Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2006-08-01 Packet
CITY OF ALAMEDA • CALIFORNIA IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL: 1. Please file a speaker's slip with the Deputy City Clerk and upon recognition by the Mayor, approach the podium and state your name; speakers are limited to three (3) minutes per item. 2. Lengthy testimony should be submitted in writing and only a summary of pertinent points presented verbally. 3. Applause and demonstration are prohibited during Council meetings. AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY AUGUST 1, 2006 - - - - 7:30 P.M. [Note: Regular Council Meeting convenes at 7:30 p.m., City Hall, Council Chambers, corner of Santa Clara Ave and Oak St.] The Order of Business for City Council Meeting is as follows: 1. Roll Call 2. Agenda Changes 3. Proclamations, Special Orders of the Day and Announcements 4. Consent Calendar 5. Agenda Items 6. Oral Communications, Non - Agenda (Public Comment) 7. Council Communications (Communications from Council) 8. Adjournment Public Participation Anyone wishing to address the Council on agenda items or business introduced by Councilmembers may speak for a maximum of 3 minutes per agenda item when the subject is before Council. Please file a speaker's slip with the Deputy City Clerk if you wish to address the City Council. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1. ROLL CALL - City Council 2. AGENDA CHANGES 3. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS 3 -A. Library project update. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be enacted, approved or adopted by one motion unless a request for removal for discussion or explanation is received from the Council or a member of the public. 4 -A. Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on July 18, 2006, and the Special City Council Meetings held on July 20, 2006 and July 26, 2006. (City Clerk) 4 -B. Bills for ratification. (Finance) 4 -C. Recommendation to adopt Specifications and authorize Call for Bids for the Purchase /Lease of two greens mowers, two reel mowers, one tractor, five electric utility vehicles, one sweeper, and one self powered aerator. (Golf) 4 -D. Recommendation to amend Agreement with Masayuki Nagase to modify the dates of deliverables for Library Art Work for the New Main Library Project. (Library) 4 -E. Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Deleting Section 2- 63.10, Third Party Claims, and by Adding a New Section 2 -65, Disposition of Property Consisting of Sections 2 -65.1 through 2 -65.5, to Article V, Administrative Policies and Procedures. (Finance) 5. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 5 -A. Public Hearing to consider Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Adding Article XVIII Earthquake Hazard Reduction in Existing Wood Frame One and Two Story Residential Structures to Chapter XIII (Building and Housing). (Planning and Building) 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (Public Comment) Any person may address the Council in regard to any matter over which the Council has jurisdiction or of which it may take cognizance, that is not on the agenda. 7. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (Communications from Council) Councilmembers can address any matter, including reporting on any Conferences or meetings attended. 7 -A. Discussion of the U.S. Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. [Mayor Johnson] 7 -B. Discussion of Big Box Retail Policies and Regulations. [Councilmember deHaan] 8. ADJOURNMENT * ** • For use in preparing the Official Record, speakers reading a written statement are invited to submit a copy to the City Clerk at the meeting or e -mail to: lweisige @ci.alameda.ca.us • Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact the City Clerk at 747 -4800 or TDD number 522 -7538 at least 72 hours prior to the Meeting to request an interpreter • Equipment for the hearing impaired is available for public use. For assistance, please contact the City Clerk at 747 -4800 or TDD number 522 -7538 either prior to, or at, the Council Meeting • Accessible seating for persons with disabilities, including those using wheelchairs, is available • Minutes of the meeting available in enlarged print • Audio Tapes of the meeting are available upon request • Please contact the City Clerk at 747 -4800 or TDD number 522 -7538 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to request agenda materials in an alternative format, or any other reasonable accommodation that may be necessary to participate in and enjoy the benefits of the meeting CITY OF ALAMEDA MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers From: Debra Kurita City Manager Date: August 1, 2006 Re: New Main Library Project Update Attached to this memorandum is the August 1, 2006 Library Construction Report. Attachment Respectfully submitted, ane Chisaki Acting Library Director Agenda Item #3 -A 8 -1 -06 o Construction R August 1, 2006 0 rz4� ON U g a+ 0 00 Ud Construction 0 cu o -d k a .4 N b 0 o . Y z oO a N . a) ct y 0 U j >, s~• O czt y ° O U 4 - U c 3•w _ U O c� • 0 U c r'' ,� 0 , 0 cn -0 a) D, � a) a) 4 c/] ) b y 0 0 'd p ct Qcn a cpp U O ° n.:- n.lc.„,8 O - . b 0 E r O , � �, O E " � Q 1 y Q. o U 0 0 o o 0 0 o o ° o b � vl CID • .., � 6 `�U U U `ID dcd b 3U >' ° • • 3 ° X23 .P ; a = • r; .4-',.. E E-4 Z U W� W '1-1(-) 1 H . L—. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • = • • a) 0 0 0 U 0 0 on U 0 U • at a N O (j Art -Cs vC N Z 00 N c� it - a) U O 7:1 O a) Ocip � 3 ) C7 rnZ • rn W Ct 7 O Z .4 .4 ir CC .. • • • Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service 0 c) c) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O O O r 0 0 0 0 0 ,W iO O O CU O O O O O O MOO •- N O O O O O 2 co a▪ 1 r O O L.6 Cr) 0 0 0 1.6 O CL 0 C) OO — r-- d'OON- r- N 0 'p Ni- o M ti 0 O co N = CO ,- Lri ao L w 6g 15 C J .c s.i E o 2 t o 3 4E C co d E @O .c 'O • r. c a) ▪ .C) F+ L _c 7 7 m E .)] .0 J _ u_ co m a. c c c9 0 o w c E w O i O 2 OO-0 ca o 7 = i +�+ • �� O O �- cv ▪ 'a' rn c c p r E cC c 7 7 O (� CD c u_ 0 7 a) a) 0 7 • 0 a• C -64a, C E E g o o ��QQ_UV L �, p o w coo o o ca @ a 'C c c - +�+ @ O 0 E w >> c0 • O O U Q. 47 w (� SD O O O a) •- T i 'p O co c a c 0 a) • N a aa)) o =_ co Q Q ct cn2Ucn m 27,383,438.00 Sources Subtotal: 20,042,439.00 Expenditures to date: 7,340,999.00 Balance Available: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O N N O O COO 0) O N CO Cr) O CO N I- N ti a0 ti CO CO CO co O U) m f0 -c U 0 L a) co O O O • c U c m c *k *k t 4 • O m a) a) a) a) a) C "O -C7 "O •o •o O 4a.000000 0) O a) a) a) a) a) C/3 O o) m m m CO CO 0 C C C C C .CO L CO co CO co CU > c a D Hoo 0 a) as t V G: \Library\New Main Library FS 05- 06.xls UNAPPROVED MINUTES MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- -JULY 18, 2006- -5:30 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 5:35 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent: None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (06- ) Conference with Labor Negotiators: Agency negotiators: Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee organizations: Alameda City Employees Association, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, and Management and Confidential Employees Association. (06- ) Conference with Real Property Negotiators; Property: 2900 Main Street; Negotiating parties: City of Alameda and Alameda Gateway, Ltd; Under negotiation: Price and terms. (06- ) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9; Number of cases: Two. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Conference With Labor Negotiators, Council received a briefing from Labor Negotiators on the status of contract negotiations and gave direction; regarding Conference With Real Property Negotiators, Council received a briefing from legal counsel and gave direction; regarding Conference With Legal Counsel, the matter was continued to July 27, 2006. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council July 18, 2006 UNAPPROVED MINUTES MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- -JULY 18, 2006- -7:30 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 7:42 p.m. Boy Scout Troop 73 led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmember Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent: None. AGENDA CHANGES None. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS (06- ) Presentation by the Park Street Business Association (PSBA) on the 22nd Annual Art and Wine Faire. Blake Brydon, Art and Wine Faire Chair, presented glasses to the Mayor and Council; invited everyone to the Faire. (06- ) Presentation to the Fourth of July Parade Committee recognizing their efforts for a successful Mayor's Fourth of July Parade. Mayor Johnson thanked the committee for the hard work; stated the committee helps to financially support school bands. Barbara Price, Fourth of July Parade Committee Chair, presented T- shirts to the Mayor and Council; introduced the committee members; stated $31,000 was raised. Mayor Johnson stated there was a picnic at Rittler Park after the parade for the Coast Guard and family members; presented certificates to committee members. (06- ) Presentation regarding the World Masters Swim Championship to be held on August 11, 2006. Linda Gilcrist and Paul White submitted a handout; outlined the event's activities and encouraged anyone interested to volunteer. (06- ) Presentation and update on Alameda Development Corporation. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 18, 2006 1 Gregg Fujita, Alameda Development Corporation (ADC) President, introduced Board Members and gave a brief presentation. Dan Lachman, ADC Executive Director, thanked Development Services for all their efforts; provided an update on the 626 Buena Vista Avenue project; invited everyone to the November 2006 groundbreaking; outlined upcoming projects. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Daysog moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] ( *06- ) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meetings held on July 5, 2006, and the Regular City Council Meeting held on July 5, 2006. Approved. ( *06- ) Ratified bills in the amount of $2,523,936.31. ( *06- ) Resolution No. 14000, "Amending Resolution No. 9460 to Reflect Current Positions and Entities to be Included in the City of Alameda's Conflict of Interest Code and Rescinding Resolution No. 13906." Adopted. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (06- ) Discussion of City Attorney staffing options and request to hire an Administrative Management Analyst. Councilmember deHaan moved approval of hiring an Administrative Management Analyst. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (06- ) Resolution No. 14001, "Participating in the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) Cities for Climate Protection Campaign and Creation of a City Task Force." Adopted; and (06- ) Resolution No. 14002, "Providing Support for Policies that Promote the Development and Commercialization of Plug -In Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 2 July 18, 2006 Hybrid Electric Vehicles as a Participant in the Plug -In Partners National Campaign." Adopted. The Supervising Planner provided a brief presentation. Mayor Johnson stated that plug -in vehicles are in line with the City's vehicle replacement program; she would prefer to have an Alameda Power and Telecom representative on the Task Force. The Supervising Planner stated that a Public Utilities Board representative would be on the Task Force. Mayor Johnson inquired whether a Planning Board Member was interested in serving on the Task Force. The Supervising Planner responded the Boards and Commissions have not been approached; stated various Planning Board Members are on subcommittees. Mayor Johnson stated the Task Force composition could be brought back to Council for review. The Acting City Manager stated the Public Utilities Board President volunteered to be on the Task Force last night. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether any other cities have moved forward on the initiative. The Supervising Planner responded all cites are moving forward together; data is being collected; the next process will be reviewing the data and setting local and regional goals. Mayor Johnson stated that most Alameda County cities are moving forward with the initiative; the Alameda County Conference of Mayors endorses the ICLEI portion. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the meeting. Proponents (In favor of resolutions): Carol Stone, Alameda; Karen Butler, League of Women Voters (submitted handout); Joyce Mercado, Alameda; Edward Thorp, Alameda; Stanley M. Schiffman, Alamedans for Climate Protection; Ron Silberstein, Alameda; Herb Behrstock, Alamedans for Climate Protection; Michael J. Krueger, Alameda; Jodie Van Horn, Plug -In Bay Area; Marc Geller, Plug -In America /Electric Auto Association (submitted handout); Jon Spangler, Alameda Recycling Coalition; David Teeters, Alamedans for Climate Protection. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 18, 2006 3 There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the meeting. Mayor Johnson stated the number of public members should be increased; the Task Force could have two additional members. Councilmember deHaan inquired what is the Task Force's life expectancy. The Supervising Planner responded the process would be completed in March 2007. Councilmember deHaan stated the initial Task Force could be large and move down to a smaller oversight Task Force. Councilmember Matarrese concurred with Councilmember deHaan; stated there is a process that covers the assessment; proposed that the resolution describe what is expected from the Task Force; some functions to consider are: 1) publicizing and engaging the general public in the discussion of what ICLEI is and what the assessment is, 2) determining what evaluation of the output of the assessment affects the City and providing a recommendation to Council on priorities of actions that the City should take against the assessment points; 3) determining what policies may affect the general public, and 4) providing future recommendations; stated a century and a half of industrial revolution habits are backing up because fuel is going away; the impact has been demonstrated on the whole planet; the process sets up an ongoing way of life for the City; a commission might be recommended by the Task Force after the process is completed in March 2007. Councilmember Daysog thanked the speakers for addressing the issue; stated global warming can be reduced by 10 -20% by taking mass transit or car sharing once a week. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated she would like to see the Task Force focus on encouraging individual citizens, and more importantly businesses in town, to do their share. Councilmember deHaan stated he is concerned that past efforts have not been institutionalized; Alameda has been extremely successful in waste management, green power generation, and as an electric city; emphasis is not placed on programs as time passes; the City has some of the basic policies and desire; the City has been a leader and has some of the better terrain for people to get out of cars and walk; focus should not be lost and should be a day -in and day -out lifestyle; the City was not allowed to purchase electric cars for Alameda Power and Telcom; Cal Start was one of the City's Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 4 July 18, 2006 leading efforts; Alameda should be proud to be an electric city. Mayor Johnson stated Alameda has bio- diesel at the former Naval Air Base for power generators; the City has implemented one of the most progressive and inclusive recycling programs; Alameda has been on the forefront of environmental issues. Councilmember Matarrese requested taking a separate vote on the two resolutions. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the Resolution Participating in the ICLEI, with an amendment to increase the public members at large to four members and to incorporate the following Task Force functions: 1) publicize and engage the community at large, 2) evaluate and provide prioritized recommendations to Council on actions that can be taken on the output of the assessment, 3) provide recommendations for monitoring of activities, and 4) provide recommendations on how to proceed, including but not limited to, establishing a standing commission. Councilmember deHaan stated the City has many existing commissions. Councilmember Matarrese stated his recommendation was that the Task Force would make a recommendation to Council on the monitoring process which could include, but not be limited to, a standing commission. Councilmember deHaan stated the Transportation Commission and other commissions could take on some of the role. Councilmember Matarrese stated existing commissions could be used, or a broad, standing commission could be established. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mayor Johnson stated that Alameda Power and Telecom deserves credit; 85% of the City's electricity comes from renewable resources; recently the Alameda Times Star reported that Alameda Power and Telecom entered into a twenty -five year contract for wind power; Alameda Power and Telecom purchases power from a Santa Cruz facility that produces electricity from gas that comes from dumps. The Senior Management Analyst stated Point Richmond and Livermore landfill gas facilities are additional sources for Alameda Power and Telecom; a larger facility is anticipated at Half Moon Bay; transmission costs and risks are reduced. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 18, 2006 5 Mayor Johnson stated that Alameda Power and Telecom is very aggressive about pursuing renewable energy sources. The Senior Management Analyst stated that management and staff have discussed a goal for 100% renewable energy sources. Mayor Johnson inquired what was the nationwide goal, to which the Senior Management Analyst responded the State's goal is 20% by 2013. Councilmember deHaan stated the landfill gas is a win -win situation. The motion carried by consensus - 5. Councilmember Matarrese suggested inserting "electric" in front of "hybrid electric" throughout the resolution because the City's vehicle replacement policy directs purchase of entirely electric vehicles first; stated the hybrid electric becomes a fuel efficient, gasoline driven car when driving at a high speed and long distance; former Interim City Manager Bill Norton had an electric Honda CRV and was able to make two round trips from Alameda to San Francisco between charges. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether members in the audience had any questions or needed clarification. Mr. Geller stated he wanted to ensure that Council was clear on the difference between hybrid electric vehicles, plug -in hybrid electric vehicles, and entirely electric vehicles; the resolution only relates to a hybrid vehicle that can be plugged in; today's hybrid vehicles cannot be plugged in; there is not option to get electricity from the cleaner, cheaper domestic source. Mayor Johnson stated that the City's number one priority is entirely electric. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the Resolution Providing Support for Policies, with an amendment to insert "electric or" in front of "hybrid electric vehicles ". Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (06- ) Negotiations with the Bay Area Water Transit Authority Related to Transfer of City Ferry Services. Mayor Johnson announced that she would recuse herself on the matter Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 6 July 18, 2006 because she serves on the Water Transit Authority (WTA). The Public Works Director provided a brief presentation. Steve Castleberry, Water Transit Authority Executive Director, provided a Power Point presentation. The Ferry Services Manager provided a brief presentation. Councilmember Daysog inquired why the specific guarantee period was five to seven years instead of fifteen to twenty years for maintaining current service levels. The Ferry Services Manager responded Council could specify a fifteen or twenty -year period. Councilmember Daysog inquired why the City could not get ferry services and funding back if the WTA reduced service levels. The Ferry Services Manager responded he did not want to commit the City to take back ferry services if grant funding fell short of actual operation expenses during the intervening years. Councilmember Daysog stated the WTA is receiving some core funding; the City should get back the boats and revenue if the WTA does not perform. Councilmember deHaan stated the condition of the ferries might deteriorate and the City would need to get additional funding to bring the ferries back into operation. Councilmember Matarrese stated the City needs to be protected; the City should have the option to take back the ferry services if trips are reduced below what the City is accustomed to at the end of the guarantee period, rather than the original number of trips at the time of transfer; the City cannot afford to go back to the original service levels because of Alameda Point build out; he would like a real guarantee that the City would get the boats and funding back in order to maintain the service level the City needs in the event reductions are ever proposed. The Ferry Services Manager inquired whether Councilmember Matarrese meant that if there were ten round trips per day at the time of transfer and the WTA increases the trips to fifteen round trips per day, the trigger point would be whether the WTA proposed to reduce the round trips to below fifteen, to which Councilmember Matarrese responded in the affirmative. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 18, 2006 7 Vice Mayor Gilmore stated that getting back the same boats with a longer guarantee period is highly unlikely; provisions need to be made. Councilmember deHaan stated the likelihood of an agreement falling apart would indicate a total disaster with the ferry service; the WTA is an authority that should have some long standing. Councilmember Matarrese stated his biggest fear is that a 75,000 person city would take second place to larger surrounding cities; Alameda has the most need for a ferry system; he is concerned that Alameda might get a trip reduction after seventeen years in favor of adding an additional trip for another city; Alameda does not have a chance of getting another bridge or tube; everything needs to be done to ensure that Alameda's needs are on top of the pile. Councilmember deHaan stated he feels that the City could keep running the ferry services for the next five to ten years; the question is how long the storm can be weathered and whether there is a commitment from the State; the City could be stranded; inquired whether any future legislation would strengthen the WTA's position. Mr. Castleberry responded he believes so; a significant amount of funds are set aside for transit services in the November ballot infrastructure bond that can provide emergency response during recovery of a disaster; stated the details of the bond still need to be worked out; the WTA believes the bond will be an investment in the ferry service. Councilmember deHaan inquired what was the WTA's annual budget. Mr. Castelberry responded the WTA currently receives $3 million per year for ongoing operations; another $3 million per year will be available through Regional Measure 2 funds once operations begin for South San Francisco; another $3 million per year will be received when the Berkeley operation starts. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether there are funds for Alameda. Mr. Castleberry responded there is approximately $6 million per year in Regional Measure 2 funds for expanded service in Alameda. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the WTA is planning on taking over other services, and whether the WTA is in negotiations with other local authorities. Mr. Castleberry responded the WTA is in discussions with the City Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 8 July 18, 2006 of Vallejo; the City of Tiburon has approached the WTA for help which probably would not be feasible; South San Francisco and Berkeley are new ferry services. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether existing service is a focus of the WTA. Mr. Castleberry responded the WTA does not have any authority over Alameda services; the WTA's only legislative mandate is on new services. Councilmember deHaan stated there are benefits and disadvantages in being first with a new service; inquired whether schedules are the WTA's forte. Mr. Castleberry responded the WTA looks at schedules as low fruit; schedules can be done at a fairly low cost to make the mode better for the riders. Councilmember deHaan stated he appreciates the WTA's efforts to help market the City's ferry services; inquired whether the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) would always be a player for the WTA's funding stream. Mr. Castleberry responded MTC administers Regional Measure 2 funds; MTC would touch 90% of the WTA's operating funds. Councilmember deHaan inquired how the WTA would be better at working with MTC for farebox relief. Mr. Castleberry responded MTC reviews and evaluates services separately; MTC does not evaluate bus companies on a route -by -route basis; the WTA believes marketing is not just for one route, but for both. Councilmember deHaan stated he thinks the City could do the same thing as the WTA. Mr. Castleberry stated that the WTA would put all resources in the farebox relief because the farebox ratio is unfair. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated she thinks that staff does a wonderful job of running the ferry services; she needs incentives from the WTA, such as having more access to funds and having the opportunity to improve the ferry services, before considering turning the ferry service over; she does not see any reason to turn the ferry service over to the WTA; inquired whether route timing would be systemized; stated that she is interested in having ferry connections to buses Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 9 July 18, 2006 and trains for the South San Francisco and Redwood City ferry services; bicycle riders are complaining that the ferries do not have enough room for bikes; bike accommodations would be an improvement. Mr. Castleberry stated the WTA would not believe that transferring City ferry services is a good idea if riders would not benefit; the WTA is eligible for funds that the City is not; 25% of operating funds would be for landside connections; transit agencies can be paid to cooperate; boats are being designed to carry 100 bikes. Jon Spangler, Alameda, stated he was impressed with the WTA's presentation; he is not an opponent or proponent at this point; he is concerned with 1) possible affects on cross - estuary services, 2) what the WTA would offer to reduce ticket prices, 3) greener propulsion systems and other green initiatives, including solar and sail powered ferries, 4) guarantees for customer services, and 5) bike commute provisions. Councilmember Daysog stated people in Alameda love the ferry system; the two Alameda ferry systems service particular markets; he is not inclined to move forward with the negotiations; key points need to be considered; funding streams should be given back if boats are given back; concurred with Vice Mayor Gilmore's comments regarding getting the same boats back with a longer guarantee period. Councilmember Matarrese inquired how much discussions would cost, to which the Ferry Services Manager responded the discussions would cost staff's time. Councilmember Matarrese inquired what would not be done while WTA discussions are conducted; stated he would like to have an analysis of the two paths going forward; Council could make a decision on whether it is worthwhile to tie up staff time to get $200,000 and give up local control; he is not willing to authorize discussions until the analysis is made. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated one of the key issues has to be protection of Alameda's services because the ferry system is a necessity; protection is necessary in case the Oakland to South San Francisco run becomes more profitable and Alameda services are cut. In response to Councilmember Matarrese's question regarding the cost for discussions, the Public Works Director stated the approximate cost would be $15,000. Councilmember Matarrese inquired what would not be done while Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 10 July 18, 2006 negotiations were conducted, to which the Public Works Director responded marketing and customer relations. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the City is going to be in a healthy financial position to replace boats in five years. The Public Works Director responded that he is not sure that the City would be able to expand the services based on current or projected funding; there is a significant decrease in the funding Oakland has given the City; there is no indication that additional funding would be provided; Oakland could opt out; if so, the majority of the farebox recovery for the Alameda /Oakland Ferry Service would go away. Councilmember deHaan stated that he is concerned with being the first one in the water; pieces have been put together to keep things flowing; he is concerned that the WTA does not have the complete wherewithal to make the transfer a priority; the issue is a tough decision; concurred with Councilmember Matarrese regarding deciding whether to negotiate. The Public Works Director stated staff brought the matter to Council because of a previous Council's request. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether other ferry systems are being requested to joint the WTA, to which the Public Works Director responded in the negative. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether there are competitive grants that the City could apply for to bridge the funding gap; stated Council discussed the concept of hiring a grant writer in the past. The Public Works Director responded in the negative; stated the City receives a bulk of Regional Measure 1 funding; the City is not a transit agency; transit agencies receive federal money; the WTA has access to Regional Measure 2 funds. Mr. Castleberry stated that Regional Measure 2 funds set aside $6 million per year for operating costs and some capital for the Alameda /Oakland ferry service. Councilmember Matarrese stated it is odd that the City does not have access to money to expand its services; requested reasons in bullet point format for entertaining the possible transfer of the City's ferry services to the WTA; requested an explanation on why $6 million is available to the WTA and not the City for expanding Alameda ferry services; suggested reviewing the possibility of changing the rule or getting an exception so that the City can Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 11 July 18, 2006 entertain the possibility of obtaining the funding. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated the City needs to get some tangible benefit for transferring the ferry service. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he does not want to waste staff's or WTA's time if there are no good, solid reasons for the transfer. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of bringing the matter back to Council with consolidated information. Councilmember deHaan stated the matter does not need to be fast tracked; Council needs to better understand what the parties bring to the table; more information needs to be gathered; he would like to have staunch, feedback points brought back to Council to ensure that the WTA is right on track; the transfer could be the marriage of the century, or possibly not. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he previously abstained on the matter; he will vote no on the matter tonight; the City should get back to the regular business of running and managing the ferry system. Councilmember deHaan stated an agreement does not need to be signed, and negotiations do not need to be initiated; Council is requesting that both sides get together to provide information on the future and commitments that can be made. Councilmember Daysog stated that he will still vote no on the matter; he may change his vote in the future. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore and Matarrese - 3. Noes: Councilmember Daysog - 1. Abstentions: Mayor Johnson - 1. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (06- ) Michael John Torrey, Alameda, requested status on the Parrot Park northern waterfront project; stated the children have nowhere to play. The Acting City Manager stated the Environmental Impact Report is being prepared for the northern waterfront. Mayor Johnson suggested the matter be referred to the Housing Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 July 18, 2006 Authority. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he received a complaint about the treatment of the sycamore trees along Parrot Park. Mayor Johnson stated the City needs to be careful on how trees are pruned; direction was given to do a ten -year prune on Gibbons Drive a couple of years ago. Councilmember deHaan stated the trees survived; the trees can take severe pruning but severe pruning is not a good process. (06- ) The following discussed Measure A: Diane Lichtenstein, Housing Opportunities Make Sense (HOMES); Helen Sause, HOMES ;Laura Thomas, Alameda; Jon Spangler, Alameda; Gretchen Lipow, Alameda. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (06- ) Mayor Johnson stated she received an e -mail indicating the cost of solar permits in Alameda is higher than other cities; requested the matter be reviewed. (06- ) Councilmember Matarrese stated a tenant at the Clement Avenue storage rental facility complained about sludge seepage between storage unit concrete cracks; the tenant inquired whether the City could contact the owner. The Acting City Manager stated Alameda County would be contacted as well to ensure there is not health issue. Councilmember Matarrese requested that a report be brought back to Council on the matter. (06- ) Councilmember deHaan requested that the possibility of renaming Tinker Avenue to Willie Stargell Avenue be placed on the next agenda. (06- ) Councilmember deHaan stated that recently retail leakage has been well documented at Alameda Landing; only a certain amount of leakage can be captured; a certain amount is needed in certain categories; he would like to review limiting the number of square feet in existing and future shopping centers; he would like to discuss big boxes and boxes in general; requested that the matter be placed on the next agenda. (06- ) Mayor Johnson requested that the US Conference of Mayor's ICLEI initiative be placed on the next Council agenda under Council Communications; stated placing the matter under Council Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 13 July 18, 2006 Communications would be the appropriate first step to see whether the matter should be placed on a Council agenda for action. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 10:33 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council July 18, 2006 14 UNAPPROVED MINUTES MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY- -JULY 20, 2006- -8:00 A.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 8:10 a.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent: None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (06- ) Conference with Legal Council - Anticipated Litigation; Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9; Number of cases: One. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that direction was given to Council. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 9:00 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council July 20, 2006 UNAPPROVED MINUTES MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING WEDNESDAY- -JULY 26, 2006- -6:30 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:40 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent: None. The Special Meeting was adjourn to Closed Session to consider: (06- ) Conference with Real Property Negotiators; Property: 2900 Main Street; Negotiating parties: City of Alameda and Alameda Gateway, Ltd.; Under negotiation: Price and terms. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that Council received a briefing from Real Property Negotiators and gave direction. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council July 26, 2006 July 27, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers: This is to certify that the claims listed on the check register and shown below have been approved by the proper officials and, in my opinion, represent fair and just charges against the City in accordance with their respective amounts as indicated thereon. Check Numbers 150292 - 150791 EFT 227 EFT 228 EFT 229 EFT 230 EFT 231 EFT 232 EFT 233 EFT 234 EFT 235 Void Checks: Amount 5,106,798.52 25,603.50 29, 993.50 722,670.00 12,768.50 1,029,364.60 191, 950.51 412,450.00 137,238.81 385, 898.60 GRAND TOTAL 8,054,736.54 Respectfully submitted, aw, .A S "a amela J. Sibley Council Warrants 08/01/06 BILLS #4 -B 08/01/06 City of Alameda Memorandum Date: To: From: RE: August 1, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers Debra Kurita City Manager Recommendation to Adopt the Specifications and Authorize Calling for Bids for the Purchase/Lease of Two Greens Mowers, Two Reel Mowers, One Tractor, Five Electric Utility Vehicles, One Sweeper and One Self Powered Aerator BACKGROUND The City of Alameda purchasing policy requires that the City Council review and approve the specifications for materials that are estimated to cost in excess of $25,000 prior to the initiation of a formal bid process. During the 2006 -2007 budget process, the Golf Department, in compliance with the City's newly adopted resolution to establish guiding principles for the management of the City fleet vehicles and equipment, has determined a need to replace two greens mowers, two reel mowers, one rotary mower, five electric utility vehicles, one sweeper and one self powered aerator. The rotary mower will be replaced with a more efficient tractor. The tractor pulls a seven unit mowing reel. Included in this report as attachment A, is the notice inviting sealed proposals for the purchase or lease of the aforementioned equipment including specifications. DISCUSSION /ANALYSIS The Golf Department employs a mechanic and therefore, maintains all of the department vehicles and equipment. Attachment B is a list of all Golf Department vehicles and equipment. This equipment is in direct compliance with the City's guiding principles for the management of the City fleet vehicles and equipment. In order to ensure that the golf courses are maintained at a high standard, equipment replacement is an important component of that effort, which will provide golf patrons with the best golfing experience possible. FISCAL IMPACT The cost for the replacement of this equipment has been approved by City Council in the 2006 -2007 Golf Department Operations Budget (Enterprise Fund). Agenda Item # 4 -C CC 8 -1 -06 Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers RECOMMENDATION August 1, 2006 Page 2 of 2 Adopt the specifications and authorize the initiation of the competitive bid process for the purchase /lease of two greens mowers, two reel mowers, one tractor, five electric utility vehicles, one sweeper and one self powered aerator for the Chuck Corica Golf Complex. submitted, DK/DVB /nem Attachments ens i ., ager, Golf ATTACHMENT A CITY OF ALAMEDA ALAMEDA, CALIFORNIA NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR PURCHASE /LEASE OF 2 GREENS MOWERS 2 REEL MOWERS 1 UTILITY TRACTOR 5 ELECTRIC UTILITY VEHICLES 1 SWEEPER 1 SELF POWERED AERATOR Sealed proposals will be received by: City of Alameda Chuck Corica Golf Complex 1 Clubhouse Memorial Road Alameda, CA 94502 Proposal Deadline: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 at 5 p.m. Questions regarding the attached specifications may be directed to: Dana Banke General Manager, Golf Department (510) 747 -7820 ATTACHMENT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL INQUIRY NO. GOLF - 3 (This Is Not a Purchase Order) Please submit a quotation for 2 Greens Mowers, 2 Reel Mowers, 1 Utility Tractor, 5 Electric Utility Vehicles, 1 Sweeper and 1 Self Powered Aerator in accordance with the attached specifications. Prices quoted shall be F.O.B. Alameda, California. No charge shall be allowed for your complying with this request. The City of Alameda reserves the right to accept or reject quotation on each item separately or as a whole, and to waive any defects in bids submitted. Discrepancies, ambiguities in, exceptions to, or omissions from the specifications or conditions imposed by this inquiry in any of its parts shall be brought promptly in writing to the City of Alameda's attention. The matter shall be clarified to all bidders by means of a written supplement which shall become a part of this inquiry. All equipment and materials shall comply with all Federal, State and local safety rules and regulations including OSHA. If requested by the City of Alameda, bidders shall demonstrate in Alameda, unit they are bidding within one week of bid closing date, unless other terms are mutually agreed upon. Please advise on bid proposal form, location, where warranty and/or maintenance will be done. SEALED BIDS (No faxes please): Quotations will be received until Wednesday, August 16, 2006 at 5 p.m. at the office of the General Manager, Golf Department, Chuck Corica Golf Complex, City of Alameda, #1 Clubhouse Memorial Road, Alameda, CA 94502, phone 510/747- 7820. Proposal may be withdrawn by the Bidder if award of contract is not made within 45 days after opening of bids. EXECUTION OF CONTRACT: The contract, in form and contents satisfactory to the General Manager, shall be executed by the successful Bidder and returned to the General Manager with the necessary performance bond, if any be required, within ten working days after the Bidder has received notice that the contract has been awarded and is ready for signature. No proposal shall be considered binding by the General Manager until the execution of the contract. Price quoted shall include all State and Federal Taxes, including the amount of any Use or Excise Tax which may be applicable to the transaction, all of which will be paid by the Bidder. If California Use Tax is applicable, Bidder shall state whether he maintains a place of business in the State of California or is authorized by the State Board of Equalization of said State, under ATTACHMENT A Section 6202 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, to collect Use Taxes. If the Bidder to whom the contract is awarded does not maintain a place of business in the State of California, or is not authorized to collect Use Taxes, the amount of such taxes, if applicable, will be deducted from the total bid price and paid directly by the Board to the State. LOCAL PREFERENCE RULES: The local preference rules are set forth in section 3 -16 and 3- 17 of the City Charter Article V. Chapter II of the Municipal Code. The local preference rules of the City extend a 5% preference to local businesses in the evaluation of bids or proposals for the award of all contracts for the purchase or lease of supplies, materials, equipment or other personal property. Local business are defined in the Municipal Code as a business firm with fixed offices or local taxable distribution points within the boundaries of the City of Alameda which hold a current business license with an Alameda business address which is not a Post Office box. Bidder shall clearly indicate if he or she believes they qualify for this preference. The final determination of qualification for Alameda Bidder's preference rests with the Board. ATTACHMENT A INQUIRY NO. GOLF - 3 Bid Proposal - Lease /Purchase Option (Municipal) (2 Greens Mowers, 2 Reel "Fairway" Mowers, 1 Utility Tractor, 5 Electric Utility Vehicles, 1 Sweeper and 1 Self Powered Aerator) In compliance with the annexed notice inviting informal proposals, the undersigned hereby proposes and agrees to perform the items and work therein described in accordance with the specifications therefore, and further agrees to enter into a contract therefore, at the listed prices. Prices shall be F.O.B. City of Alameda. 