Commission on Disability Issues." Adopted; (16-140A) Resolution No. 15135, "Reappointing Arthur Kurrasch as a Member of the Housing Authority Board of Commissioners." Adopted; (16-140B) Resolution No. 15136, "Appointing Tina Landess Petrich as a Landlord Member of the Rent Review Advisory Committee; and (16-140C) Resolution No. 15137, "Appointing Robert Schrader as a Landlord Member of the Rent Review Advisory Committee." Adopted. Vice Mayor Matarrese moved adoption of the resolutions. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. The City Clerk administered the Oath of Office and presented certificates of appointment to Ms. Tsztoo, Mr. Kurrasch and Mr. Schrader. (16-141) Introduction of Ordinance Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Documents Necessary to Implement the Terms of a Ten-Year Lease with Two Ten-Year Renewal Options and an Option to Purchase with Alameda Point Redevelopers, LLC for Building 8, Located at 2350 Saratoga Street at Alameda Point. Introduced. The Assistant Community Development Director and Ted Anderson, Cushman and Wakefield, gave a Power Point presentation. Mayor Spencer inquired whether the market rate calculation is market rate after the money has been put into the building during the lease. Mr. Anderson responded that the calculation assumes a shell cost. Regular Meeting Alameda City Counci… | 10419 | |
161 | 161 | Mayor Spencer stated the calculation is not the money that is being put in during the lease, to which Mr. Anderson responded in the affirmative. Mayor Spencer inquired why the property is not currently leased; questioned why the City is doing an option to purchase. Mr. Anderson responded the building is not leasable in its current condition. Mayor Spencer inquired whether a tenant could lease the building and make the improvements. Mr. Anderson responded it is possible, stated the building was marketed to everyone possible; a lessee's focus is typically to run their business, not to take on a renovation before they can even start their business. Mayor Spencer inquired whether the City had tried to lease the building. The Assistant Community Development Director responded the building has been on the market since the Base closed without any bites because of the investment required; buildings now have the purchase options to allow tenants to get the money to make improvements; tenants want to own the buildings; ownership is used to leverage financing; in order to move difficult buildings, people want to own them to get financing; the building is in the adaptive reuse zoning area, which gives the future end user flexibility; the old buildings need a lot of money to restore them; it is imperative to offer the opportunity to own to allow people to get money and invest. Mayor Spencer inquired whether in the scenario the City currently owns the property and is now providing an option to purchase, to which the Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the City has not had the money to rehabilitate the building. The Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the buyer would pay into the master infrastructure program if the option to purchase was exercised. The Assistant Community Development Director responded the City set the price of the building to cover the fair share of in… | 10419 | |
162 | 162 | they purchase or the money goes into the General Fund. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired on the amount of the infrastructure fund. Mr. Anderson responded the amount is $1.8 million. Councilmember Oddie inquired what is the developer's commitment for making repairs to the infrastructure of the building. The Assistant Community Development Director responded that the tenant is putting $10 million in the purchase price and $8.5 million worth of improvements into the building; the total investment in the building is $36.5 million. Councilmember Oddie inquired if the building is just leased and not purchased what would be the price. Mr. Anderson responded the lease would be $1 million as the lessee completes repairs the first year; another $1 million year 2, and another $1 million year 3. The Assistant Community Development Director responded the total would be approximately $3.4 million dollars. Councilmember Oddie inquired what it would cost the City to bring the building up to a tenantable situation. The Assistant Community Development Director responded to make the building habitable, would cost $8.5 million. Mayor Spencer inquired what the lessee has to put in as a part of the lease. The Assistant Community Development Director responded the $3.4 million is only the infrastructure burden; the lessee would have to pay rent and the Citywide Development Fee. Mayor Spencer inquired whether the money to make the building habitable is a requirement of the lease, to which the Assistant Community Development Director responded in the negative. The Assistant Community Development Director responded there are benchmarks in the lease stating the lessee would have to spend $3.4 million; the aggressive rent increases are designed make the lessee make the necessary improvements. Mr. Anderson stated as time goes on, it will be more expensive for the lessee to have a building that cannot be occupied. The Assistant Community Development Director continued the presentation. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 9 March 15, 2016 | 10419 | |
163 | 163 | Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired if work/live spaces are currently a part of the zoning for the area, to which the Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative and continued the presentation. Mayor Spencer inquired whether there is anything to encourage the 500 employees to use public transportation or bike to work. The Assistant Community Development Director responded Alameda Point is part of a Transportation Demand District; stated there are a limit number of parking spaces available; tenants will pay into a TDM program and will be encouraged to use public transit. Mayor Spencer inquired if tenants will need to provide public transportation alternatives to their employees. Mr. Anderson responded the building resides on 3.4 acres; the employees will need to find alternate means of transportation to work. Mayor Spencer inquired how the City would know the employees will not be parking in surrounding neighborhoods. The Base Reuse Director responded that every tenant or property owner will have to prepare a TDM Plan Compliant Strategy and comply with the Alameda Point TDM; they will have to pay per square foot; tenants will be required to pay annually into the account; the fund will provide shuttles in the peak hours and provide bus passes to all employees; tenants will be required to submit a compliance strategy to the City. Mayor Spencer stated they do not have to buy a bus pass, they can bike or walk; she does not want to have 600 more cars on the road and related parking. The Base Reuse Director responded the overall TDM Plan is designed to encourage trip reduction goals and meet the requirements of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Mayor Spencer inquired if anything requires the employees to not drive a car to work. The Base Reuse Director responded the TDM provides frequent and reliable transportation services so that people get out of their cars; stated the land is leased to the tenants by the City so the parking could be enforced; the TDM makes sure people have options for… | 10419 | |
164 | 164 | before the new jobs; a portion of the jobs will be jobs work/live units with tenants living on the premises; a portion may take the ferry into Alameda; a portion may walk; for those coming into the Island, it will be a reverse commute. The Base Reuse Director responded the strategy is to provide more jobs and balance the housing on the Island. Mayor Spencer inquired how many work/live units will there be. The Base Reuse Director responded that the work/live housing is highly restrictive; stated the tenants would have to obtain a commercial license; the building is commercial use under the zoning. Mayor Spencer inquired whether people will be living there; requested an estimate on how many units will be work/live units. *** Councilmember Oddie left the dais at 9:00 p.m. and returned at 9:02 p.m. Jonah Hendrickson, Alameda Point Redevelopers, gave a Power Point presentation. Mayor Spencer inquired how many housing units will be in the building. Mr. Hendrickson responded the current work/live zoning would allow for 100 units based on the Alameda Municipal Code and the square footage; stated the issue of use will be further discussed by the Planning Board during the master use permit process. Mayor Spencer stated it is appropriate to discuss the number of units; inquired how many people per unit. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the term work/live means that tenants would live and work in the same place and a commute would not be a part of the equation, to which Mr. Hendrickson responded in the affirmative. Mayor Spencer inquired if a couple lives in the unit do both occupants need to work there or only one. Vivian Kahn, Alameda Point Redevelopers, stated the work/live ordinance was specifically crafted to ensure the units are commercial spaces; it allows a maximum of 30% of the floor area to be devoted to residential uses and be no more than 400 square feet; at least one of the people occupying the space must have a business license and be conducting business; the ordinance is very strict and explicitly … | 10419 | |
