Resolution 13566CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. 13566
CONSIDERING AND MAKING FINDINGS AS TO A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLANS
FOR THE ALAMEDA POINT, BUSINESS AND WATERFRONT
AND WEST END COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
WHEREAS, the Community Improvement Commission of the City of Alameda
(the "Commission ") has prepared Amendments to the Community Improvement Plans
(the "Amendments ") for the Alameda Point, Business and Waterfront and West End
Community Improvement Projects; and
WHEREAS, as the Lead Agency, the Commission, has prepared a Mitigated
Negative Declaration on the Amendments pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., hereinafter "CEQA "), the
Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (14 Cal
Code Regs. Section 15000 et seq., hereinafter the "State CEQA Guidelines ") and local
procedures adopted by the Commission pursuant thereto; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has published and distributed a Notice of Intent to
Adopt a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance with Mitigation Measures
and circulated a draft Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration in accordance with
CEQA and State CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Commission received three written comments during the public
review period, none of which resulted in revisions to the Amendments or Mitigated
Negative Declaration that require recirculation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
prior to adoption; and
WHEREAS, the City of Alameda is a Responsible, Agency, as defined in Section
21069 of the Public Resources Code, with respect to the Amendments; and
WHEREAS, on March 18, 2003, the Commission and the City Council held a joint
public hearing on the proposed Amendments and the Mitigated Negative Declaration,
and the City Council has considered all comments and testimony received pertaining
thereto.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared, published,
circulated and reviewed in accordance with the requirements of CEQA, the State CEQA
Guidelines and local procedures adopted by the Commission pursuant thereto.
Section 2. The City Council has evaluated all comments, written and oral,
received from persons who have reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and has
duly reviewed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared and
adopted by the Commission prior to adopting this resolution and acting on the
Amendments.
Section 3. The City Council hereby finds, on the basis of the whole record
before it (including the initial study and comments received) that there is no substantial
evidence that the proposed Amendments will have a significant effect on the
environment and that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the Commission's
independent judgment and analysis.
Section 4. The City Council hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring
Program set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference.
Section 5. The City Clerk of the City of Alameda is authorized to file a Notice
of Determination with the County Clerk of the County of Alameda and the Office of
Planning and Research, if applicable, following the adoption by the City Council of
ordinances adopting the Amendments.
Section 6. The Commission is the custodian of the documents and other
material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based,
which documents and other materials are located at the City of Alameda, Development
Services Department, 950 West Mall Square, Room 215, Alameda, CA 94501 -7552.
resoapvgnegdec312
ca
ca
5
0
cr
Cr F—
w
w
LL�
CO
CI
g�W
N V
W
cr
Q
L11 --
o
Lti
cc 0
W v
P;
w
w
V W
W
Lu
The environmental mitigation measures listed in the second column below have been incorporated into the conditions of approval for the Amendment and Merger of the West End Community Improvement
Plan (WECIP) and Business and Waterfront Improvement Plan (BWIP), and Amendment of the Alameda Point Improvement Plan (APIP) Project in order to mitigate identified environmental impacts. A
completed and signed chart will indicate that each mitigation requirement has been complied with, and that City and state monitoring requirements have been fulfilled with respect to Public Resources Code
Section 21081.6.
VERIFICATION
0
r,
0
Signature
0
o
Timing
Requirements
Type of
Monitoring Action
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
II
City
II
RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(CONDITION OF APPROVAL)
IDENTIFIED IMPACT
AIR QUALITY
Tti
0
E 0
0
Q, U
w a) N a)
E C 5. E..
'.. o c0 0 - =
T.)' La ca c •
0 U a) a) N a
O 2 .5 5 .0
c
'- 0 3 c m= m
Gt) 'a) E m c p
- � N G 0 0 E)
0
0. N > .-. 7.° .
C
0
0 c .o a) = aa)i coma
0
0
0
Li
N
0
0
O
neda Col nu
CIC = City of AI
0
VERIFICATION
0
0
0
.C7)
c
z
=
IDENTIFIED IMPACT
N
2 = C
2
2
-o
0
as
0.
0
0
0L
-o 0
0 .0
0 +-
0- a)
0.
0
0 o
2 -4
E
o
o cr) 0
c 0
2 o
,on t o ?1 g
-2 0
2 7-, —
0 o
a) , -2
L.. > 9 0 ` .-
-.2
2
cs
o 0
.E ..-,8-
-0 —
c 7, ca
0 2 si 0 a) ca 0
ca cb
o ) , -
ta 0 -0 .2 0.