2 Greens Mowers, 2 Reel Mowers, 1 Utility Tractor, 5 Electric Utility Vehicles, 1 Sweeper and 1 Self Powered Aerator -per City of Alameda specifications, or approved equal 2 Greens Mowers, 2 Reel Mowers, 1 Utility Tractor, 5 Electric Utility Vehicles, 1 Sweeper and 1 Self Powered Aerator must be delivered as soon as possible (see Specifications" attached). End of Lease Unit Cost/Per Month Total/Per Month Purchase Price 60 MONTH LEASE $ $ $ MUNICIPAL LEASE DISCOUNT TRADE -IN ALLOWANCE /EQUITY WARRANTY Submit list of recommended spare parts and list prices. Also show your trade discount off list. Submit list of references. Company Signature Title Date Delivery Date Payment Schedule ATTACHMENT A REQUEST FOR BIDS INQUIRY NO. GOLF - 3 2 GREENS MOWERS, 2 REEL MOWERS, 1 UTILITY TRACTOR, 5 ELECTRIC UTILITY VEHICLES, 1 SWEEPER AND 1 SELF POWERED AERATOR Furnish price proposal as follows: Outright purchase and municipal lease /purchase by the City of Alameda of 2 Greens Mowers, 2 Reel Mowers, 1 Utility Tractor, 5 Electric Utility Vehicles, 1 Sweeper and 1 Self Powered Aerator, bids shall include literature and operating data. Additional information: 1. Sales Tax - The City of Alameda is not exempt from sales tax and this shall be shown as a separate item. 2. Prices shown in proposal must be on a per unit basis. 3. Any exceptions to basic specifications must be noted. 4. Bids shall include warranty and delivery time information. 5. Bids shall include recommended spare parts with list prices and applicable discount. 6. Bids shall include cash discount terms. 7. City of Alameda reserves the right to determine the "best value" proposal. 8. All mowers are to be late 2005 or 2006 models on approval of Golf Complex management. CITY OF ALAMEDA CHUCK CORICA GOLF COMPLEX GREENSMOWER SPECIFICATIONS ENGINE: 18 hp (13.4 kW) Briggs & Stratton® gasoline engine, governed to 2850 rpm high idle, 1650 rpm low idle. Air cooled, 34.8 cu. in. (570 cc). FUEL CAPACITY: 7 gallon (26.5 liter) capacity; unleaded gasoline. TRACTION DRIVE: 2 or 3WD, hydrostatic piston pump closed loop system. Foot pedal forward and reverse; infinitely variable. GROUND SPEED: Forward — 1st, snow: 3.8 mph (6.1 km/h); 2nd, transport: 8.1 mph (13 km/h). Reverse —1.9 mph (3 km/h). TURF COMPACTION: 8 -10 psi (dependent on tire pressure) with operator and cutting units down. IMPLEMENT DRIVE: Single gear pump, mono valve block, series reel drive to 3 reel motors. STEERING: Power steering. Adjustable steering wheel tilt and a 5- position steering arm tilt. ELECTRICAL FEATURES: 12 volt lead acid, group size U1, with 300 minimum cold cranking amps 0° F and 34 minutes reserve capacity at 85° F/25 amps draw. 16 amp alternator. Ignition switch/key. Seat switch. Harness terminals and fuse slot available for optional lights installation. CONTROLS /GAUGES: Raise /lower -mow lever (joystick). Functional control lever (neutral, mow, transport). Foot operated traction drive and brakes. Hour meter. Hand operated throttle and choke. Mechanical engine speed control. TIRES: 18 x 9.5 -8, 2 -ply pneumatic tubeless, demountable and interchangeable with smooth tread. BRAKES: Two 6" (15.2 cm) drum type. HYDRAULIC OIL: 7.5 gallon (28.4 liter) tank with internal baffle. 1.0 gallon (3.8 liter) auxiliary tank. LEAK DETECTION: Equipped with Turf GuardianTM leak detection system. SOUND LEVEL: 83 dB(A) at operator's ear under normal conditions. 1 CITY OF ALAMEDA CHUCK CORICA GOLF COMPLEX GREENSMOWER SPECIFICATIONS OVERALL DIMENSIONS: Wheel Tread: 49.5" (149.9 cm), Wheel Base: 47" (119 cm), Length: 90" (229 cm), Width: 69.75" (177 cm) w /reels, Height: 48.5" (123 cm), Weight (no reels): 970 lbs. (440 kg), Weight w /reels (no fuel, no operator): 1,256 lbs. (570 kg). WIDTH OF CUT: REEL SPEED: CUTTING UNIT 59" (150 cm) Approximately 1975 RPM at 2850 engine RPM. SUSPENSION: Cutting units are completely free - floating, each attaching to the tractor by direct pull links and lifted by a centered lift arm. Baskets are supported by carrier frames that are ground following. Cutting unit floatation is unaffected by basket content. Grass baskets are all interchangeable and accessible from the front of the machine. OPTIONAL ACCESSORIES: 3WD kit, basket replacement kit, traction tire, thatching reels, spiker, tri- roller, backlap /reel speed kit, ROPS. WARRANTY: Two year limited warranty. Refer to the Operator's Manual for further details. Briggs & Stratton provides a two year commercial engine, and a lifetime Magnetron® ignition warranty. NO. OF BLADES: Reels will have either 8 or 11 Blades. HEIGHT OF CUT: REEL WELDMENT: REEL BEARINGS: Cutting height is adjusted on front roller by two vertical screws and held by two locking cap screws. Bench HOC range is .062 - .297" (1.6 -7.5 mm). With high HOC kit, range is .285 -1" (7.3 -25.4 mm). Effective HOC may vary depending on turf conditions and bedknife installed. Reels are 5" (13 cm) in diameter, 21" (53.3 cm) in length. High carbon steel blades are welded to 5 stamped steel spiders, and heat treated to RC 48 -54 hardness. The reel is ground for diameter and concentricity, and backgrind. Two double row, self - aligning ball bearings, 30 +/ -.1 mm inside diameter slip fit onto reel shaft with lock nut. Multiple seal barriers on both sides of bearing for added protection. Reel position maintained by a wave washer with no adjusting nut. 2 CITY OF ALAMEDA CHUCK CORICA GOLF COMPLEX GREENSMOWER SPECIFICATIONS MAINTENANCE: No grease zerks, sealed bearing design eliminates daily maintenance. REEL DRIVE: The reel weldment shaft is a 1.375" (35 mm) diameter tube with drive inserts permanently pressed in both ends. A replaceable floating coupler with an internal eight tooth spline is factory installed on the right end, and held in place by a snap ring. FRAME: Precision machined, die -cast aluminum cross member with two bolt -on die -cast aluminum side plates. AGGRESSIVENESS: Aggresiveness stays constant throughout the life of the reel. Patented design. BEDKNIFE: Replaceable single edged, high carbon steel bedknife austempered to RC 48 -55, fastened to a machined cast iron bedbar with 13 screws. Tournament bedknife is standard. BEDKNIFE ADJUSTMENT: Dual screw, indexed "click" adjustment to the reel; detents corresponding positively to .0007" (.018 mm) bedknife movement for each position. FRONT AND REAR ROLLERS: Front: Aluminum Wiehle®, 2.5" (6.4 cm) diameter with sealed bearings and through- shaft. Option between full, narrow- spaced and wide - spaced roller. Rear: Steel full, 2" (5.1 cm) diameter with sealed bearings and through - shaft. GRASS SHIELD: Non - adjustable shield with adjustable cut -off bar to improve grass discharge from reel in wet conditions. TOTAL WEIGHT: 8- blade: 72 lbs. (32.7 kg) with aluminum Wiehle Roller. 11- blade: 75 lbs. (34.1 kg) with aluminum Wiehle Roller. COMPARABLE EQUIPMENT ACCEPTED 3 ENGINE: RADIATOR: ELECTRICAL FEATURES: FUEL SYSTEM: CONTROLS: GAUGES: DIAGNOSTICS: TRACTION DRIVE: CITY OF ALAMEDA CHUCK CORICA GOLF COMPLEX REEL MOWER SPECIFICATIONS Kubota® V1505-T liquid - cooled diesel engine. 4- cylinder, over -head valve. 1.5 liter displacement. Turbo - charged. 46 hp (34.3 kW) gross rated, 42 hp (31.3 kW) net at 3000 rpm. 40 amp alternator. Donaldson two -stage air cleaner with safety filler and restriction indicator. Rear mounted, cross -flow agricultural type radiator, 7 fins per inch. Cooling system capacity is 3.5 gallons (13.25 liters). Air to oil cooler with 2 rows, 6 fins per inch, mounted in front of radiator tips outward for cleaning. Removable oil cooler /radiator screen. 12 volt, 650 cold cranking amperes at 0 °F (- 18 °C), 105 minute reserve capacity at 80 °F (27 °C), maintenance free battery. 1.4 Kw electric starter. 55 amp alternator with I.C. regulator /rectifier. Automotive type electrical system. Seat switch, reel and traction interlock switches. Bosch® in -line fuel injection pump with energized -to -run (ETR) fuel flow solenoid. Replaceable spin -on fuel filter /water separator. Fuel capacity: 15 gallon (57 liter). Foot operated traction and brake pedals. Hand operated throttle, traction speed limiter, parking brake latch, ignition switch, single joystick control for cutting unit on/off and lift /lower. Reel speed and backup controls located under the hood. Hour meter, speedometer, fuel gauge, engine coolant gauge, and warning light cluster: engine oil pressure, high engine temperature, charge indicator, glow plug, water in fuel indicator, low water indicator. The Automatic Control Electronics, ACETM system allows precision timing and control of machine functions for maximum reliability. Optional diagnostic display connects to an electronic control unit to pinpoint any electrical problems quickly and easily. Available DATA LOGTM system allows mechanic to find intermittent problems. Diagnostic test ports are provided for front and rear cutting unit drive, cutting unit lift, steering, and hydrostatic transmission charge pressure. Power to the front drive wheel is via servo - controlled hydrostatic pump operating individual fixed displacement axial piston wheel motors that operate a planetary gear final drive assembly. Foot pedal control of forward /reverse ground speed. 4WD System only: couples rear drive axle to hydrostatic transmission via overrunning clutch for full time on- demand 4WD. A Roll Over Protection Structure (ROPS) and seat belt are standard on 4WD models. 1 CITY OF ALAMEDA CHUCK CORICA GOLF COMPLEX REEL MOWER SPECIFICATIONS GROUND SPEED: 0 -10 mph (0 -16.1 km/hr) forward; 0 -4 mph (0 -6.4 km/hr) reverse. TIRES/WHEELS/PRESSURE: Two rear steering tires: 20 x 10 -10, tubeless, 6 -ply rating. Two front traction drive tires: 29 x 14 -15, tubeless, 6 -ply rating. Recommended tire pressure: 10 -15 psi (59 -103 kPa). MAIN FRAME: All welded steel frame includes tie -down loops. BRAKES: Wet triple disc brakes on front planetary assemblies may be actuated individually for service brakes or locked together for transport or parking brakes. Dynamic braking through hydrostatic traction drive. STEERING: Power steering with dedicated power source. SEAT: Deluxe seat with adjustable suspension and fore -aft location. Optional Armrest Kit, Model 30707. ROPS: A 4 -post ROPS with seat belt and optional canopy standard on 4wd units, optional on 2wd. OVERALL DIMENSIONS: Height Length Transport Width Operational Width 60" (152 cm) w/o ROPS 120" (305 cm) 84" (213 cm) w/ ROPS Wheel Tread 72.25" (178 cm) — front 84" (213 cm) 110" (279 cm) Wheelbase 58 "(147 cm) — font 41" (104 cm) — rear NET WEIGHT WET: 3,100 lbs. (1,407 kg) with 5 -blade cutting units and full fluid levels. SOUND LEVEL: 82 dB(A) under normal operating conditions. WARRANTY: Two year limited warranty. CERTIFICATION: The mower complies with American National Standards Institute (ANSI B71.4 -1999) and European Community (CE)specifications with required weight kits and ballast installed. PUMP HYDRAULIC SYSTEM: A three section gear pump provides hydraulic flow to power the cutting units, power steering and cutting unit lift. 2 CITY OF ALAMEDA CHUCK CORICA GOLF COMPLEX REEL MOWER SPECIFICATIONS CONTROL BLOCKS: All hydraulic functions are controlled by two integrated hydraulic control blocks utilizing cartridge type relief valves, solenoid controlled proportional valves and solenoid operated directional control valves. REEL SPEED CONTROL: Reel drive circuit is split into front and rear independent circuits. Each circuit has a manually adjustable control for reel speed and backlap adjustment. LIFT CYLINDERS: The front right and left units and the rear two units are raised by individual cylinders in separate series circuits. All lift and lower sequences are controlled by the ECU. HYDRAULIC OIL RESERVOIR: 100% of oil from reservoir passes through a 100 mesh suction strainer before entering the reel drive circuit. 8.5 gallon (32 liter) capacity. HYDRAULIC OIL FILTER: 11 gram capacity at 10 gallon (37 liter) per minute flow Average Beta = 20 at 3 micron. Filter head has integral 50 psi (3.4 bars) bypass and a true differential pressure service indicator. 5, 7 AND 11 BLADE CUTTING UNITS TYPE: Five 22" (56 cm) width cutting units; fully interchangeable. Front or rear discharge selectable with movable shield. WIDTH OF CUT: 96" (244 cm) total. HOC RANGE: 3/8- 13/4" (9.5 -44.5 mm) height of cut range. Recommended use: 5 -Blade 1- 13/4" (25 -44 mm); 7 -Blade 1/2 -1" (12 -25 mm); 11 -Blade 3/8 -5/8" (9.5 -15 mm). REEL CONSTRUCTION: All welded construction. 