165 | 165 | whether the tenants have to work in Building 8 or if they would be allowed to work in the City. Ms. Kahn responded that a business license goes with the address and cannot be carried to another address. Stated the project will benefit the Alameda Point; the developers will be putting $8 million into the building before the lights can even be turned on; selling the building is the best option for the City; the tenants would like to give back to the community with apprenticeships and internships for youth: Michael McDonough, Chamber of Commerce. Stated Building 8 is an adaptable building; he has worked on many large buildings like Building 8 and it takes a while to rehabilitate the large buildings: Dick Rutter, Alameda. Stated that she is a banker and the option to purchase makes sense from a finance standpoint; it is creating jobs, which creates an economic engine for the City and tax revenues; urged Council to approve the project: Kari Thompson, Chamber of Commerce. Stated Epic Middle School is a stem school; all the students take engineering design and fabrication; there is a need for space in Alameda for students to work with skilled craftsmen as they prepare themselves for the workforce; read a letter from Florine Roper urging Council to support the project: Francis Abbatatatuono, Epic Middle School. Stated that he leases a space from Mr. Hendrickson why he transformed and cleaned up a once dilapidated building; Mr. Hendrickson will apply the same dedication to his work and tenants for the adaptive reuse of Building 8: Brandon Canchola, Treasure Island Woodworks. Read different statements from tenants and community members of Berkeley regarding the Berkeley Kitchen Project; urged Council to support the project; stated Mr. Hendrickson will apply the same vision at Alameda Point: Adan Martinez, City of Berkeley, Economic Development Manager. Stated that he works on behalf of landlords and tenants; he supports the project because warehouse and manufacturing space is needed; velocity and demand are present in the … | 10419 | |
166 | 166 | rehabilitation Mr. Hendrickson did on the Berkeley Kitchen Project; stated the adaptive reuse of Building 8 will surpass the success he achieved with Berkeley Kitchen: Kiran Shenoy, Berkeley Landmark Preservation Commission. Stated allowing the project at Building 8 will attract more small businesses and allow them to have commercial success; urged Council approval of the project; read a letter from owner of Mission: Heirloom, Berkeley Kitchens; stated Berkeley Kitchen has allowed him to grow his business: Alain Shocron, La Noisette Sweets. Read a letter from Berkeley Councilmember Darryl Moore; stated Mr. Hendrickson transformed a once vacant, landmark designated building into Berkeley Kitchens; the adaptive reuse of Building 8 will meet or exceed the success of Berkeley Kitchens; the City of Alameda will be greatly enriched by the development genius of Mr. Hendrickson: Ryan Lau, Legislative Aide, Councilmember Darryl Moore. Stated Mr. Hendrickson's designs enliven community and are very accessible to the community; the City needs someone who can take the massive scale and bring it down to make it accessible to the community: Elisa Mikiten, Architect. Stated Mr. Hendrickson is a developer who equally prioritizes profit, people and the planet; science, technology, engineering and math are used adding arts, innovation and entrepreneurship; read a letter of support from Janet Smith-Heimer, President of Bay Urban Economics; stated Mr. Hendrickson has a strong and effective reuse entrepreneurship and will create a lively makerspace community which will foster the City's goals for reuse and economic development in creative industries: Emylene Aspilla. Stated that he is a tenant in one of Mr. Hendrickson's buildings; Mr. Hendrickson turned a rundown old machine shop into a sleek, clean hub of studios and workspaces for artists and small business owners; Mr. Hendrickson is a great developer; he strongly supports the project; Alameda providing a place for artists to go would be great so that they do not have to move to o… | 10419 | |
167 | 167 | Stated that he is the owner of a makerspace in Oakland where kids and families can come and do large projects; he supports the project and hopes to be a tenant in Building 8: Parker Thomas, Steam Factory. Read two letters from tenants of Berkeley Kitchens: Christy Kovacs, Muffin Revolution owner, stated Mr. Hendrickson is a great manager and would be a great candidate for the project in Alameda; stated the Berkeley Kitchens created a collaborative working environment for all the tenants; stated Mr. Hendrickson's vision for Building 8 is unsurpassed: Leslie Jacobowitz. Read two letters from supporters of the project: Steven Camarretto and Jesse Rosalles; urging approval of the lease for Building 8 which will fit the character and needs of the community; stated the inclusion of Mr. Hendrickson and his team would only benefit the residents of Alameda; Mr. Hendrickson will be an excellent landlord and the project will work: Ira Jacobowitz. Stated his company is a diverse operation, which hosted 35,000 people in their tasting room last year alone; the Building 8 project can host food producers, artists, makers and there is room for a lot of success stories in Alameda: Chris Jordan, St. George. Read letters from tenants of Berkeley Kitchens: Shrub and Co. owner Juan Garcia stated: since moving into Berkeley Kitchens their business has grown; Mr. Hendrickson will do the same in Alameda; the City and citizens will be lucky to have him; Kathleen Frumkin stated: Mr. Hendrickson created such a positive use of space in Berkeley that is extremely rare to find; urged Council to support the project: Barbara Hendrickson. Read two letters urging Council to go forward with the project; one from a very happy tenant at Berkeley Kitchens and the secretary of the landmarks preservation committee; stated Mr. Hendrickson has a track record of rehabilitating buildings into spaces that provide local artisans and makers an opportunity to run their businesses; urged Council approval of project: Alex Orloff, Berkeley. Mayor Spencer called a … | 10419 | |
168 | 168 | The Base Reuse Director responded the tenant could submit an application for a conditional use permit and say they want to do 270 work/live units; the current project states the tenant does not want to do any more than 100 work/live units. Mayor Spencer stated the 100 work/live units is not in the presentation. The Base Reuse Director responded 100 units is a land use decision that the City has not discussed yet; stated the City has left open the flexibility for the developers to do a number of commercial uses; when the developer gets into the design, there is flexibility to come up with a plan and submit an application; ultimately, the City Council will make the decision. Mayor Spencer stated there is a potential of 270 housing units; inquired if 270,000 square feet is allowed within the zoning. The Base Reuse Director responded the zoning does not give the developer the right or ability to build work/live units; a conditional use permit is required. Mayor Spencer inquired if there is the potential in Building 8. The Base Reuse Director responded only if the Planning Board approves the request and the City Council upholds the Planning Board approval. Mayor Spencer inquired if the person who arrived at the sales price valued the price at the potential of having 270 work/live units. The Base Reuse Director responded the building has been valued as commercial use because work/live is commercial use; stated the building is not financed as residential; the project is restrictive in the way that it is structured; it is priced and zoned as commercial use. Mayor Spencer stated it is zoned for work/live; the City's zoning states that every unit must be up to 1,000 square feet and Building 8 is 270,000 square feet. The Base Reuse Director responded approval of work/live units would have to go to the Planning Board and could be called for review by Council. Mayor Spencer inquired whether a sale price is being agreed upon, to which the Base Reuse Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor Spencer inquired whether the pric… | 10419 | |