7-
.0 0 0.) E
0 0 ° 0)
=
o2 o
>,
c o o
rt s =
a cz c
c -0 ■
cci rT c CD
....= 8 .,2 cc ay E •-- 59.
0 10 •-r,
s . -a. 5 0
c 0 v)
... 0
(.3
63
0.
0
9
m
9
"" ° 0 0
0 0 -0
"5.
-=L' 2 E c 2= 2 -.' -- 5 0 ,2 --i.- - .7. 0 -_
-
010 o.2:00:0 o ; .0 9 m 0. c o 0)
o. 00 -.:...
2 — 0 -r: ,,, . 1,2 . ci.g, ...,,TE, -,---
`
,
- 5 . i` 2 :cr 5 i
o -
c .
-E ...
3, cz 4 i. 4!_ .F, 2- .,
T6 .%7)
`Qt
a 0. T-1
E ,.=‘ 6 0 .--. 6 ...:, o a; .22
7 0 ' 6 rt' 7 -) 3
a`,L' ,,-, 70' 72 ("5- -E 7 2
< r-= ' -C. ° ? c . .) C3. -' 8 °
al E „, ._ -0 -6 _ ...u2
0 a)
a 8 E ....Q. '..-->2 ,-1 > c'' 2 c)--•, ...7-' T..
E 3 if4 fi -c7) c'.,'' . i. 5 se 42 ..:e-' Q '
' tl cu g- -'.. T,53 (2'3_ `07., (') ? 20). -
c 9 a 2
All(7( 7 I Cy:7J
0
0.
as;
0 •
E
0.
00
7_
VERIFICATION I
,t,
- m
0
Signature
0
z
cc
0
I--
- - E
0
E
Timing
Requirements
Type of
Monitoring Action
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Imps.
Entity
RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(CONDITION OF APPROVAL)
IDENTIFIED IMPACT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
° CD E CI
2 'in—' . 1 --c ) — a)
•• a) .—.a,
•'''' T) =
0 ts —
c 0 ct -,T,
C2- —6 '71 70
a_ a_
,
cc-2: = 8 2 , _E 7,5co
C.) c .5 - 0 < 05 Cra: •c .0 < '5
° 65 ri -c 0 -=,- 5 = 'ES 775
,?-
al. -2)o.: 8- 0 0 ;...- c_. ,
cz ,_ co
0
•-• ci) r.,,,
0 ° _ — ,., T.. Ti c a
.00 ,.. = - ;.= Z5 '--- 7
ET (t 2 z" Til *<'' 72
F.3
.0
c „,
-8 • 8 = .
0 0 1:-_
>, ,. —
7-0
LL
'72
is; C:L)f "G -� Cafifvniia
<
VERIFICATION
. as
•- as
cs
ta
,.
0
c
to
c7)
MONITORING
Timing
Requirements
Fts
0
7_
t cu _
g_ 5 Tti.
0 — >
— o 0
I.. Q) 1...
0 :Fs, 0.
0
C.). Ca 0
permit issuance
Type of
Monitoring Action
00
'Es 9
, 0
'2 E 7 g E .0
(n c );', ° 0
. _ o 0 E as 0 o
= c = - a) • -
000 E -
a c 0. P.. "C -0 0
0- 4,...-- .3) o 0
2 - " 0 c•- 0 2
... E -3 • = 2.) E a-
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
>,
0
Impl.
Entity
c
• : - . --7C•E--1.5 -, ‘ .
0 0 0 0 aa0 ' -2, 7:
• > ' . ' 2 5oED. ' r o. :i5u: .r', ) • " . e
. : 0o 00 _
( . = < C) -
'
00
00
t) C
a
T.
V)
RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(CONDITION OF APPROVAL)
I.._ 1...
0 C
.rn - co "C CI. r C
C7) in T•ti >, '._ f., c (1) .- 00
_2 -"•------
0 (-tc , ,0 C>_o t , - )- , 0I-C— l,,0 a,L - - _ i ) .3.-..„...a C - 5ca0 a.c _2" ) , s , . -• e "- •0 5,0 - ,0 o -..-, ., / , - . = ..t''c8 = 0 0 „- .-'-o_ :, ' -- ! .r0 C0ca- o c 0 '..O -) ) • _ - :.4=,o 0 -0 .=-_ ..) '• , ".2 ,0-1.G 0a0 _ P .,,,.) .,. ,, _ •---,0 ,c 0 '_E 70 ''_ ' ) . ..i4'0 0 aa0,>4, n _''' _ ) . . , = `.- - .0's Cc.- - n U . --.' . S0 ,C 0 , cc - 0) ) ".:.4- ,*s0 c>c „- - ".--; -" i. i , .= - - ,L.cc- c8 0 cE.„- n ,..) - „ ) '• ±.r41 , ,7c -u,a.--.n 5 : ) > . .