7" (17.8 cm) diameter reels. REEL DRIVE: Reel motors feature quick disconnect for removal or installation onto cutting unit. Cutting units can be driven from either end. BEDKNIFE/BEDBAR: Single point adjustment mechanism, .0005" (.0127 mm) adjustment per click. CLIP FREQUENCY: .375- 1.25" (9.5 -31.8 mm). Reel speed is manually adjustable to maintain proper clip. 3 ROLLERS: CITY OF ALAMEDA CHUCK CORICA GOLF COMPLEX REEL MOWER SPECIFICATIONS Front roller: 3" (7.6 cm) diameter Wiehle roller standard. Rear roller: 3" (7.6 cm) diameter Full roller. All rollers use the same heavy duty ball bearings with two conventional single lip seals and Toro labyrinth seal to provide four sealing surfaces to protect the bearings. Optional 3" (7.6 cm) diameter Full roller is available for the front position. GROOMER KIT CUTTER WIDTH: 20" (50.8 cm). DEPTH PENETRATION: .188 -2" (4.8 -51 mm) above ground level, at mowing height -of -cut range of 3/8- 1.75" (9.5 -44 mm). Height of Groom (HOG): .188" (4.8 mm) below height of cut when engaged in grass; .25" (6.4 mm) above height of cut when raised out of grass. CONSTRUCTION : Shaft: fatigue -proof steel hexagon. Blades: heat - treated steel, .042" (1 mm) thick, 2.5" (6.4 cm) diameter, .5" (1.3 cm) spacing between blades. WEIGHT: ACCESSORIES: Description 15 lbs. (6.8 kg). Description Description Description 5 -Blade Cutting Unit Armrest Kit Rear Weight Kit Rear Roller Scraper Kit 7 -Blade Cutting Unit Thatching Reel Hand Held Diagnostic Tool Front Roller Scraper Kit 11 -Blade Cutting Unit TurfDefenderTM Basket Kits Powered Rear Roller Brush Leak Detector Kit When Using Groomers Grass Basket Mounting Kit COMPARABLE EQUIPMENT ACCEPTED 4 UTILITY TRACTOR SPECIFICATIONS Engine Engine HP (kW) - gross 58 (43) PTO HP (kW) - Gear transmission PTO HP (kW) - Hydrostatic transmission 50 (37) Rated engine speed, rpm 2400 Type Diesel Operating range 950 -2600 Aspiration Turbo Cylinders /Displacement, cu. in. (liters) 4 / 148.9 (2.44) Cylinder Liners Cast -in -block Bore and Stroke, mm (in.) 85x105 (3.39x4.13) Compression Ratio 20:1 Lubrication Pressurized Cooling System Water pump Air Cleaner Dry type w/ safety element and air restriction indicator Engine Shutoff Key switch Engine Torque @ rated speed, ft./lb. (N /m) 123.86 Fuel Tank Cap., US Gal. (L) (Open; Cab) Open -14.5 (54.9); Cab -13.8 (52.2) Electrical Type 12 volt Battery Size (CCA) 770 Alternator (12 volt, amp) 75 amp Starter Size, hp (kW) 2.9 (2.2) Fuel System Type Direct Injection Injection Pump Type In -line with electric shutoff U.S. gal. /hr (L /hr) @ 100% load* 3.28 (12.4) *Fuel consumption rate should be used for comparison purposes only. Transmission Std. Transmission; Forward /Reverse eHydro - 3 range Opt. Transmission; Forward /Reverse Left -Hand Reverser NA On- The -Go Shifting (Yes /No /Partial) NA Direction Reverser; Forward /Reverse NA Final Drive Planetary Steering Power steering Clutch; Wet /Dry NA Clutch Disk Diameter, in. (mm) wet clutch NA Drawbar Tongue Weight Capacity, Ib. (kg) 1102 (500) Axle Capacity (in operation) Front, Ib. (kg) 3527 (1600) or combined capacity of front tires, whichever is less. Rear, Ib. (kg) 5292 (2400) Creeper Optional SpeedMatch Hydraulics Type Open Center Pump Rated Output, gpm (L/min.) 17.1 (64.6) Steering 5.1 (19.3) Implement 12.0 (45.3) Pump Type Dual gear Maximum Operating Pressure (PSI) 2500 Draft Control Type Position Control Remote Control Valves Available 5 3 -Point Hitch Type Category I Lift Capacity (24 -in. behind link arms), Ib. (kg) 2500 (1134) Lift Capacity @ lift link ends, Ib. (kg) 3130 (1419) Power Take -Off (PTO) Standard Rear @ 540 RPM Optional Mid @ 2100 Control Independent Clutch Brake (for Mid and Rear PTO) Multi -disk, wet Fluid Capacities Fuel Tank, gal. (I) Open -14.5 (54.9); Cab -13.8 (52.2) Cooling system (includes coolant bottle), qt. (I) Open -6.4 (6.2); Cab -8.8 (8.4) Crankcase with filter, qt. (I) 8 (7.5) Transmission and Hydraulic System, gal. (I) gear NA Transmission and Hydraulic System, gal. (I) 9.6 (36.1) hydrostatic Front Axle Gearcase (MFWD axle), gal. (I) 1.3 (5) Final Drive Type Planetary Engage On- the -Go Rear Differential Lock Yes Operator Station Rollover Protective Structure OSHA, SAE, ASAE Rigid - Foldable - Telescopic Foldable Platform - Flat /Straddle Flat Gear Shift Location - Console /Floor Left Hand Side Cab Compliance Complies with OSHA, SAE and CSA standards for rollover protection Visibility 360 Degrees Platform - Flat /Straddle Flat dB(A) Rating 78 Seat Suspension System Air -ride 2WD Dimensions Wheelbase, in. (mm) NA Front Tread Range, in. (mm) NA Rear Tread Range, in. (mm) NA Minimum Rear Tread Setting, in. (mm) NA Front Axle Clearance, in. (mm) NA Turning Radius w /Brakes, ft. (m) NA Turning Radius w/o Brakes, ft. (m) NA Unballasted Operating Weight, Ib. (kg) NA Approx. Ship Wgt, Ib. (kg) Open; Cab MFWD Dimensions Wheelbase, in. (mm) 71.5 (1816) Front Tread Range, in. (mm) Front Axle Clearance, in. (mm) Turning Radius w /Brakes, ft. (m) 9.2 (2.8) Turning Radius w/o Brakes, ft. (m) 9.8 (3) Limited Slip Differential Unballasted Operating Weight, Ib. (kg) Approx. Ship Wgt, Ib. (kg) Open; Cab Open -3700 (1679); Cab -4345 (1971) Standard Tires 2WD Front NA Rear NA MFWD Front 8.00 -16 R1 Rear 13.6 -28 R1 Miscellaneous Miscellaneous Underhood Muffler Yes Joystick SCV Control Yes Inboard Planetary Yes Axle Type Flanged Brakes - Type and Control Wet disk COMPARABLE EQUIPMENT ACCEPTED CITY OF ALAMEDA CHUCK CORICA GOLF COMPLEX ELECTRIC UTILITY VEHICLE SPECIFICATIONS ENGINE: 48V separately- excited DC motor with external fan. Motor brush service life 1,500 hours. TRANSAXLE: 16.99 to 1 ratio with helical gears. Direct drive double reduction with differential. REAR SUSPENSION: Proprietary Active In -Frame suspension. FRONT SUSPENSION: Proprietary torsional independent "A" -Frame with 5" (12.7 cm) of travel at spindle. MAX SPEED: Infinitely variable 0 -16 mph with fully charged batteries. Economy mode limits to 12 mph. BRAKES: Rear wheel mechanical drum, complemented with regenerative braking. FRAME: Welded, high strength steel channel and tube construction. GROUND CLEARANCE: Front: 7.75" (19.7 cm) Rear: 6" (15.2 cm) TIRES: 22 x 9.5 -10, 4 -ply. BATTERIES: Eight, 6V, T1.05 or US 2200. CONTROLLER: 48V, separately excited with regenerative braking, 500 amps max. Includes rolloff indicator, thermal outback, fully sealed /potted, status indicator light. CHARGER: Remote charger with drive inhibit on AC connect, 115V AC +/- 10% input, 48V DC (nominal) 17 amp output. 12 -hour average recharge time (depends on age, DOD and temperature). INSTRUMENTS /DASH: Battery discharge indicator, hour meter, headlight switch, on /off ignition key switch. DIMENSIONS: Width 59" (150 cm) Length 115" (292 cm) Wheel Base 79" (201 cm) STEERING ANGLE: Manual pinion and sector gear system with 67° steering and ergonomically positioned non- adjustable column. TURNING CLEARANCE CIRCLE: Inside rear tire: 39" (99 cm), inside front tire: 150" (381 cm), outside rear tire: 158" (401 cm), outside front tire: 227" (577 cm). CORROSION RESISTANCE:Body and bed constructed of dent and corrosion resistant polyethylene. Frame is dipped e -coat so internal and external surfaces are treated. CARGO BED SIZE: TOTAL CAPACITY: CARGO BED CAPATICY: TRAILER TOWING: WEIGHT (EMPTY): Length: 49" (124 cm), Width: 52" (132 cm), Height: 10" (25 cm), double walled, polyethylene. 1,200 lbs. (545 kg) with two 200 lbs. (91 kg) passengers. 800 lbs. (363 kg) 400 lbs. (182 kg) trailer, 50 lbs. (23 kg) tongue weight with standard hitch. 800 lbs. (363kg), 100 lbs. (45 kg) tongue weight with heavy - duty tow hitch. 1,450 LBS. with standard batteries. COMPARABLE EQUIPMENT ACCEPTED CITY OF ALAMEDA CHUCK CORICA GOLF COMPLEX SWEEPER SPECIFICATIONS ENGINE: 18 hp, twin cylinder, Kohler® Command ®, EPA & CARB Certified. AIR CLEANER Standard: A Kohler 2 -stage system with rotating screen (pre - cleaner). FUEL SYSTEM 5 gallon (18.93 liters) capacity polyethylene tank. GROUND SPEED: In Transport: While sweeping: up to 5 mph (8 km/h). up to 6.5 mph (10.4 km/h). TRACTION /DRIVE: Sundstrand 15 pump with Parker /Ross hydraulic wheel motors. REEL PICK UP: Belt driven, counter rotating, dual rubber finger reels. Reels rotate between 1,100 and 1,200 rpm with staggered overlapping sweeping fingers. REEL ENGAGEMENT: 2 position reel height adjustment with slack/tight belt engagement. SWEEPING WIDTH: 48" (122 cm) HOPPER LIFT AND LOWERS:Stationary hopper with gas cylinder assisted lever operated hopper door. Includes removable grass baffle. DUST CONTROL: Internal hopper design directs discharged exhaust dust down and to the rear of the sweeper, away from the operator. HOPPER CAPACITY: 1.25 cu. yd. (.96 cu. meters) capacity. OPERATOR'S SEAT: High back cushion seat with slide adjust. TIRES: Front: 18 x 8.5 -8 (45.7 x 21.5 -20.3 cm) ribbed tread, Rear: 18 x 9.5 -8 (45.7 x 24.1 -20.3 cm) turf tread, 4 -ply. MAINTENANCE: The engine oil drain plug, oil filter and battery are all located behind a front access panel. All reel bearings are greaseable. TIE DOWNS: 4 tie downs — one at each corner of the machine. SAFETY FEATURES: 6" (15.2 cm) rear drum parking brake, protective interlock switches and shielding of hydraulic hoses. DIMENSIONS: Overall width: 69" (175 cm), Overall length: 113" (287 cm). CURB CLEARANCE: 4" (10.2 cm) WEIGHT: 1600 lbs. (726 kgs) COMPARABLE EQUIPMENT ACCEPTED CITY OF ALAMEDA CHUCK CORICA GOLF COMPLEX SELF - POWERED AERATOR SPECIFICATIONS AERATING DEPTH: up to 3.5 inches deep AERATING WIDTH: 50 inches wide AERATING HOLE PATTERN: 2" x 1" up to 2" x 6" AERATING SPEED: 2.5 to 5.5 mph AERATING RATE: 2" x 2" spacing (1.2 acres per hr) HITCH: 5TH wheel or conventional 2" DRIVE: 23 HP V Twin Vanguard DIMENSIONS: HEIGHT: 30 inches WIDTH: 62 inches LENGTH: 48 inches WEIGHT: 1,000 lbs. SHIPPING WEIGHT: 1,400 lbs. TINES: CORING TINES: 1/2 ", 3/4" (patent pending) SHATTER KNIVES: 1/8 ", 1/4 ", 3/8" (patent pending) COMPARABLE EQUIPMENT ACCEPTED INVENTORY OF GOLF COMPLEX MAINTENANCE VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT Make and Model John Deere 310D John Deere 4600 John Deere 3235 John Deere 3235 John Deere 2243 John Deere 2243 John Deere 800 John Deere 800 John Deere 1500 John Deere 1800 John Deere 1200A Jacobsen 1900D Jacobsen 5111 Jacobsen 5111 Jacobsen SV3422 Jacobsen Greens King V Jacobsen Greens King V Jacobsen Greens King 4 Jacobsen Greens King 4 Jacobsen Greens King 4 Jacobsen 422D National National Ford Loader Forklift Metermatic 2 Lely Cushman 120 Kawasaki Mule (5) EZGO 120 (3) Tennant Turfco 1530 SP Toro GF (2) Toro Reel Master Toro Reel Master Toro Grounds Master Toro Greens Master Ford Ranger (3) (QT) Function Hours Backhoe Loader 4203 Tractor 1832 Fairway Mower 4476 Fairway Mower 4663 Tee Mower 1508 Tee Mower 1870 Greens Aerator 150 Greens Aerator 187 Fairway Aerator 200 Gallon Spray Rig 898 Sand Pro 1360 Trim Mower Rough Mower Rough Mower Core harvester Greens Mower Greens Mower Tee Mower Tee Mower Tee Mower Rotary Mower Rough Mower Rough Mower Loader Forklift Top Dresser Fertilizer Hopper 120 Gallon Spray Rig Utility Vehicle Utility Vehicle Street Sweeper Top Dresser Greens Aerator Fairway Mower (gas) Fairway Mower (diesel) Rotory Mower Greens Mower Pickup Truck 1206 4830 5477 2173 4389 3295 2526 13988 15640 576 3575 1977 2400 2117 5460 Approx. 756 38008 25262 1429 13258 Year 1991 1998 1996 1996 1997 1997 1997 1997 1997 1997 1997 1998 1998 1989 1995 1997 1994 1990 1990 1995 1998 1998 1982 1986 1980 1980 1989 1994 2004 2000 1998 1989 1987 1990 1994 1990 1996 ATTACHMENT B CITY OF ALAMEDA Memorandum Date: August 1, 2006 To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers From: Re: Debra Kurita City Manager Recommendation to Amend Contractor Agreement with Masayuki Nagase by Modifying Dates for Deliverables for Library Art Work for the New Main Library Proj ect BACKGROUND In January, 2003, the Library Building Team established an Art and Recognition Team. With funding from the Friends of the Library, the Team engaged an Art Consultant to assist in the process of planning art for the new Main Library. The Team sent out an RFQ for artists, reviewed the artists' qualifications and body of work, and interviewed finalists. During the solicitation and selection stage, the Art and Recognition Team were joined by three local artists and art collectors to assist in the evaluation of proposals and artist interviews. Five works of art were selected and recommended for the New Main Library pending the identification of the funding sources for the Library Foundation. DISCUSSIONS /ANALYSIS Solicitation and selection of public art for the new Main Library is the result of an extraordinary effort by a citizen -staff committee. Many hours were spent by staff and volunteer citizens reviewing proposals, interviewing artists, evaluating finalists and presenting the art to the Public Art Advisory Committee. These same individuals worked closely with the Friends of the Library and the Library Foundation to secure the needed funding. Through their actions the members of the Art Team, the Friends and the Foundation, have demonstrated the high priority they place on public art at the new library. The first piece selected was "Cadence of the Water," a series of eight limestone medallions proposed by Masayuki Nagase for the exterior of the building. This work of art was approved on July 21, 2004, by the Public Art Advisory Committee. Funding for "Cadence of the Water" was in place in July 2005 and the work was commissioned by the City Council on July 19, 2005. A second work of art, also proposed by Masayuki Nagase, "Oracle of the Tree," a limestone tile mural, was selected and approved by the Public Art Advisory Committee on the same date. Funding for "Oracle of the Tree" was in place in April 2006 and the work was commissioned by the City Council on May 2, 2006. Agenda Item #4 -D CC 8 -1 -06 Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers Page 2 August 1, 2006 At the request of the City, the installation work for the limestone medallions was delayed seven months to allow exterior building work to be completed to avoid damaging the art medallions during construction and to allow time for the paving of Times Way and the library parking lot. The Contract Amendment reflects this change in date of deliverables. This delay does not affect the overall project timeline. The "Oracle of the Tree" is a mural fashioned of polished limestone tiles in subtle shades of black and grey. The design is based on the abstracted forms of the live oak trees that were once a major natural characteristic of Alameda and the coast of California. The mural will be five feet in height and ten feet in length, and will be mounted behind the main Check Out Desk near the entrance to the Library. The installation of the mural will commence after the installation of the exterior medallions. MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE This action does not affect the Alameda Municipal Code. BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT Funding for the "Cadence of Water" and the "Oracle of the Tree," is provided by the Alameda Free Library Foundation and the Friends of the Alameda Free Library. RECOMMENDATION Approve the Amendment to the Contractor Agreement with Masayuki Nagase to modify the Dates of Deliverables for Library Art Work for the New Main Library Project. Respectfully submitted, ane Chisaki Acting Library Director ,A: CITY OF ALAMEDA Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers From: Debra Kurita City Manager Date: August 1, 2006 Re: Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Deleting Section 2- 63.10, Third Party Claims, and by Adding a New Section 2 -65, Disposition of Property, Consisting of Sections 2 -65.1 through 2 -65.5, to Article V, Administrative Policies and Procedures BACKGROUND City departments purchase various assets such as furniture, office equipment, and vehicles in the normal course of business. Over time these assets are no longer useable and become surplus to current operations. Typically, the municipal code will contain a section permitting the sale of surplus or damaged assets. In 1996, while clarifying language in Article V (Administrative Policies and Procedures), Chapter II (Administration), those sections permitting the sale of surplus or damaged goods, supplies or equipment were inadvertently removed. The removal of those sections left the City departments with no means of disposing of such surplus items. The completion of the new Main Library and the need to dispose of surplus library furniture and equipment emphasized the need to re -adopt authorizing language. Further, during the research, it was determined that current Section 2 -63.10 Third Party claims is unnecessary and is proposed to be deleted. With this deletion, the municipal code will then conform to current practices. DISCUSSION There are two reasons to re -insert language regarding surplus items. First, specific clarification regarding the re -use of assets will provide departments with a means of reallocating to other departments or disposing of by auction unused assets. As operating departments replace furniture and equipment, old items should be re -used or auctioned in order to effectively employ City assets. The second reason to clarify the re -use or disposal of surplus items is the lack of central storage. Currently, unused items are stored in a variety of city facilities in conditions that do not protect the asset. As the useful life of an asset comes to completion, there may be other departments or other community -based organizations that are grantees of the City that may find the asset of use. If none of these conditions exist, then it is appropriate to sell at public auction those assets no longer needed. The sale converts the asset from a physical asset to a monetary asset. Agenda Item #4 -E CC 8 -1 -06 Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers August 1, 2006 Page 2 of 2 It is anticipated that with the occupation of the new Main Library there will be many pieces of furniture and equipment no longer needed in Library services. The introduction and adoption of this proposed ordinance will permit staff to efficiently and effectively handle these surplus items. BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT There is an administrative burden to accomplishing the purpose of this ordinance. However, if done regularly and routinely the quantity of items will not be sufficient to require a substantial amount of time. Items sold will generate revenue that will be allocated to the fund from which the items were originally purchased. MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE The proposed ordinance eliminates Section 2 -63.10 Third Party Claims as unnecessary. It adds to Article V, Sections 2 -65. through 2 -65.6 inclusive. This new section includes both unclaimed (lost and stolen) as well as surplus property. RECOMMENDATION Adopt ordinance amending the Alameda Municipal Code by deleting Section 2- 63.10, Third Party Claims, and by adding a new section 2 -65, Disposition of Property, consisting of Sections 2 -65.1 through 2 -65.5, to Article V, Administrative Policies and Procedures. Respectfully submitted, JAB:dl e -Ann B •{r r ief Financial Officer CITY OF ALAMEDA ORDINANCE NO. New Series AMENDING THE ALAMEDA MUNICIPAL CODE BY DELETING SECTION 2 -63.10 (THIRD PARTY CLAIMS) AND BY ADDING A NEW SECTION 2 -65 (DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY) CONSISTING OF SECTIONS 2 -65.1 THROUGH 2 -65.5 TO ARTICLE V (ADMINISTRATIVE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES) BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Alameda that: Section 1. The Alameda Municipal Code is hereby amended by deleting section 2- 63.10, Third Party Claims, from Section 2 -63, Lost, Stolen and Unclaimed Property. Section 2. The Alameda Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new Section 2 -65, Disposition of Property, to Article V, Administrative Policies and Procedures, to read as follows: 2 -65.1 Definitions. In this section: Finance Director means the City Chief Financial Officer or his or her designee. Surp /us property includes surplus, damaged or inoperative goods, supplies or equipment. Unclaimed property includes lost, stolen and unclaimed property. 2 -65.2 Duty to Report Unclaimed Property. The Chief of Police and the Public Works Superintendent — Maintenance Services Division shall, at the expiration of each fiscal year, make a report to the Council of all unclaimed property which may be in their possession or under their control. Within thirty (30) days after the date of the report, the Chief and Superintendent shall turn over the property and money mentioned in the report to the Finance Director, who shall issue a receipt for it. (See also Section 2 -63 regarding lost, stolen and unclaimed property received by the Police Department.) 2 -65.3 Surplus Property. A department wishing to dispose of surplus property should contact the Finance Director. Disposal of surplus property must be preceded by a disposal form in order to dispose of the asset. 2 -65.3 Disposal of Property. The Finance Director is responsible for the disposal of unclaimed and surplus property under this Section. The Director has the authority to dispose Introduction of Ordinance # 4 -E CC 8 -1 -06 of surplus and unclaimed property by any of the following methods, in his or her discretion: a. retained by the City when the Director determines there is a need for it. b. transferred to a non - profit corporation which has either received a grant from the City to provide public services or has entered into a written agreement with the City. c. sold, following the procedures set forth in section 2 -65.4. Unclaimed and surplus property may not be sold or transferred to City employees other than at auction open to the general public, or with approval of the City Council. 2 -65.4 Sale of Property. a. Authority to sell. The Finance Director shall fro m time to time sell all unclaimed and surplus property in his or her possession, unless such property is to be retained by the City or transferred to a non - profit corporation under section 2 -65.3 b. b. Notice of the sale. Notice of the sales shall be published for ten (10) days before the time of sale in the official newspaper of the City. The notice shall specify the time and place of sale and briefly describe the property to be sold. When the Finance Director knows the name and address of the owner of any unclaimed property, he or she shall also mail a notice of the sale to the owner at least five (5) days before the time of sale. c. Delay in selling; Notice. If for any reason any of the property is not sold at the time set for the sale, the sale of that property may be postponed from day to day for a period of time not longer than ten (10) days. The Director shall post notice of the postponement at the place of sale. d. Sale to highest bidder. The Finance Director shall sell at auction, to the highest bidder, for lawful money, the property described in the advertisement, at the time and place designated. e. Costs. The Finance Director shall pay the costs of storage, advertising and sale from the proceeds. 2 -65.5 Disposition of Proceeds. The Finance Director shall deposit the proceeds of the sale of unclaimed or surplus property into the General Fund, or the fund from which the property was originally purchased, except that the proceeds from the sale of unclaimed property shall first be retained for one year (after having paid the expenses for storage, advertising and sale), and those proceeds are subject any lawful claim which may be made by the owner of the property." Section 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after the date of its final passage. Presiding Officer of the Council Attest: City Clerk I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was duly and regularly adopted and passed by Council of the City of Alameda in regular meeting assembled on the day of , 2006, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City this day of , 2006. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda CITY OF ALAMEDA Memorandum Date: August 1, 2006 From: Debra Kurita City Manager To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers Re: Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of an Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code Adding Article XVIII Earthquake Hazard Reduction in Existing Wood Frame One and Two -Story Residential Structures to Chapter XIII (Building and Housing) BACKGROUND On April 11, 2005 the Alameda City Council directed staff to prepare a seismic retrofit program that provided standards and incentives for the voluntary retrofit of one to two -story residential structures. Most of the existing housing stock in Alameda is one to two -story wood frame structures. This type of construction has performed poorly in past earthquakes. Typically, buildings built prior to 1960 do not have adequate foundations, are not bolted to their foundations and /or lack bracing of walls enclosing crawl spaces. This group of buildings consists of as many as 9,000 structures in Alameda. Many of these structures are included on the City of Alameda's Historic Building Study List. In 1999, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) concluded that upwards of 88,000 housing units in Alameda County would become uninhabitable following a magnitude 6.9 earthquake on the Hayward Fault. ABAG has also concluded that while over 50% of the single - family homeowners in the City of Alameda had done some retrofit work, only 18% had adequately retrofitted their buildings with foundation bolts and plywood bracing. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) earthquake hazard maps indicate that the City of Alameda will experience violent shaking, as well as liquefaction, in future seismic events. DISCUSSION Structural retrofit of one to two story, wood frame residential structures typically includes a combination of adding anchor bolts to prevent buildings from sliding off their foundations and adding plywood sheathing along portions of the cripple wall (a short stud wall that extends from the top of the perimeter foundation upward to carry the floor joists) to prevent collapse of these walls. In some cases, existing foundations need to be re -built or strengthened. Agenda Item #5 -A 8 -1 -06 Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers August 1, 2006 Page 2 of 4 Several Bay Area cities have adopted ordinances that encourage voluntary seismic retrofitting of residential structures. Berkeley offers a combination of a reduction in the property transfer tax and permit fees waivers as an incentive for voluntary seismic upgrades. San Leandro instituted an aggressive public education campaign that included practical hands -on workshops with experts, educational videos, detailed construction drawings, and a streamlined package of plans and permits. Two recently published documents provide contractors and homeowners the information needed to submit plans, obtain permits and complete a seismic retrofit of a one to two - story, wood frame residential structure without having to hire an architect or engineer. The first document is the recent ABAG- endorsed standard plan set entitled "Standard Plan A- Residential Seismic Strengthening Plan ". Representatives of ABAG's Earthquake Program, building contractors, the California Building Officials, the Earthquake Engineering Institute, the International Code Council, and the Structural Engineer's Association of Northern California, developed this plan set. Qualified buildings may be retrofitted using only this set of plans. The plans contain all the construction details necessary to complete the project. Use of this plan set is limited to one and two -story, conventional light -frame wood construction and Group R -3 which are one and two - family occupancies. The second set of standards is Chapter A3 of the recently published 2006 International Existing Building Code. This set of prescriptive standards can be used on one to two story conventional light -frame wood construction and Group R -3 (one and two - family) occupancies that have specific structural weaknesses. While the use of these standards will require a set of plans be developed, there is no requirement that an architect or engineer be used. Maintaining the City's historic buildings and preserving the housing stock by reducing the effects of a major seismic event benefits the community. Property owners and contractors in Alameda have indicated that if the existing City fees and ordinances were changed, they would be inclined to retrofit their buildings. These fees include the cost of permits, the need to hire a licensed architect or engineer, and building code provisions that require an upgrade. Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers ANALYSIS August 1, 2006 Page 3 of 4 In order to encourage property owners to seismically retrofit their residential structures, staff has identified the following incentives: 1. Amend the AMC by adopting prescriptive standards for seismic retrofit contained in the ABAG — endorsed "Standard Plan A — Residential Seismic Strengthening Plan" and Chapter A3 of the 2006 International Existing Building Code. a. Adoption of these standards will exempt property owners from the requirement to upgrade plumbing, mechanical, electrical and fire /life safety systems unless they constitute a hazard to life and property. b. Adoption of these standards will allow contractors and property owners to prepare plans without having to hire an architect or engineer. 2. Make copies of the plans available at no charge from the Permit Center and on the City of Alameda website. 3. Reduce permit fees to a flat rate of $150. BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT The cost of processing, plancheck and inspection services for a typical seismic retrofit is approximately $650. In the last few years the City has issued an average of 65 seismic retrofit permits annually. By reducing the cost of permit fees for seismic retrofits to $150, revenue to the City will be reduced by approximately $32,500 annually. MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE All other sections of the Municipal Code dealing with this subject matter have been thoroughly analyzed and found to be compatible with the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code. RECOMMENDATION Introduce the ordinance amending the Alameda Municipal Code by adding Article XVIII Earthquake Hazard Reduction in Existing Wood Frame One and Two -Story Residential Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers August 1, 2006 Page 4 of 4 Structures to Chapter XIII (Building and Housing), and adopt the incentive programs. By: Respectfully submitted, Are' Cathy / oodbury Planning & Building Director Grego Building Of i sal ann Attachments: 1. Standard Plan A- Residential Seismic Strengthening Plan 2. Chapter A3 2006 International Existing Building Code 90 -1-8 v -S# wan Ipua2V i# ivatutpu v 911M 019713M0 OfP1 NV1-11 321OW ION VNINIVIN00 CAW 11 -1013H NI 8312/019 0111 NCH! 3MOW ION 9323CLLOfQ1.1.6 1V11N3O19321 O orata-OOOPI 1Hvri dO 301210110W 31V-Id 7119 NOI1VON0O4 OW TlVm 31ddIEG 210A11,11.1 VNIN31-1/VN32119 OIW8139 3•llldl2e0932id Nbld NINa1 -11- NaN..S 011,491 s Ib'IINaciis ! ve M1 d Clei'daNb°1S CD Z ��zro t i 1$ 4j tL i g 1 WI ffi a P- .jf$ e g 8gg 3,xxx 33 zi .s ; • .o ki!hk } 1 41 I �3n fox u n ng�i N z �£ g �� Y : ! i / rh 3f i g3 141Y i I 1 i�I lop all Ile 6 s k rn ppp a g �4g4g ag f� a8 t K Id tto $2 g 1s 3g n�4 9£ i i lir !i i V !8 gin1'0.111 & 1 2 ! a 4 a g i e €, @ s ill i� 1 ig ii# 11 I!`3 3 Hi .i . ° i t9 i$ e i ill �?� i2 e�° y6�l�ip° 4' ii ii ii° 111hil£iilI1111ii 1 • 1'.- i' gg x' 1 a$ !. I f e 1 is 1 3 k °1�i �'aE •p�biiu p4 irdi...I...4.. i e iL 1 rj �Etggt¢IP i 2 .g�gt Ra @g4 1 nzt l! RGliikoni� iii /i1'a h. ... s i S 5 R a i n e� �6 qqp8 a gB' x 111 8 g a li ¢ 41 10 P bl ' gg 11 Q JH !III I!Ii i E ai § d lIii$F 3 gs ! S # I �. ', ;j 1 1 jlj �l 1 �� I � 4 1 91111 i 1y ° y°! °Ll1i0 x11111 �� m o j Slhg . 1 $ NN _ ° ° . a . i... a R i e a a -11 8g gB ih a i 4 El.o Ri4i �E S�Sfi` 83iR 8 ei 29 ti 8 �i� $ iqq r. 1111 10111101 1041 ��d !a il33 i .. ... . sA ii 11 I .. . ° , . i . i 3 eQ i. _... .... . 1e�r. 1 j��l 11 1 i¢$9 2a@ � i it:' 4i li � 3g�,�� I � ! ; r c � r ; i z ' 3 :1111i 4® oaa oY o l( g d 1 gg /0m 000 9 0 q a . 1 ., hil f171164; 's� ? i e3 1� II: 5T4 1 p °¢d 1 o 4 I 1 i[p 14 s1 }}1� ! 1 -1 _� I 1111 0 ii11 .y{f 1 111.41 3_! i f �g i 15 5 s s i3i333a1 1 4l� � 11111111 i,i1si1 i NMI Nil 1 {a i'" W lla 6 d 1 I�p i na R2 l!l 1 °;4 €. �$l 4 Nifiliho !ail I Q yip ii y 3 d ;E 9 3ivh i' $R !9*,4 1 E p3p°; °IIII' -9. i Q S 1£ 7° g 1• S L' 2 �ee�E���i� � 4Y1,� �S�gYVttt � �� 41<� 22 {{IOVIjIxga qg 0 ° C ib iiiiii C! 9 - � i- 1 e s° � {g p 11i a A 4 it a i �E1 a �p�a' 0 h p s� Pill! 1@ el�ip ai6 /1111 1 @ �gA�@ 4i1i1::: 5' SiE ig 6 Yi g li1n11777 Culp jig ii i3 9 R 4111-y1i L I L�.I.ai Y4l ?;r3; a i € " g 8< i COBS oil S . , 31r111171 b >► w."" :... 11 r ft/ r% —.—� f ; l 13 .o jj SrN�tt 'Lf� SY` - t ' trl� li�iJ(� d 9S 5 I �r Jw . 4 m 3 r, y y�7 iM1' ;' @;''�F�i -TTr 1i 1'; y'a'k l� 1 ill1 1 i r' �� g �s °f �8 ,a,1 Ha iii % E 3 If q s i .J ,1 Fl 4 Q — ° gP {t a k9 €1 ��1 " 1—p- i SLIM VN1113114 QILL NMf1 321OW ION 9PIINIVINOO GNV 114,131.1N1 9321016 Q LL NVI th 32 OW 1ON 9301ru712LL9 111I1NSICIIM1 CIEIdV261-dOOf11 OH NV 31V1d TIM NOWICIN110d dNV 9NI7VtJ9 117111 37ddIaO 2VO4 Meld VNINEIH.LVN3S19 7IW9139 3A11d2063Sci NV-61 NINa1-11,NaNis oIWSIa9 Ib'11Nactsa�I NVIci CINb`QNb'1S 1• Pi rQ i 0 8 U. MINIMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMEMMEMOMMSMINIMM MMIIIMMEMEMEMMOMMEMMINIMMEMMEMMEMM MMIIIIMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEMMEM MEMMEMEMMIMUMMEMMMOMMEMEMMEMMEMEM MINEMMEMMEMMEMENNMMMMEMMIMMEMMMEM MIMMINIMMEMMOMMEMMEMMEMMOMMIUMMEMM MMIIMMEMENMEMMOIMMEMMOIMMEMEMEMMEMMM ■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■.■■■■■=MOM ■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■ .. ■. ■........■... ■ ■ ■..... ■.■...■■ .. . .■.■....■.....■.....■■■....■■ .. .■.....■■.■..■■■.■■..■■■....■■■ ■ ...... =mom ...............u. mmummommommummommummimplummo miummommummummommommommommil .. ■..... ■ ■ ............. ■ ■..N.. MEMMEMEMEMEMMEMMEMIUMMEMMINIMMEMEM MMEMMEMMEMMIIMMEMMEMMEMMOMMEMMOM EMMUMMEMMEMMI ............................ MEMENIMMEMMEMMOMMIUMMEMEM ■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■ ■ ■ ■■ ■ ■■ ■ ■ ■■ ■ ■ ■ ■■■■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ MEMMOMMEMMEMEMMENMEMMEMMIMMINIMMOM .. . ■. ■.. ■... ■.... ■........... ■... IMMIMMEMMEMEMEMMUMMEMMOMMEMMEMMEM .. .....................■........■ MEMMEMEMMEMOMMEMMEMEMMIIMMEMMEMMEM .. . ■ ■ ■.■ ■...... ■ ■■.......... ■ ■... ■.■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■...■■■■■. ■■■■.■ ■. ... ■.. ■. ■. ■ ■ ■.... ■. ■ ■..... ■ ■. ■. MMEMMORIMMIMMEMEMMIMMEMMEMIIMMEMIMEM .. . ■■ ■... ■■... ■.■ ■....... ■.... ■.. .. ■ ■ ■ ■... ■ ■ ■. ■■■.■ ■ .............. MEMEMMEMMIIMMEMEMIMMOMEMMOMMEMMEMM MMEMEMEMOMMEMMEMMOMMEMMEMMEMMEMEM IIMMMEMMINIMMEMMOMMMEMINIMMEMMEMMEMM MMEMMINIMMEMMOMMEMMEMENIOMMEMMEMEMM MMEMMIMMEMMIIMMOMMIMMEMMENMEMMEM mummummommummmumummgmemmul . ..C• ■■.....■..■..... ■■ ■ ■....... .■ .■■.■■ ■.■■■■■.■■■■■■■.■■■ ■.EMAA .. ............................... 6 y V o0 @e 00 oa NEW 4 at t INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL® Attachment #2. 1 CHAPTER A3 PRESCRIPTIVE PROVISIONS FOR SEISMIC STRENGTHENING OF CRIPPLE WALLS AND SILL PLATE ANCHORAGE OF LIGHT, WOOD -FRAME RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS SECTION A301 GENERAL A301.1 Purpose. The provisions of this chapter are intended to promote public safety and welfare by reducing the risk of earth- quake- induced damage to existing wood -frame residential buildings. The requirements contained in this chapter are pre- scriptive minimum standards intended to improve the seismic performance of residential buildings; however, they will not necessarily prevent earthquake damage. This chapter sets standards for strengthening that may be approved by the building official without requiring plans or calculations prepared by an architect or engineer. The provi- sions of this chapter are not intended to prevent the use of any material or method of construction not prescribed herein. The building official may require that construction documents for strengthening using alternative materials or methods be pre- pared by an architect or engineer. A301.2 Scope. The provisions of this chapter apply to residen- tial buildings of light -frame wood construction assigned to Seismic Design Category C, D or E of the International Build- ing Code containing one or more of the structural weaknesses specified in Section A303. Exception: The provisions of this chapter do not apply to the buildings, or elements thereof, listed below. These buildings or elements require analysis by an engineer or architect in accordance with Section A301.3 to determine appropriate strengthening: 1. Group R -1, R -2 or R -4 occupancies with more than four dwelling units. 2. Buildings with a lateral- force - resisting system using poles or columns embedded in the ground. 3. Cripple walls that exceed 4 feet (1219 mm) in height. 4. Buildings exceeding three stories in height and any three -story building with cripple wall studs exceeding 14 inches (356 mm) in height. 5. Buildings where the building official determines that conditions exist that are beyond the scope of the pre- scriptive requirements of this chapter. 6. Buildings or portions thereof constructed on concrete slabs on grade. The details and prescriptive provisions herein are not intended to be the only acceptable strengthening methods per- mitted. Alternative details and methods may be used when approved by the building official. Approval of altematives shall be based on test data showing that the method or material used is at least equivalent in terms of strength, deflection and capac- ity to that provided by the prescriptive methods and materials. The provisions of this chapter may be used to strengthen his- toric structures, provided they are not in conflict with other related provisions and requirements that may apply. A301.3 Alternative design procedures. When analysis by an engineer or architect is required in accordance with Section A301.2, such analysis shall be in accordance with all require- ments of the building code, except that the base shear may be taken as 75 percent of the horizontal forces specified in the building code. SECTION A302 DEFINITIONS For the purpose of this chapter, in addition to the applicable definitions in the building code, certain additional terms are defined as follows: CHEMICAL ANCHOR. An assembly consisting of a threaded rod, washer, nut and chemical adhesive approved by the building official for installation in existing concrete or masonry. COMPOSITE PANEL. A wood structural panel product composed of a combination of wood veneer and wood -based material, and bonded with waterproof adhesive. CRIPPLE WALL. A wood -frame stud wall extending from the top of the foundation to the underside of the lowest floor framing. EXPANSION BOLT. A single assembly approved by the building official for installation in existing concrete or masonry. For the purpose of this chapter, expansion bolts shall contain a base designed to expand when properly set, wedging the bolt in the pre - drilled hole. Assembly shall also include appropriate washer and nut. ORIENTED STRAND BOARD (OSB). A mat - formed wood structural panel product composed of thin rectangular wood strands or wafers arranged in oriented layers and bonded with waterproof adhesive. PEREVIETER FOUNDATION. A foundation system that is located under the exterior walls of a building. PLYWOOD. A wood structural panel product composed of sheets of wood veneer bonded together with the grain of adja- cent layers oriented at right angles to one another. SNUG - TIGHT. As tight as an individual can torque a nut on a bolt by hand, using a wrench with a 10 -inch -long (254 mm) handle, and the point at which the full surface of the plate washer is contacting the wood member and slightly indenting the wood surface. 2008 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE® 91 APPENDIX A WAFERBOARD. A mat - formed wood structural panel prod- uct composed of thin rectangular wood wafers arranged in ran- dom layers and bonded with waterproof adhesive. WOOD STRUCTURAL PANEL. A structural panel product composed primarily of wood and meeting the requirements of United States Voluntary Product Standard PS 1 and United States Voluntary Product Standard PS 2. Wood structural pan- els include all- veneer plywood, composite panels containing a combination of veneer and wood -based material, and mat - formed panels such as oriented strand board and waferboard. SECTION A303 STRUCTURAL WEAKNESSES For the purpose of this chapter, structural weaknesses shall be as specified below. 1. Sill plates or floor framing that are supported directly on the ground without an approved foundation system. 2. A perimeter foundation system that is constructed only of wood posts supported on isolated pad footings. 3. Perimeter foundation systems that are not continuous. Exceptions: 1. Existing single -story exterior walls not exceed-. ing 10 feet (3048 mm) in Length, forming an extension of floor area beyond the line of an existing continuous perimeter foundation. 2. Porches, storage rooms and similar spaces not containing fuel- burning appliances. 4. A perimeter foundation system that is constructed of unreinforced masonry or stone. 