169 | 169 | The Base Reuse Director responded work/live is a conditionally permitted use for the adaptive reuse area. In response to Mayor Spencer's inquiry, the Base Reuse Director stated the use is allowed on 1/3 of Alameda Point. Mayor Spencer stated with all the community discussions regarding housing at the Point, the potential of the buildings being flipped has not been discussed. The City Manager responded that a condition of approval could be added limiting the amount of work/live units. Mayor Spencer stated work/live should have been included in the presentation and taken into consideration in the pricing; there has not been transparency with the community; there it is a potential impact on the community. Vice Mayor Matarrese stated there is a housing parameter at the former Base; the fact that the building is being adaptively reused is an important factor to consider; the building currently has negative value and is costing the City money; he is ready to vote to support the project; one reservation is the cost to rehabilitate the building; another reservation is that Building 8 is ten times the size of Berkeley Kitchens; urged accelerating selling the building; proceeding is worth taking the risk to get the revenue stream. *** (16-142) Mayor Spencer stated a motion is needed to consider the remaining agenda item on the wetlands mitigation bank [paragraph no. 16-143]. Councilmember Oddie moved approval of considering the remaining item. Vice Mayor Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried unanimous voice vote - 5. *** Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the testimony from the people who have worked with the developer is great feedback; the project will be creating jobs; the development is needed; there are safeguards regarding the housing and work/live units; she is ready to support the project. Councilmember Oddie inquired what the Assistant Community Development Director's role is in these types of situations. The Assistant Community Development Director responded that she took an active role in investigating th… | 10419 | |
170 | 170 | Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the Assistant Community Development Director's job is to get the best possible deal for the City. The Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated with leases at Alameda Point, the fund is very delicate and in demand. Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the deal is the best possible the City could get for Building 8. The Assistant Community Development Director responded in the affirmative; stated the City was able to get a deal with more infrastructure for the building. Councilmember Oddie stated the Assistant Community Development Director's job is to maximize what the City can get from any deal; any implication that the Assistant Community Development Director is not looking out for the best interest of the City is frustrating; one of the priorities of the Alameda Point Master Plan is to generate new economic development and employment opportunities; read some of the City's goals from the Master Plan; stated that he supports the project. Councilmember Daysog stated the cost for developing Building 8 is doubled; each project should contribute towards major infrastructure; Alameda values the historic character of the site and wants to reuse the sites; these are the types of businesses and industries the City wants in Alameda; he supports the project; in terms of the economics, the City has done its due diligence; the traffic generation from the work/live housing would be less than typical housing. Mayor Spencer stated according to the staff report, the work/live spaces are not considered residential and are not considered housing under the Navy's residential development cap; it is important to be transparent for the community. Vice Mayor stated the debate over the number of work/live units can be done at the use permit stage. Vice Mayor Matarrese moved approval of staff executing the lease [introduction of the ordinance]. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, E… | 10419 | |
171 | 171 | The City Clerk stated the previous meeting went past 11:00 p.m., and the agenda for the April 5th meeting is full and the meeting might go past 11:00 p.m., which would require the Council to add meetings. Councilmember Oddie inquired if the matter could be adjourned to the next meeting. The City Attorney stated the Council is not continuing the item, it will be re-agendized. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS Not heard. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA Not heard. COUNCIL REFERRALS Not heard. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS Not heard. ADJOURNMENT In order to not continue past 11:00 p.m., Mayor Spencer adjourned the meeting at 10:59 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 18 March 15, 2016 | 10419 | |
172 | 172 | OF TERKA MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2006 1. The meeting was called to order at 5:02 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL: Members Avonnet Peeler, Michael Rich, Michael Robles-Wong, and Executive Secretary Karen Willis. ABSENT: Member Roberto Rocha. STAFF PRESENT: Jill Kovacs, Senior Management Analyst, and Stacey Meier, Administrative Assistant, Human Resources. OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE: 3. MINUTES: The minutes of the regular meeting of July 12, 2006 were presented for Board approval. Member Peeler moved to accept, Member Rich seconded, and carried by a 3-0 vote. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: Member Rich moved to accept the consent calendar with the exception of 4-D, which he asked to pull for discussion. Member Peeler seconded, and carried by a 3-0 vote. SUMMARY REPORT FOR EXAMINATION ELIGIBLE LISTS AND CLASSIFICATIONS FOR THE MONTHS OF JULY, AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER 2006: 4-A ELIGIBLE LIST ESTABLISHED DATE ESTABLISHED EXAM NO. Administrative Management Analyst 9/12/2006 206-44PR Administrative Tech Il 8/23/2006 206-41PR Assistant Engineer 8/15/2006 206-36 Customer Service Representative 7/20/2006 206-09 Electrical Helper 9/13/2006 206-47 Fire Apparatus Operator 9/19/2006 206-08PR Intermediate Clerk 7/20/2006 206-34 Journey Lineworker 8/7/2006 206-26 Permit Technician I 7/3/2006 206-25PR Permit Technician III 7/3/2006 206-24PR Permit Technician III 8/28/2006 206-43 Planner I 7/18/2006 206-38 Principal Executive Assistant 9/20/2006 206-59PR Supervising Planner 7/27/2006 206-29 | 10419 | |
173 | 173 | City of Alameda Page 2 Civil Service Board Minutes Regular Meeting of October 4, 2006 4-B ELIGIBLE LISTS EXTENDED: DATE ESTABLISHED EXAM NO. EMS Education Coordinator 4/13/2005 205-10 Fire Captain 10/12/2005 205-46PR Jailer 10/20/2005 205-48 Maintenance Worker I 3/1/2006 205-58 Maintenance Worker Il 3/23/2006 205-65 Planner III 4/5/2006 206-15 Public Safety Dispatcher 3/10/2006 205-25/26 4-C ELIGIBLE LISTS EXPIRED/ DATE ESTABLISHED EXAM NO. CANCELLED/EXHAUSTED ACE (Land Dev & Trans) 3/3/2006 205-24 Administrative Technician I 8/12/2005 205-45PR Assistant City Attorney I-II 2/2/2006 206-12PR CATV Technical Operations Superintendent 4/11/2006 206-061 Engineering Supervisor 3/28/2006 206-17PR Executive Assistant 10/22/2004 204-54 Facilities Maintenance Worker 2/15/2006 206-06 Plan Check Engineer 3/28/2006 206-05 Planning Services Manager 4/21/2006 206-21 Police Sergeant 9/15/2004 204-38PR Program Specialist I/II 2/23/2006 205-64 (Community Programs) Public Works Maintenance Team Leader 3/16/2006 205-59 (Concrete) Public Works Supervisor 8/17/2004 204-37 Sales and Service Supervisor 2/23/2006 205-52 Supervising Civil Engineer 3/23/2006 205-55 System Dispatcher 3/17/2006 206-07 Transportation Planner 3/3/2006 205-63 Utility Construction Compliance Specialist 3/15/2006 205-66 4-D LIST OF SPECIFICATIONS: Assistant Line Superintendent (Revised) Computer Services Coordinator (Revised) Jailer (New) Principal Executive Assistant (New) Public Safety Dispatcher (New) Redevelopment Manager (Revised) Senior Public Safety Dispatcher (New) Transportation Coordinator (New) Discussion: Executive Secretary Willis explained that the reason there are a high number of new specifications listed on the agenda is due to the fact that many positions were re-assigned from a broad classification to more specific classifications with new titles as part of the PANS contract | 10419 | |