L.0 00 0 - i ^0 .th- 5 E a0 -7-) . , - - - -• 7_ = c,- C 2'ac7p _ i, 1 :) ) s ' .-- Ec 0.0 2 5 cs r-C- Z :- ' ‘ = - - '5 0 ■c 8,c0 ,=— ...._ .. . - . „-c0 0 a=- ,M 00‘-.:_) ), . , - _ '• .7.. _ 4 - :.-= - c g?- = ,- 0 .-.2-, ).- .
= 0 _ .-
- • - >, 0 a) - c- c ..c = Co -C-2' C) C '-' .11 Q) 0 .r..'
.. .0 .- .- E a) ca to) 8 0 8 -= o's a) - cn 0 0 4- 0) -- F.--
.... 0 0 ,... ._ 0 -C ..... • - ,,.... 0
0 .0 - , - 0 o= --- ' -0C
. 0) >, c . 0 ,_ 2. = .- 2 1 0 ca 0 0 -0 c --- 0)
CC . 0 al as O 8- :;-:: o 0 .8 -c Tvi 2 2 . as -&:- 0 .2 c • -ff as Fs .0 .,-,:) 3
0 2 E 0 "ro *0 70 .8 0 a) '8' u) ttc -0 E., u3- ,13 - -o 't .- E as `I)
0.. — o ".E 'c, c -- -- ‘” 0 0 0 0 C 0 ° — '-.. -C) 0 2 a) al
c '-- `15 -= F) 2 0 -c:- 2'-°•'_-E co-65`-'="-- 0
6 0 8 ctl .' = = Te —E” rn = cl. = E .5 v)
a, s ca ) - C 7= C r'c , Li 3 • ,-C ,,,u9 2 2 79 r...), ...0C scr) (...) Fo '-r_CL). 8CC1 cs- °CZ ri, V) .....C: ZS 0= .-0:_. .9 CC
a '6 °M) I 02 ° s- E /0 , o = 5 o 03 a2=> ca a Cf CO 0)0). 0)000
C
r) S ) .
,
-'
0
-8
L
'D
CD
1 I ,
cultural resources are encountered
during approved ground- disturhing
IDENTIFIED IMPACT
CULTURAL RESOURCES
a)
(1)
In —0) ,c .= a)
c c _ E c9 , g
0 8 >
4-, -5 c 0 ••07 0 ,_ as ),.2, „, ,_ -§-
2 0
•Sci_E-o°L” -0- E
0 E-.--° CS) .)
= .= 0 CI 0 0 -0 to 'f5: o co >, •
= I-- 9) a) 0 u..1 c o "t5
-tF 0 o..T 2 '0 - ...c .-...,., ., Z
,• a . 0 F° 2
.r. CA s... -5 ...-E -E- a) -- •- 0 = 6- ,_ .s.-_)
th 0 0 o ,-- , .c-F, = -° cn ,... = o 8
0 CC 2 ----- E '-' - -C' 2 m . >, •bc ci)
u a) .._ a) C1-- '/),,,,
>,..-mv,,,,.... .....cc
t " 00) cu ,-, ,,•3 .:.= ..c.: c--- lc o6
':5 E ..--
6 -"" 0 "' 2 ° o eli 2 -0 .0) .5, °
• ° o •._:_- E sc -c) ct C15 -th --E--- *CI E
in the BWIP and WECIP Project Areas
associated with development encouraged
and improvements funded by the project
could disturb as -yet unidentified sensitive
archaeological resources in the Project
Areas.
:d I.
Z
0
—
<
0
it
w
>0
C.)
,..
c
c
cn
MONITORING
c
e,)
E
1:73 .b-
C 5
....E cr0
c
0
o
ett
al
c
00
o ..a.
0.
i- 2
Confirm that
regmnt. is included
in grading permit
_____ j
-a .5
c Lu
0
DI C
c .2
7.-.. Ta.
o 0
I- .-
a .c
043
2 >
• >,
Ul
CC
Ili
Z>
0 0
ct a.