174 | 174 | City of Alameda Page 3 Civil Service Board Minutes Regular Meeting of October 4, 2006 agreement. Board President Robles-Wong asked whether the new classifications created a competitive situation for the individuals who were re-assigned into a new job title, and questioned whether or not those individuals were required to re- test. Executive Secretary Willis stated that none of the individuals involved were required to re-test for their positions. Board President Robles- Wong expressed concern that if the Civil Service Rules were not followed, the employees who were re-assigned were not being protected by the system that was designed to do just that. He suggested that there should be a special meeting called in cases when individuals are involved. Member Rich also requested a special meeting to discuss personnel actions and procedures, and Member Peeler agreed. The Board agreed that a special meeting would be scheduled for mid- November. Member Rich moved to approve item 4-D with the understanding that staff will agendize a separate item on the next agenda to provide procedural background on the reclassification process. Member Peeler seconded the motion and was carried by a 3-0 vote. 5. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 5-A Activity Report - June 1, 2006 through August 31, 2006. Executive Secretary Willis presented the Board with Turnover Statistics as requested by Board Member Rich at the July 12, 2006 meeting. She stated that the report showed percentages of resignations, retirements and other separations for Miscellaneous and Safety employee groups back to the year 2001. She explained that resignations had risen significantly in the last two years. Member Rich asked if there was any idea why. Executive Secretary Willis stated that some employees obtained jobs in other cities for better retirement or due to the fact that they had not gotten a pay increase with the City, and others had resigned for personal reasons. 5-B Proposed Change to Civil Service Ordinance, Section 2, Merit Principal 3. Executive Secretary Willis state… | 10419 | |
175 | 175 | City of Alameda Page 4 Civil Service Board Minutes Regular Meeting of October 4, 2006 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT) None 7. CIVIL SERVICE BOARD COMMUNICATIONS (COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARD) Referring to the Turnover Statistics presented with the Activity Report under 5-A, Board Member Rich shared his concerns regarding the rising number of resignations from Miscellaneous Employees as compared to the low number of Safety employee resignations. He encouraged the City to resolve this matter as quickly as possible. Executive Secretary Willis stated that they are working on it and are getting much closer. 8. CIVIL SERVICE BOARD COMMUNICATIONS (COMMUNICATIONS FROM STAFF) Executive Secretary Willis explained that Mr. Michael Soderberg, who was supposed to have been the new Board Member, moved to Southern California between submitting his application and being notified of his appointment and that consequently, he would not be appointed. She stated that the City is soliciting applications for Civil Service Board Members. 9. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 6:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Karen Willis Human Resources Director & Executive Secretary to the Civil Service Board | 10419 | |
176 | 176 | Social Service Human Relations Board Minutes of the Regular Meeting, Thursday, June 24, 2010 1. CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL President Wasko called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. Present were: Vice President Villareal, Soglin, James, Dailey, and Biggs. Absent was: Nielsen Staff: Franz 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Minutes of the Regular March 25, 2010 meeting were approved as corrected (Biggs/Soglin) and the Minutes of the Regular April 15, 2010 were approved as presented (Dailey/Soglin) 3. 3-A. RESOLUTION COMMENDING OUTGOING MEMBER JONATHAN SOGLIN A Resolution commending member Soglin's service to the community as a SSHRB member was read by President Wasko and approved by the Board -M/S (Villareal/Dailey) Unanimous (Soglin abstained). The Resolution was presented to member Soglin, and Vice President Villareal expressed his pleasure working on ATAH with member Soglin. President Wasko thanked him for his help with the Dental Clinic. The Board suspended business and held a brief reception in member Soglin's honor. 3-B. A REQUEST FROM PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TO PROVIDE A LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THEIR SUBMITTAL OF A SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL (SRTS) GRANT Staff distributed sample letters of support for a SRTS Grant being applied for by City of Alameda Public Works, and explained that they are requesting that the board provide a letter in support of their effort to secure the grant. The funds would be used for capital improvements in targeting Franklin and Wood. Some of the grant would be used to provide safety education. While the Youth Collaborative has already voted to provide a letter of support, they voiced concern that similar improvements were needed at schools on the West End and that Public Works should be encouraged to apply for additional funds for these schools. They also hoped that the funds to provide safety education from the current grant could be used for West End schools. The Board voiced support for the current grant, but also had interest in a second letter regarding SRTS improvements for West End schools, af… | 10419 | |
177 | 177 | Social Service Human Relations Board Minutes of the Special Meeting, June 24, 2010 Page 2 It was agreed to have staff gather additional information before a second letter is drafted. M/S (James/Villareal) to write a letter to Public Works (Ccing other departments as appropriate) encouraging them to use the current grant request as a model for improvements in other neighborhoods, and to add relevant information gathered from the 2004 Survey and any information available regarding traffic surveys. Unanimous 3-C. PARTICIPATION IN THE MAYOR'S 4TH OF JULY PARADE Discussion regarding the Board's participation in the Parade included our need for a "single drop" trailer to make it easier to get off and on, the need for people to help build the float, and people to ride on the float. M/S (Villareal/James) for the Board to support and participate in the parade, and to authorize up to $250 for supplies. Unanimous 3-D. NOMINATIONS OF OFFICERS Staff explained that while the Board can make nominations at this meeting, they will need to wait until there is a fully constituted Board before they can vote. Member Villareal nominated President Wasko for President and Member Biggs nominated Vice President Villareal for Vice President. M/S (James/Soglin) that nominations be closed. Unanimous 3-E. WORK GROUP PROGRESS REPORTS Alamedans Together Against Hate Workgroup - Villareal It was suggested to write a letter to former Police Chief Tibbett thanking him for working with the Board. ATAH can write a letter themselves rather than waiting for it to be agendized. Sister City Workgroup - Wasko There will be an Exhibit of sister City Photographs at the Free Library the entire month of August, with a reception on August 12th. The group is still seeking a pro-bono / reasonable lawyer to apply for tax exempt status. Resource Sharing Workgroup - Biggs The workgroup (Biggs & Dailey) met with member Nielsen to discuss how they could work in partnership with the A&AW. Ideas | 10419 | |
178 | 178 | Social Service Human Relations Board Minutes of the Special Meeting, June 24, 2010 Page 3 4. BOARD/STAFF COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA - Staff suggested: taking off either July or August, waiting until after the elections to meet with the new Mayor and City Council, and having a "meeting of the whole" work session to discuss Board / Workgroup plans for next year. The work session would include discussing the upcoming needs assessment. Member Biggs announced that a book vending machine in front of the APC offices would have its Grand Opening on June 30th It holds 900 books, and 300 new library cards have been issued on the West End. This machine is the 1st of its kind in the country. He also mentioned that it would be good to encourage positive discourse during the upcoming election. President Wasko echoed Member Biggs concern. Member James announced that he and Member Biggs were present at the city council meeting representing the Board's CDBG recommendations. Member Villareal voiced concern regarding the West End taking the brunt of cuts resulting from Measure E not passing. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - Information - 3 minutes per speaker 6. ADJOURNMENT M/S (James/Soglin) to adjourn. 8:50 Respectfully submitted, Jim Franz Community Development Coordinator | 10419 | |
179 | 179 | of of MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PENSION BOARD OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD 4:30 P.M., JULY 29, 2019 ALAMEDA CITY HALL 2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE, ALAMEDA CONFERENCE ROOM 391 1. The meeting was called to order by Nancy Bronstein at 4:32 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL: Present: Secretary Nancy Bronstein, Nancy Elzig via teleconference, Bill Soderlund. Absent: Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft Staff: Elliott Otto, Finance Representative, Chad Barr, Human Resources Technician. 3. MINUTES: The minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 28, 2019 were moved for acceptance by Trustee Soderlund and seconded by Nancy Elzig. Passed 2-0 (Soderlund abstained due to absence from January meeting). The minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 29, 2019 were moved for acceptance by Trustee Elzig and seconded by Trustee Soderlund. Passed 3-0. 4. AGENDA ITEMS: 4-A. Pension Payroll and Financial Reports - Quarter Ending June 30, 2019 and City of Alameda Police & Fire Pension Funds Financial Reports for the Period Ending June 30, 2019. Finance Representative Otto explained the quarterly reports. There was a decrease from the prior month due to Lucymay Schrieber, 1079 Pensioner, passing away. Offsetting the decrease was the uniform allowance being paid out. Representative Otto further explained the quarterly financial report showing | 10419 | |
180 | 180 | City of Alameda Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Pension Board - Monday, July 29, 2019 Page 2 that $732,657 would be moved to pay down unfunded liability. This will be reflected in the September 2019 statement. Trustee Elzig asked what are the contractual services listed. Representative Otto replied those are actuarial costs. Trustee Soderlund asked how often than happens and Representative Otto replied he thought it was every 2 years, but could check. Trustee Elzig moved to accept the financial statement as presented and Trustee Soderlund seconded. Passed 3-0. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT): There were no oral communications from the public. 6. PENSION BOARD COMMUNICATIONS (COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARD): There were no oral communications from the Board. 7. ADJOURNMENT: There being no additional items to come before the board, the meeting was adjourned at 4:41 p.m. Respectfully submitted, me Nancy Bronstein Human Resources Director | 10419 | |
181 | 181 | APPROVED PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES MONDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 2012 1. CONVENE: 7:04 p.m. 2. FLAG SALUTE: Vice-President Burton 3. ROLL CALL: Present: President Zuppan, Vice-President Burton, Board members Ezzy Ashcraft, and Knox White. Board Member Köster arrived for item 7-A Board Member Henneberry Arrived during item 7-A 4. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION: None 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None 6. CONSENT CALENDAR: 6-A. Zoning Administrator and Design Review Pending and Recent Actions and Decisions. 6-B. 2013 Meeting Calendar Board Member Knox White motioned to approve the consent calendar. Board Member Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-0; no abstentions. 7. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: 7-A. Economic Development Strategy for Alameda Point - Presentation by Keyser Marston Associates of a proposed economic development strategy for Alameda Point. Development Manager Eric Fonstein gave a brief introduction of the job-based Strategy and introduced Keyser Marston Associates' consultants Tim Kelly and Ernesto Vilchis who provided a summary of findings via PowerPoint presentation. Consultant clarified for Board Member Knox White that the vision for Alameda Point is to build upon existing businesses and uses, i.e., food, maritime, recreation and breaking Alameda Point into smaller pieces. Approved Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 6 November 26, 2012 | 10419 | |
182 | 182 | Board Member Köster clarified with the Consultant that current businesses such as St. George got started on existing infrastructure by breaking larger building into smaller spaces and are models for future businesses. The five prototypes selected for study represented a broad spectrum of criteria. Board Member Ezzy Ashcraft clarified with the Consultant their role in commercial development at other bases. KMA's services included developing business terms and they were very much involved in the implementation of the economic development strategy, especially developer selection. Consultant helped identify which developer entity/team had the financing, the vision to realistically put tenants into the buildings. Board Member Ezzy Ashcraft asked for examples of having tenants as ambassadors. Consultant clarified that McClellan Air Force Base actually created a marketing opportunity for existing businesses. In response to her inquiry as to where lease revenues go, Alameda Point Chief Operating Officer Jennifer Ott responded that funds primarily go into the maintenance of City services at the base and property management, also into a "rainy day" fund. Ms. Ott confirmed that Building 5 is one of the most contaminated buildings at the Point and will not be controlled by City until 2019. President Zuppan asked the Consultant to clarify whether there were any parallels with other bases with main gate entrances for both commercial and residential uses. Consultant responded that there are multiple entrances to Alameda Point that can be primarily for residential but residential was not a part of this analysis. In response to infrastructure needs, Consultant responded that telecommunications are important. Infrastructure will be a challenging exercise and stressed the need to be flexible and able to accomplish incrementally. President Zuppan opened public comment. Cheryl and Byron Zook, Alameda Point Studios, spoke in favor of the Strategy and commented on the success of their business and desire for expansion and long-term lea… | 10419 | |
183 | 183 | Need to make Alameda Point a high-profile project. Jon Spangler, resident, spoke against Strategy but in support of comments made by previous speakers Bangert, Biggs, Smith and Bey. No clear vision at Alameda Point after several plans completed. Issues still needing to be addressed include open space, Measure B and transportation. Piecemeal approach to infrastructure will be more costly than a master development. Helen Sause, HOMES, urged Board not to call a good marketing analysis a strategy. Not sure how mix-use dream can be achieved without integrating residential. Urged Board not to lose vision of walk to work. Irene Dieter, resident, commented on actual branding missing from the Strategy. Need to clarify what it is we want people to think of when they think of Alameda Point. President Zuppan closed public comment. Ms. Ott stated the City is willing to discuss long-term leases with tenants but must also consider future development plans. She stated Standard of Reasonableness was an oversight in the Strategy and should be incorporated. In response to Board Member Köster's inquiry as to the process of incorporating the comments from tonight's meeting, Lori Taylor, Community Development Director, noted that comments/changes would orally be presented to Council on Dec 5. Board Member Köster reiterated that housing and transportation are very important issues in Alameda. Board Member Knox White commented that Strategy reads more like a marketing proposal and concurred with others that there is no real clear vision. Ms. Taylor clarified that since the time the Planning Board packets were distributed; KMA completed the narrative that went out in the Council packets. President Zuppan recommended that the presentation to Council state that the Planning Board did not see the narrative. Board Member Knox White questioned when City is going to prioritize efforts. Current services of property management company should be addressed. He questioned why Strategy recommends targeting specialty foods when Harbor Bay has land an… | 10419 | |