CD <
-. u.
2 z
c:3O
<1.- 8
z
LU , 9
, >,
a) "C en 7-7
en Cn ..Y c
tr)
ct -5
a) cc o — .— 0 a) =
c2 u) 't c cn = c o
...-:-.. r, c.) .— z 4
',.., ,
a) - al c 0 '
-
:SE--0-02°T--`,-11
=-40ctc00:1
0 0 o - c 0
o) u) 7-.. 0 'En o
0 0 8,, 0) ›, ,_ L- •--C1
>., o. E •=--" ci) — '-- al GCB CO (1)8 0 CD—
c a) < •- 0 .c.5 .52 en • — -c -c 76 0) c) 6 0 o
>, -E-. a) -6_ c a) 0 -'-' c ,-- co c_ as •
' -- C .0 "--• E — `at) c 1:' ' c " 5 > 2 .- ci,
1.7,10 ›,„, a)cecoc00i'.-0) 76•---
00 c
a) c-C3 CS)
-P- -C; :Ea' .-E ....,--- .2 ° •..— E LI) 0° •in— .'-T >al ....-al .2k- a)v) 'Li 0E 8 ,...1.—")
. _?.
in 2 .2 o 2 F .- 1-5 -. 0 — ,?_ c E ,53- E
Mitigation CR -3: If fossils are
unearthed during future excavations
associated with a improvement plan=
facilitated development or improvement
project, a qualified paleontologist shall
be consulted so that the resource is not
further damaged or destroyed. The
decision to extract the resource,
preserve the resource in place, or
sacrifice the resource shall be made at
that time depending on its significance.
This is a standard procedure
implemented for projects throughout
Alameda, and would reduce this impact
to a less- than - significant level.
I-
C.)
<
0.
2
CI
u..1
ir
1-
z
LU
Impact CR -3: Disturbance of
Paleontological Remains. Excavation
activities in the BWIP and WECIP Project
Areas associated with development
encouraged and improvements funded by
the pioject could unearth paleontological
remains. Some of these remains could
have significant importance.
Department of Fislr
res; CDFG = Calit
ity Improverne
VERIFICATION I
0
Signature
MONITORING
Timing
Requirements
samoisitsemsimmermis
2 a
a) cz0-
73
Prior to grading
or building permit
approval
Type of
Monitoring Action
0
2 0
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
. 3. >,
Imp!.
Entity
miamseinmen
'a 4Lo.
"10 ...-
' -g• 00
,-• 0
0 d
d> c
- 0 8
c
RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(CONDITION OF APPROVAL)
0) ,.., • 1
=
-
c'---'2.0 2
2
1-
needed new storm drainage facilities,
designed in accordance, with City of
Alameda criteria and installed in existing
Any project - facilitated development
proposed for location within the FEMA
designated 100 -year flood plain shall be
subject to associated existing flood
protection policies and regulations. Any
IDENTIFIED IMPACT
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
•-, I
•
Iimpact. -
1 Development EIR.) Project - facilitated
0
0
4:12.
-5-
"f„
0
0
0
0
LL
0
0
0
or;
0
72-
13
0
0
0
0.
0
0
0
0
00
c't
4:1 —101,
ro
2
-5 Z
IVERIFICATION
....0%)
CI
4.)
'5
'ra
c
a)
Fii
MONITORING
u)
C
cu
E
0
P Er
cc
c ,
-
c
co c) c)
*0-) >"'
6 -0
co
T C — O ce 2
o o 0
0 0
trz - CO M.
0
o
..
7 0
E u) E nc)
,- —
a 5 2 tn
0 z
C
0
=
0
<
0)
C
*c.•
o. 0
a,
Tn
5
C -
rz 2 a
approval of a
residential project
over 50 units in
A
::-...
0 w
cis
ra c
e -0
._. •--
o 6-
E >
•5
, A
_E Luc
a
a
- 0 5
0 c E c
BERIBISManintiMli
RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(CONDITION OF APPROVAL)
project- facilitated development proposal
for a portion of the BWIP or WECIP
areas that does not have an existing
FEMA floodplain map shall, prior to
issuance of any grading or building
permit, submit for City review and
approval, a detailed floodplain (design
flood) delineation for the development
site in accordance with FEMA standards
and as described in the Catellus Mixed
-0 e-
a)
Ci) 0
) 0r t o-0 0 0 0 C/) 0
a0 o .E - c en 0 C7)
5 0.. - cc c.) 0 7::' -5 co •
.—, 0.— ,..0.......,0
*-0,-,a)00.ocE0 c 0
ct, -- 2 , as 'E; E'
-0 to c c..- 0 0 6.,
4) -05 .r.-G. C' >"' "2 2 -0 E .c
RI TT 5 C 0 C 1 -5 - C a) 0 E.1). a) '§
) -r... ,-, 0 -,, _,>, 0) _R a) E w --,
= - - - - - _IP.