184 | 184 | Board Member Ezzy Ashcraft noted this was a good report. She suggested trying to find a way to market the Point to Alameda residents so they could become familiar with the type of uses out there. She noted the need to pursue the film industry and position ourselves to take advantage of opportunities. She emphasized the community's desire for a mixed use development. Board Member Henneberry noted that a certain amount of industrial space needs to support maritime uses at the Point. He stated he supports submitting the Strategy to Council. President Zuppan stated that she agreed with other board members who didn't feel like this was a strategy, but a step in the process to develop an economic development strategy. She noted that a lot of hard choices need to be made regarding what to fund. Tenant management should also be addressed. Board Member Knox White suggested holding off the presentation of the Strategy until the new Council is seated. 7-B. Public Hearing on an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Tentative Map for 89 Lots at 1551 Buena Vista Avenue (APN72-384-21. The project was originally published as 69 lots. The Planning Board will consider approval of an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for Marina Cove II, 89 residential lots and a Tentative Map within the area bounded by Ohlone Street, Buena Vista Avenue, Clement Avenue and Entrance Way (currently occupied by the Chipman Company). The site is zoned R-4-PD, neighborhood residential with a Planned Development overlay. Andrew Thomas, Planning Services Manager, gave brief presentation. Board Member Ezzy Ashcraft clarified with staff that the six lots fronting Buena Vista would have access from Buena Vista via 3 shared driveways on Buena Vista and not side street access. Staff noted that that Parcel Map was approved several years ago for fewer units. Units were increased to meet the City's housing requirements. Board Member Knox White clarified with Staff that Tentative Map is establishing a Parcel 53 and that dotted lines are adju… | 10419 | |
185 | 185 | President Zuppan opened public comment. Board Member Knox White motioned to reduce speaker time to 3 minutes. Board Member Henneberry seconded the motion. Motion failed, 3-2-1 Köster abstained; no quorum. Speaker time will remain 5 minutes. William Smith, resident, noted that the design has improved, although he is still concerned about fulfilling the capacity for the Housing Element. Helen Sause, HOMES, spoke against the density of each parcel and suggested that condos might take advantage of the great views over the estuary and relieve the density of each parcel. Integrating affordable homes would be a much improved social aspect of the development. John Spangler, resident, noted that he was not in favor of the Marina Cove I development and not in favor of this proposal. Diane Lichtenstein, HOMES, concurred with comments made by speakers Sause and Spangler. Distressed with lack of number of affordable units and design. Laura Thomas, Renewed Hope, commented that more affordable housing units are needed, although pleased with the proposed 37 unit multi-family housing lot. Karen Bey, resident, spoke in favor of the project and encouraged approval. President Zuppan closed public comment. Board Member Köster r noted concerns about courts, Buena Vista frontage, and emergency access. Staff clarified that decisions on courts A, B and C can be postponed until layout of multi-family buildings is finalized. Multi-unit housing can be increased at a later time. Map is being addressed tonight and not the architecture. What's referred to as "Street C" in report should be "Street B". There is no "Street C". Vice-President Burton motioned to extend the meeting to 11:50. Board Member Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion. Motion carried, 6-0; no abstentions. Board Member Köster commented that he'd like to see more density on Parcel 53, Street B connect through to Arbor Street and rear access to lots facing Buena Vista. Board Member Henneberry supported acceptance of project. Board Member Knox White supported acceptance of project. B… | 10419 | |
186 | 186 | Vice-President Burton supported acceptance of project. Proposed adding condition that developer provide, at a later date, some sort of distinctive paving to Emergency Vehicle Access. President Zuppan supported acceptance of project, although concerned that more housing units are not included. Staff clarified that rear-access to the Buena Vista fronted lots can be considered at the Design Review stage and concern can be included in the report to Council. Board Member Knox White motioned to accept the Tentative Map as proposed minus dotted lines for courts A, B, and C and addition of emergency vehicle access materials language and addendum with the correction of typo (53 lots not 52). Board Member Henneberry seconded the motion. Motion carried, 6-0; no abstentions. 8. MINUTES: 9. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS: Written Report None. 9-A. Future Agendas 10. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None. 11. BOARD COMMUNICATIONS: None. 12. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. 13. ADJOURNMENT: Approved Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 6 November 26, 2012 | 10419 | |
187 | 187 | ALAMEDA GOLF COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING Revised 6/16/08 Wednesday, May 21, 2008 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Jane Sullwold called the regular meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. in the Ladies' Lounge at the Chuck Corica Golf Complex, 1 Clubhouse Memorial Road, Alameda, CA 94502 1-A. Roll Call Roll call was taken and members present were: Commissioner Betsy Gammell, Vice Chair Ray Gaul, Commissioner Bill Schmitz and Chair Jane Sullwold. Absent: Secretary Bill Delaney and Commissioner Jeff Wood. Also present were Interim General Manager Dale Lillard and Assistant Golf Professional Mike Robason. 1-B Approval of Minutes - Regular Meeting of April 16, 2008: The Commission approved the minutes unanimously. 1-C Adoption of Agenda The Commission adopted the agenda unanimously. 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. 3. COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS None. 4. AGENDA ITEMS: 4-A Response from the City Auditor. Chair Sullwold read a letter from City Auditor Kevin Kearney dated May 20, 2008, purportedly explaining the accounting procedures concerning the golf cart lease. The Golf Fund is being charged the entire amount of the four-year lease -- $449,000 -- in this fiscal year. Mr. Kearney did not answer the question of why this was necessary in his letter. He compared the golf cart lease to a home mortgage, but, of course, a home owner is not required to put aside the entire amount due to be paid over the 30-year term of his mortgage during the first year, making the comparison inappropriate. The Commission intends to ask Mr. Kearney additional questions. Chuck Corica Golf Complex Page 1 06/16/08 Golf Commission Minutes | 10419 | |
188 | 188 | Prior to the meeting Chair Sullwold asked Interim General Manager Dale Lillard to explain the components of the Services category in the Golf Complex financial reports for May, as this figure is substantially over budget this year. Mr. Lillard reported that the Services category included the four years of payments on the golf cart lease, payments to the National Golf Foundation for the Operational Review and Master Plan, and a charge of $115,063 for Beltline eminent domain litigation expenses. The Golf Commission questioned why the Beltline expenses, which have absolutely nothing to do with golf or the Golf Complex, are being charged against Golf Complex revenues. [Note: The next day, May 22, 2008, Mr. Lillard clarified by e-mail to the Golf Commissioners that the Services category included a charge of $374,794 to date for the golf cart lease, and $79,522 for payments to date to NGF. The charge of $115,063 for Beltline expenses was attributed to risk management, and was included under the category of Transfers to Other Funds.] 4-B Score card advertising. Assistant Golf Professional Mike Robason said that he had contacted the company that offered to prepare free scorecards in exchange for advertising rights and had begun negotiations with them to see what they would be willing to do for the Golf Complex. 4-C Feedback on elimination of complimentary rounds; discussion regarding possible changes to various categories of greens fees. Commissioner Schmitz and Commissioner Gammell, neither of whom was present at the April meeting, expressed serious disagreement with the April vote by the Commission to impose a $15 charge for employees to play golf at the Golf Complex. Commissioner Gammell said she considered it embarrassing that Pro Shop employees would be allowed to play for free at other courses but would be charged to play at their home course. Commissioner Schmitz moved, and Commissioner Gammell seconded, that the decision to impose employee greens fees be rescinded. Chair Sullwold said she was opposed to the motio… | 10419 | |
189 | 189 | Commissioners who expected to pay the $15 rate starting on May 1 were told by Pro Shop staff that no such rate existed, so they had to ask to be counted as employees in order to be properly charged. She instructed Mr. Lillard to have the Commissioner rate set up as soon as possible. A general discussion ensued regarding possible ways to enhance Golf Complex revenues by changes to greens fees. The Golf Commission approved a recommendation to City Council to (1) equalize rates on the Clark and Fry courses by bring Clark rates up to Fry rates, (2) create a "super super" twilight rate of $10 per round after 6:00 p.m. on a 90-day promotional basis, and (3) raise the weekend rate at the Mif Albright course from $7.00 to $9.00. Mr. Lillard was asked to present these proposals to City Council as quickly as possible. Chair Sullwold asked Mr. Lillard and Mr. Robason if either had any additional revenue-enhancing ideas for the Golf Commission to consider, but neither could think of any. Both were encouraged to come forward immediately if they had any new ideas, or if any new ideas were suggested to them. 4-D Discussion on marketing plan by Secretary Delaney. Chair Sullwold read an e-mail dated May 21, 2008, from Secretary Delaney as follows: I have secured an individual who will add a great deal to our marketing discussions. He is available after June 6th, thus I plan to schedule an input and brainstorming session shortly after that. It would be a 5-hour meeting initially to discuss issues, characteristics of the course/facility, competitive activities, other entertainment facility events, etc. The objective is to find a common ground to begin the brainstorming session. There would be a second meeting to get into actual strategic issues, messaging and maybe some creative approaches. Execution efforts will come from the second meeting. We'll also want to consider how we measure our efforts (i.e. ROI and impact). All of this will be part of our discussions. I would think we should have no more than 7 people involved. 3 Commis… | 10419 | |
190 | 190 | 5. ORAL REPORTS 5-A Golf Shop and Driving Range activities report by Assistant Golf Professional Mike Robason. The Assistant Golf Professional reported that the Taylor Made Demo Day held on May 17, 2008 was very successful bringing in $6,500. The Golf Complex will be hosting a Ladies Day on June 11, 2008 in conjunction with the PGA of America's Women's Golf Month. The activities will include a "Demo Day" with Titleist/Cobra and teaching clinics. The event is free. 5-B Golf Complex Maintenance activities report by Superintendent Doug Poole. Absent. 5-C Beautification Program and Junior Golf Club by Mrs. Norma Arnerich. No tape transmission available. 5-D Golf Complex Restaurant Report, Jim's on the Course. No Restaurant representative was present. Mr. Lillard reported that ceiling tiles had been replaced, and plans were in the works to replace the carpet. 6. COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS 6-A Marketing and Promotions, Commissioner Gammell. Nothing to report. 6-B Golf Complex Financial Report, Secretary Delaney. Absent. Financial matters discussed earlier. 6-C New Clubhouse Project, Vice Chair Gaul and Commissioner Schmitz. Nothing to report. 6-D Maintenance, Buildings, Security, Albright Course and Driving Range, Commissioner Wood. Absent. 7. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (Public Comment) None. Chuck Corica Golf Complex Page 4 06/16/08 Golf Commission Minutes | 10419 | |
191 | 191 | 8. OLD BUSINESS None. 9. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Included in the Commission packet was a memorandum to the Finance Department showing the surcharge payment for April 2008 was $11,790. The year-to-date total to the General Fund is $112,231 for fiscal year 2007/2008. 10. ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING'S AGENDA Golf Complex financials. 11. ANNOUNCEMENTS/ADJOURNMENT The Meeting was adjourned at approximately 8:00 PM. The agenda for the meeting was posted 72 hours in advance in accordance with the Brown Act. Chuck Corica Golf Complex Page 5 06/16/08 Golf Commission Minutes | 10419 | |
192 | 192 | Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting June 27, 2005-7:00 - p.m. 1. CONVENE: 7:13 p.m. 2. FLAG SALUTE: Ms. Mariani 3. ROLL CALL: President Cunningham, Vice President Cook, Lynch, Mariani, and Piziali. Board members Kolhstrand and McNamara were absent. Also present were Deputy City Attorney Julie Harryman, Supervising Planner Cynthia Eliason, Leslie Little, Development Services Director, Jennifer Ott, Development Manager, Development Services Department, Planner III Douglas Garrison, Planner III Allen Tai. 4. MINUTES: Minutes for the meeting of June 13, 2005. Vice President Cook advised that page 8, paragraph 9, should be changed to read, "Vice President Cook advised that periodic review for a variety of parking issues had been attached to use permits in the past." M/S Piziali/Cook to approve the minutes for the meeting of June 13, 2005, as corrected. A quorum for a vote on the minutes was not present. They will be carried over to the next meeting. 5. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION: President Cunningham advised that the Board had requested that all Consent Calendar items with the exception of Item 7-E, be placed on the regular agenda. 6. ORAL COMMUNICATION:None. Planning Board Minutes Page 1 June 27, , 2005 | 10419 | |
193 | 193 | 7. CONSENT CALENDAR: 7-A. PDA05-0003 Applicant: Joe Ernst/SRM Associates (DG). The applicant proposes a Planned Development Amendment to amend the Harbor Bay Business Park landscaping and lot coverage provisions as established in Resolution 1203. This Amendment would affect Lots 1-6, 8-12 and14 of Tentative Parcel Map 8574. These lots are fronting on or southerly of 1900 and 2000 North Loop Road. The proposed Planned Development Amendment would allow a five percent (5%) increase in building coverage for parcels larger than 5.5 acres. Currently, maximum allowed building coverage is thirty five percent (35%) for lots larger than 5.5 acres and forty percent (40%) on lots smaller than 5.5 acres. The maximum lot coverage allowed on lots smaller than 5.5 acres would not be affected. The proposed Planned Development Amendment would also decrease the minimum landscape coverage by five to ten percent (5 to 10%), depending on lot size. Currently, 30% landscaping coverage is required on lots smaller than 5.5 acres and 25% landscaping coverage is required for parcels larger than 5.5 acres. The proposed Planned Development Amendment would decrease the landscaping requirement to twenty percent (20%) for these lots regardless of size. The property is zoned C-M - PD (Commercial-Manufacturing - Planned Development.) This item was removed from the Consent Calendar and placed on the Regular Agenda. Mr. Garrison summarized the staff report. Staff recommended approval of this item. The public hearing was opened. Mr. David Kirwin, 1416 Seminary Avenue, spoke in opposition to this item. He expressed concern that this item would chip away at the rules established for building on Bay Farm Island. He had not heard any good reasons for allowing slightly less landscaping or more construction density of warehouse structures on these parcels. He inquired whether further subdivision would then be allowed. The public hearing was closed for Board discussion. Mr. Garrison noted that this business park was originally conceived as a campus-like set… | 10419 | |