2
-o
— 0 -0 - ..0 .-.
" cd
Ct 0 i.... CtS
•0
E
Z 0
..„,,u0.„
2- 0 15, 5 if
0 cz _ =
(.) sn 2 -6
cti o. 0.
.
u)
5
..a: > _= c-
:°
. -
0 .— M 0)
—cn
o -5
o -5
13 09 _o
7:-' :.) 0
.
similar to Mitigation NOI -1 in the
Catellus Mixed Use Development EIR.)
IDENTIFIED IMPACT
NOISE
0
.2.-
c -
z •c ( t c c T 3 2 p_ Cl
•••••• 0 = '''''
-cri C 0 0
-ocr-50..-5= ,Pri
= a) x > a)
as • ._._
-I
, .c:i
E. 2 ,
0 0 6- C -'--
= mom ..-.., 0
Um >,....-2 0 ...,:L.' 73 6.■ c:.E
5 L.-, 1,7, E,
1."` ..... 0.) .=
.C;) Cr) ,--
z— . . a . ' E ''" C -0 5.'‹
...... as 0 a) as -EL 0
0 5 0
0. 0.. o ,._
co E 0 a) ..cr2 c o 0
0- 0 o > -a' ('..) c.) 'E
E O 8 -8 c> < 2 =
0
u)
(4
.`^.
Lu
co
co
0
z
8
.--
al
m
ai
2
co
-c:
ci
co
z-c-
-7:
,..:-
c
0
.5
Impact N -2: Project - Related Increase
in Atlantic Avenue Noise Levels. (This
impact finding is similar to Impact NO1-1
in the Catellus Mixed Use Development
0
0.
0
c:_
00
0.
0
0
E
0
0.
0
0
0
0.
0
0
0
0
Ft
0
0
0
0
0
0.
0
0
0
0
0
C2,
-0
0
0
74-"C
C.)
241PHUIh1MC( (162-1
0
z
LL
cc
Lu
z
0
15
0
z
z
EE
0
0
0)
0
00
0.
z
>,
a- LL1
ct
Lu
M
z >
0
-0.
<0.
att
0 LI.
0
00
Ui
z'
o
cc
IDENTIFIED IMPACT
3)
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
(1
o
>
° 004
2) ) 1-E -0 E
aa 5 5 -5 al
0. 7,
-
2
0
2:0
ca_
E
:as-- 0
-
— E
la
ca.
00
.0
0
d.
0
0
0
u_
0
0
5
0.
0
0
0
LL
0
0
5
0
I
)IA4A1C4 IT.624
0
7-01
o
-"c)
2
ca.
>,
0
0
0
"6"
0
t
C5
ca
:a
0.9
03 -a
7.5
00
0.
76
<
Z
5
0.0
< 8
8
05
--I 0
a)
0.
0
0
0
c)
CDFG = California Department o
Improvement Commission; cont. =
Alameda Con
U
II
U
U
0
Signature
MONITORING
ITiming
Requirements
IType of
Monitoring Action
IMonitoring and
Verification Entity
Imp!.
Entity
RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(CONDITION OF APPROVAL)
IDENTIFIED IMPACT
O
N
y C6
n
C CV
.O HO.
- c
a. a
C •m
_E. .
0 :°
- >,
° c
v C
co
a)
L
E-
N
E
O
>
Q=
a)
D
a=
x
c
n c- >° N a O ° c 'C C C°) '= .Cn in L
a ° ? m C O L= a) 'V O O O U C X a) X 6 >+
O c C U O n a) -, .r) a) 0= Y {- °• :cO co- Ca N •c E• ro O E N° = a) a) 1]
• ° U E es >, c i!II m a I1h!'i
c 5, 0 c � 3 a) a) a) :cts = o p a 0a)o 0 n.tn °tnn. 'W . j • p c_ U c 0 0 C> C C N a cO a= t= : O
C to C °_ 3 .- a U Q) '� E cti i 0. a OC - 'C E R o `^ c 0 N X -M m
N c` a •C a. a s a) >: Q. ° y c y a n an ca .c :C }� m ->, CS 0 O E E Q N a) ' -.. Ts Lf
° o 2 z E a� E a) c
a 0..a CO a .ca °O a`) = U. t4 _ > U >O - ° Q E 'y as a.