194 | 194 | In response to an inquiry by Vice President Cook regarding the future possibility of building up, Ms. Eliason noted that the Final Development Plans would preclude that choice because the applicant would have to meet parking requirements; parking was based on a partial warehouse-type use, which was less dense than office. She noted that the entire lot would have to be redeveloped entirely; they would not be able to just add a second story. Vice President Cook expressed concern about having a balance in the public interest, including safety for children and traffic. She had been uncomfortable approving these speculative projects without more information about traffic, parking and other issues. She suggested a potential mitigation by allowing 7-B to be approved without also approving all the parcelization and changing the landscaping requirements. Ms. Eliason noted that the PDA could be limited to only Parcel 14 (Ettore). That would not allow 7- C (four flex warehouses) to move forward at this time. The Parcel Map referenced was already approved by the Planning Board and will be heard by City Council in July. Vice President Cook did not feel she had enough information, and needed more environmental analysis and examination of the schools and roads. She believed the business park as a whole was excellent quality. Mr. Lynch suggested that the 15 parcels be brought back for discussion of circulation, landscaping, and building design, and to move the Tentative Map forward. Ms. Eliason noted that the Tentative Map had been approved, and that the entire business park was under a development agreement, which specified the land uses that may be included in the business park. Those uses included Office, R&D, as well as any use in the C-M District, which also included warehouse/light manufacturing. She noted that the Board had limited ability to change the uses. Vice President Cook would like the parcels, except for Ettore, to return for further analysis and discussion of compatibility of uses with schools and future plans f… | 10419 | |
195 | 195 | proposed for the garage. She noted that it would not staff-intensive, and that there would be no pay gate to queue up for at the end of the evening. Vice President Cook noted that there had been more opposition to the theater than the garage, and added that the Board listened carefully to each public speaker. She noted that some items had been addressed previously, such as retail on the ground floor. Mr. Piziali supported the use of variegated brick to add more detail to the façade. Ms. Ott noted that Michael Stanton believed that the symmetry of the pattern with respect to the horizontal openings would look better with a more subtle brick design. President Cunningham believed that the header courses should be fixed, and he was very concerned about the current brick detail design. In response to an inquiry by Mr. Lynch, Ms. Ott confirmed that one of the criteria was that the exterior façade would be consistent with whatever the Planning Board approves. She noted that Michael Stanton specified the quality of the materials in a very detailed way, based on the sample board provided. Vice President Cook noted that the DDA discussed the City's parking operations plan, which would be submitted in a timely manner and examined in detail by the City Council. President Cunningham addressed Mr. Spangler's comment regarding an exit strategy, and noted that there was no way to tell what would happen in the future. He believed the floor-to-floor heights could be adjusted, and that the conversion of a parking garage was problematic. He noted that designing structures with an eye towards adaptive reuse before the intended use has begun will compromise the project from the beginning. He hoped that Park Street business would require this volume of parking. Vice President Cook believed that without the Cineplex, this parking structure would appear too massive on its own. Mr. Lynch requested the inclusion of the financials at the next presentation. He suggested that with the recent Supreme Court decision regarding eminent domain, th… | 10419 | |
196 | 196 | accents; 2. The header courses would be corrected; 3. A lighting consultant would be utilized; 4. A landscaping plan would be included, and returned to the Planning Board. AYES - 4 (Kohlstrand, McNamara absent); NOES - 1 (Mariani); ABSTAIN - 0 9. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: President Cunningham advised that a letter from Sarah [Unavolta], commenting that she was not in favor of Item 8-A. 10. BOARD COMMUNICATION: a. Oral Status Report regarding the Alameda Point Advisory Committee APAC. (Vice President Cook). Vice President Cook advised that their last meeting was held the previous week. Staff will make a presentation before the Planning Board to discuss the future of the project, and what kind of regular review the Board would like. b. Oral Status Report regarding Northern Waterfront Specific Plan (Vice President Cook). Vice President Cook advised that there was nothing new to report since the last meeting. c. Oral Status Report regarding the Golf Course Committee (Board Member Piziali). Board Member Piziali advised that there was nothing new to report since the last meeting. d. Oral Status Report regarding the Oakland/Chinatown Advisory Committee (Board Member Mariani). Board Member Mariani advised that there was nothing new to report since the last meeting. 11. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS: Ms. Eliason advised that the preliminary concept for Alameda Point was distributed to the Board members. There will be a meeting on that subject in July. 12. ADJOURNMENT: 11:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Paul Benoit, Interim Secretary Planning Board Minutes Page 23 June 27, , 2005 | 10419 | |
197 | 197 | Planning & Building Department These minutes were approved at the July 11, 2005, Planning Board meeting. This meeting was audio and video taped. Planning Board Minutes Page 24 June 27, , 2005 | 10419 | |
198 | 198 | 7-B. FDP05-0001/DR05-0050 Applicant: Joe Ernst/SRM Associates for Ettore Products (DG). 2100 North Loop Road. The applicant requests a Final Development Plan and Design Review for a new 88,630 square foot warehouse, office and light manufacturing facility located at 2100 N. Loop Road (Parcel No. 14 on Tentative Parcel Map No 8574). The property is zoned C-M - PD (Commercial-Manufacturing - Planned Development.) This item was removed from the Consent Calendar and placed on the Regular Agenda. This item was discussed under Item 7-A. M/S Lynch/Mariani and unanimous to adopt Planning Board Resolution No. PB-05-24 to approve a Final Development Plan and Design Review for a new 88,630 square foot warehouse, office and light manufacturing facility located at 2100 N. Loop Road (Parcel No. 14 on Tentative Parcel Map No 8574). AYES - 5 (Kohlstrand, McNamara absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0 Planning Board Minutes Page 4 June 27, , 2005 | 10419 | |
199 | 199 | 7-C. FDP05-0002/DR05-0057 Applicant: Joe Ernst/SRM Associates (DG). The applicant requests a Final Development Plan and Design Review for four (4) new flex warehouse, office and light manufacturing facilities ranging in size from 13,900 to 33,272 square feet on 6.41 acres adjacent to and southerly of 2000 North Loop Road (Parcels 8-12 on Tentative Parcel Map No. 8574). These facilities will be on one lot of approximately 11.53 acres until the final map is approved. The property is zoned C-M - PD (Commercial-Manufacturing- - Planned Development.) This item was removed from the Consent Calendar and placed on the Regular Agenda. This item was discussed under Item 7-A. M/S Lynch/Cook and unanimous to continue this item, which will be renoticed following discussion with the applicants. AYES - 5 (Kohlstrand, McNamara absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0 Planning Board Minutes Page 5 June 27, , 2005 | 10419 | |
200 | 200 | 7-D. TM05-0001 - Regency Realty Group, Inc. 2599 Blanding Avenue (AT). Applicants request approval of Parcel Map 8725 to reconfigure four parcels of land at the Bridgeside Shopping Center. The site is located within the C-2 PD, Central Business Planned Development District. This item was removed from the Consent Calendar and placed on the Regular Agenda. Mr. Tai summarized the staff report The public hearing was opened. There were no speakers. The public hearing was closed for Board discussion. In response to an inquiry by Vice President Cook regarding the timing of this action, Mr. Tai replied that it was appropriate because before the public access easements can be recorded on the site, the parcels must be recorded first. He noted that should not be affected by any change in public access easements. Those easements would be recorded by a separate instrument at a later time. The Broadway Street right of way through the site would be permanently abandoned. Vice President Cook noted that she was concerned about the current proposed location for the transformers in the view corridors and welcoming area. Mr. Tai noted that staff was reviewing those issues, which were unrelated to this item. M/S Piziali/Cook and unanimous to adopt Planning Board Resolution No. PB-05-25 to approve Parcel Map 8725 to reconfigure four parcels of land at the Bridgeside Shopping Center. AYES - 5 (Kohlstrand, McNamara absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0 Planning Board Minutes Page 6 June 27, , 2005 | 10419 |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited
CREATE VIRTUAL TABLE [pages_fts] USING FTS5 ( [text], content=[pages] );