> 'c a O C N > U N > N CU P.
° Cb _ c N 6 E a) c O a) O ..E.- U .2.,- 6 E N a) ° ° 0- 3° C_ C ,a E
ca CD m O° N .= 'O 'a) =-c c1 E m E .. a U m:a`. U ps N C n- a s A) 0 a) O N 15 O
C9 'C E L U = E C. E ai c
a c ca .� ._ 3 a U= ca ro a� a ro a R 6 c c c c c c as a a) = o m
CJ C 0 (a 'c >+ R) c Cn as a O cu C= r C c "" E _. to a) a) (z 0 Q) -. F c O a L a
, , c c .Fs .c c .o -c :� c U) o ° m = v 3 a cc) m CN1 a a E cat ° L .5 3 •E
n n c ro c a ma cn c 'z'' � Ea E o) c m o o° 0.o m e v� a) _ CZ
E d P7 CV O "C 0> O 'c R3 -2 2 d V -„ a• a....= m L 0 -o U �/7 5 tt •� �> 0 c :U 0 E .D •� E>
crir`. ato-C E•= al 00.)00 :r 0 m aU co ct ac aca- -c-cn� m ;,-.) _a) co�° o ° E u. a° c
0
0
0
c)
CDFG = California Department o
Improvement Commission; cont. =
Alameda Con
U
II
U
U
VERIFICATION
• -c
0 c
Fri
0
r c
0.
ca
o
o
_ p
f1 o_
c
0
ro c o
5 N
' N
E • Q
•
L_ �"
C C
o
U a) ca
O
C
m
`0
N
m
d) m
3 0 0
3
_ -0 c T '65 -c
c O as yO 0
c. a) :3 a c _c= } h C a)
• J E
'c0 f- O •c04 5 0 O,_ 0 7, 2.)- C
47 a = p V :- ro O` O
.r 0 0 a to U N ._ . 0
2) o n (0ro -" ccv - 0 m °) .- 7:,3
o
fE = to 0 - a' co a m, 0 `o a E o 0
2 ��6m„N>,o5 EE�m0)
E
N X c `' 2 O cn j -,2>c 0) N
=g0c a330mm0 -3.n
m • c` a- c c •� = co o a) t) o 8 o 0 o` -
)N
<ca ccroa -o m E 0io C .� N
N
- �wlar a ° g °.S c oy ¢ ° 8 m
2-
IDENTIFIED IMPACT
O N N 0
0 0
.c 2 0_c 0 0 m
m ooao °'E c0
c ° E
• oaoo8m�E0
0. 0 :6 O a) aJ C O 0 'o
U O w 'i 0 E a> 5 n.
0) O 0 0 0 d 0 E 0
Nor, — 0 -? =o E �,
E .0.o a N 7 0 cu h
.0 �' c ca c a; a y
o ns .— 0 a) ?„ - c „_
as C -__ ..0 E O j a) •p c 3
i.� 3a E a, 0 0 X.a�
0 U =O 0 . ca c L •a> 0)
""0 1:" Z7 = 3 2 N '� C' _ .c 0
i
0 .r= = co u 'ca -Too = .. c =
Ease.,.. min -m
ca a) CO ca .0 : `0 c V 3 r
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
0) 0
O
0 0 UJ
' .0 m U (U
C - 0 L ED :
L o O c .c U 0 .N
c 3.
(0. O. L ;.., C N O N C
yN•�5Q�c E
c (0 0 0 -C m >. ca
tl f. Iv _.J C 5 c 3' V E
a) al t- ��v�a
a. 3 a
• E> _c ro U C
c4 O. d O 3 O 'C
°S E d 0 —
,::CD >c3as -c o
W 0 . • B was 0 2 -0 O E
N Q v .
EL c • 6 = 0 al a - .(a o O 0 l0)(0. 0E. F.!.2 m m m N
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly
adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a Special Joint City Council and
Community Improvement Commission meeting assembled on the 18th day of March, 2003, by the
following vote to wit:
AYES: Councilmembers Daysog, Kerr, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 4.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Councilmember DeWitt - 1
ABSTENTIONS: None.
IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City this
19th day of March, 2003.
Lara Weisiger, City rk
City of Alameda