5. Sill plates that are not connected to the foundation or that are connected with less than what is required by the building code. Exception: When approved by the building official, connections of a sill plate to the foundation made with other than sill bolts may be accepted if the capacity of the connection is equivalent to that required by the building code. 6. Cripple walls that are not braced in accordance with the requirements of Section A304.4 and Table A3 -A, or cripple walls not braced with diagonal sheathing or wood structural panels in accordance with the building code. SECTION A304 STRENGTHENING REQUIREMENTS A304.1 General. A304.1.1 Scope. The structural weaknesses noted in Sec- tion A303 shall be strengthened in accordance with the requirements of this section. Strengthening work may include both new construction and alteration of existing construction. Except as provided herein, all strengthening work and materials shall comply with the applicable provi- sions of the building code. Alternative methods of strength- ening may be used, provided such systems are designed by an engineer or architect and are approved by the building official. A304.1.2 Condition of existing wood materials. All exist- ing wood materials that will be a part of the strengthening work (sills, studs, sheathing, etc.) shall be in a sound condi- tion and free from defects that substantially reduce the capacity of the member. Any wood material found to con- tain fungus infection shall be removed and replaced with new material. Any wood material found to be infested with insects or to have been infested with insects shall be strengthened or replaced with new materials to provide a net dimension of sound wood at least equal to its undamaged original dimension. A304.1.3 Floor joists not parallel to foundations. Floor joists framed perpendicular or at an angle to perimeter foun- dations shall be restrained either by an existing nominal 2- inch -wide (51 mm) continuous rim joist or by a nominal 2- inch -wide (51 mm) full -depth blocking between alternate joists in one -and two -story buildings, and between each joist in three -story buildings. Existing blocking for multi- story buildings must occur at each joist space above a braced cripple wall panel. Existing connections at the top and bottom edges of an existing rim joist or blocking need not be verified in one -story buildings. In multistory buildings, the existing top edge connection need not be verified; however, the bottom edge connection to either the foundation sill plate or the top plate of a cripple wall shall be verified. The minimum exist- ing bottom edge connection shall consist of 8d toenails spaced 6 inches (152 mm) apart for a continuous rim joist, or three 8d toenails per block. When this minimum bottom edge - connection is not present or cannot be verified, a sup- plemental connection installed as shown in Figure A3 -8 shall beprovided. Where an existing continuous rim joist or the minimum existing blocking does not occur, new 3/4 -inch (19 mm) wood structural panel blocking installed tightly between floor joists and nailed as shown in Figure A3 -8 shall be pro- vided at the inside face of the cripple wall. In lieu of 3/4 inch (19 mm) wood structural panel blocking, tightfitting, full -depth 2 -inch (51 mm) blocking may be used. New blocking may be omitted where it will interfere with vents or plumbing that penetrates the wall. A304.1.4 Floor joists parallel to foundations. Where existing floor joists are parallel to the perimeter founda- tions, the end joist shall be located over the foundation and, except for required ventilation openings, shall be continu- ous and in continuous contact with the foundation sill plate or the top plate of the cripple wall. Existing connections at the top and bottom edges of the end joist need not be verified in one -story buildings. In multistory buildings, the existing top edge connection of the end joist need not be verified; however, the bottom edge connection to either the founda- tion sill plate or the top plate of a cripple wall shall be veri- fied. The minimum bottom edge connection shall be 8d toenails spaced 6 inches (152 mm) apart. If this minimum bottom edge connection is not present or cannot be verified, 92 2006 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE® a supplemental connection installed as shown in Figure A3 -9 shall be provided. A304.2 Foundations. A304.2.1 New perimeter foundations. New perimeter foundations shall be provided for structures with the struc- tural weaknesses noted in Items 1 and 2 of Section A303. Soil investigations or geotechnical studies are not required for this work unless the building is located in a special study zone as designated by the jurisdiction or other public agency. A304.2.2 Foundation evaluation by an engineer or architect. Partial perimeter foundations or unreinforced masonry foundations shall be evaluated by an engineer or architect for the force levels noted in Section A301.3. Test reports or other substantiating data to determine existing foundation material strengths shall be submitted for review. When approved by the building official, these foundation systems may be strengthened in accordance with the recom- mendations included with the evaluation in lieu of being replaced. Exception: In lieu of testing existing foundations to determine material strengths, and when approved by the building official, a new nonperimeter foundation system designed for the forces noted in Section A301.3 may be used to resist all exterior wall lateral forces. A304.2.3 Details for new perimeter foundations. All new perimeter foundations shall be continuous and constructed according to one of the details shown in Figure A3 -1 or A3 -2. Exceptions: 1. When approved by the building official, the exist- ing clearance between existing floor joists or gird- ers and existing grade below the floor need not comply with the building code. 2. When approved by the building official, and when designed by an engineer or architect, partial perim- eter foundations may be used in lieu of a continu- ous perimeter foundation. A304.2.4 Required compressive strength. New concrete foundations shall have a minimum compressive strength of 2,500 pounds per square inch (17.24 MPa) at 28 days. A304.2.5 New hollow -unit masonry foundations. New hollow -unit masonry foundations shall be solidly grouted. Mortar shall be Type M or S, and the grout and masonry units shall comply with the building code. A304.2.6 Reinforcing steel. Reinforcing steel shall comply with the requirements of the building code. A304.3 Foundation sill plate anchorage. A304.3.1 Existing perimeter foundations. When the building has an existing continuous perimeter foundation, all perimeter wall sill plates shall be bolted to the foundation with chemical anchors or expansion bolts in accordance with Table A3 -A. Anchors or bolts shall be installed in accordance with Figure A3 -3, with the plate washer installed between the nut APPENDIX A and the sill plate. The nut shall be tightened to a snug -tight condition after curing is complete for chemical anchors and after expansion wedge engagement for expansion bolts. The installation of nuts on all bolts shall be subject to verifica- tion by the building official. Where existing conditions pre- vent anchor or bolt installation through the sill plate, this connection may be made in accordance with Figure A3-4A, A3 -4B or A3 -4C. The spacing of these alternate connec- tions shall comply with the maximum spacing requirements of Table A3 -A. Expansion bolts shall not be used when the installation causes surface cracking of the foundation wall at the location of the bolt. A304.3.2 Placement of chemical anchors and expansion bolts. Chemical anchors or expansion bolts shall be placed within 12 inches (305 mm), but not less than 9 inches (229 mm), from the ends of sill plates and shall be placed in the center of the stud space closest to the required spacing. New sill plates may be installed in pieces when necessary because of existing conditions. For lengths of sill plate greater than 12 feet (3658 mm), anchors or bolts shall be spaced along the sill plate as noted in Table A3 -A. For other lengths of sill plate, see Table A3 -B. For lengths of sill plate less than 30 inches (762 mm), a minimum of one anchor or bolt shall be installed. Exception: Where physical obstructions such as fire- places, plumbing or heating ducts interfere with the placement of an anchor or bolt, the anchor or bolt shall be placed as close to the obstruction as possible, but not less than 9 inches (229 mm) from the end of the plate. Cen- ter-to- center spacing of the anchors or bolts shall be reduced as necessary to provide the minimum total num- ber of anchors required based on the full length of the wall. Center -to- center spacing shall not be less than 12 inches (305 mm). A304.3.3 New perimeter foundations. Sill plates for new perimeter foundations shall be bolted as required by Table A3 -A and as shown in Figure A3 -1 or A3 -2. A304.4 Cripple wall bracing. A304.4.1 General. Exterior cripple walls not exceeding 4 feet (1219 mm) in height shall use the prescriptive bracing method listed below. Cripple walls over 4 feet (1219 mm) in height require analysis by an engineer or architect in accor- dance with Section A301.3. A304.4.1.1 Sheathing installation requirements. Wood structural panel sheathing shall not be less than 15/32 -inch (12 mm) thick and shall be installed in accor- dance with Figure A3 -5 or A3 -6. All individual pieces of wood structural panels shall be nailed with 8d common nails spaced 4 inches (102 mm) on center at all edges and 12 inches (305 mm) on center at each intermediate sup- port with not less than two nails for each stud. Nails shall be driven so that their heads are flush with the surface of the sheathing and shall penetrate the supporting member a minimum of 1'/2 inches (38 mm). When a nail fractures the surface, it shall be left in place and not counted as part of the required nailing. A new 8d nail shall be located within 2 inches (51 mm) of the discounted nail and be hand -driven flush with the sheathing surface. All hori- 2006 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE 93 APPENDIX A zontal joints must occur over nominal 2 -inch by 4 -inch (51 mm by 102 mm) blocking installed with the nominal 4 -inch (102 mm) dimension against the face of the ply- wood. Vertical joints at adjoining pieces of wood structural panels shall be centered on existing studs such that there is a minimum I/8 inch (3.2 mm) between the panels, and such that the nails are placed a minimum of '/2 inch (12.7 mm) from the edges of the existing stud. Where such edge distances cannot be maintained because of the width of the existing stud, a new stud shall be added adja- cent to the existing studs and connected in accordance with Figure A3 -7. A304.4.2 Distribution and amount of bracing. See Table A3 -A and Figure A3 -10 for the distribution and amount of bracing required for each wall line. Each braced panel length must be at least two times the height of the cripple stud. Where the minimum amount of bracing prescribed in Table A3 -A cannot be installed along any walls, the bracing must be designed in accordance with Section A301.3. Exception: Where physical obstructions such as fire- places, plumbing or heating ducts interfere with the placement of cripple wall bracing, the bracing shall then be placed as close to the obstruction as possible. The total amount of bracing required shall not be reduced because of obstructions. A304.4.3 Stud space ventilation. When bracing materials are installed on the interior face of studs forming an enclosed space between the new bracing and the existing exterior finish, each braced stud space must be ventilated. Adequate ventilation and access for future inspection shall be provided by drilling one 2 -inch to 3- inch — diameter (51 mm to 76 mm) round hole through the sheathing, nearly centered between each stud at the top and bottom of the crip- ple wall. Such holes should be spaced a minimum of 1 inch (25 mm) clear from the sill or top plates. In stud spaces con- taining sill bolts, the hole shall be located on the center line of the sill bolt but not closer than 1 inch (25 mm) clear from the nailing edge of the sheathing. When existing blocking occurs within the stud space, additional ventilation holes shall be placed above and below the blocking, or the existing block shall be removed and a new nominal 2 -inch by 4 -inch (51 mm by 102 mm) block shall be installed with the nomi- nal 4 -inch (102 mm) dimension against the face of the ply- wood. For stud heights less than 18 inches (457 mm), only one ventilation hole need be provided. A304.4.4 Existing underfloor ventilation. Existing under- floor ventilation shall not be reduced without providing equivalent new ventilation as close to the existing ventila- tion as possible. Braced panels may include underfloor ven- tilation openings when the height of the opening, measured from the top of the foundation wall to the top of the opening, does not exceed 25 percent of the height of the cripple stud wall; however, the length of the panel shall be increased a distance equal to the length of the opening or one stud space minimum. Where an opening exceeds 25 percent of the cripple wall height, braced panels shall not be located where the opening occurs. See Figure A3 -7. Exception: For homes with a post and pier foundation system where a new continuous perimeter foundation system is being installed, new ventilation shall be pro- vided in accordance with the building code. A304.5 Quality control. All work shall be subject to inspection by the building official including, but not limited to: 1. Placement and installation of new chemical anchors or expansion bolts installed in existing foundations. Special inspection is not required for chemical anchors installed in existing foundations regulated by the prescriptive provisions of this chapter. 2. Installation and nailing of new cripple wall bracing. 3. Any work may be subject to special inspection when required by the building official in accordance with the building code. A304.6 Phasing of the strengthening work. When approved by the building official, the strengthening work contained in this chapter may be completed in phases. The strengthening work in any phase shall be performed on two parallel sides of the structure at the same time. 94 2006 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE® APPENDIX A TABLE A3 -A—SILL PLATE ANCHORAGE AND CRIPPLE WALL BRACING NUMBER OF STORIES ABOVE CRIPPLE WALLS MINIMUM SILL PLATE CONNECTION AND MAXIMUM SPACING °•b AMOUNT OF BRACING FOR EACH WALL LINE "' A Combination of Exterior Walls Finished with Portland Cement Plaster and Roofing Using Clay Tile or Concrete Tile Weighing More than 6 psf (287 N/m2) All Other Conditions One story 1/2 inch (12.7 nun) spaced 6 feet, 0 inch (1829 mm) center -to- center with washer plate Each end and not less than 50 percent of the wall length Each end and not less than 40 percent of the wall length Two stories 112 inch (12.7 mm) spaced 4 feet, 0 inch (1219 mm) center -to- center with washer plate; or 5/8 inch (15.9 mm) spaced 6 feet, 0 inch (1829 mm) center- to-center with washer plate Each end and not less than 70 percent of the wall length Each end and not less than 50 percent of the wall length Three stories 5/8 inch (15.9 mm) spaced 4 feet, 0 inch (1219 mm) center -to- center with washer plate 100 percent of the wall lengths Each end and not less than 80 percent of the wall lengths a. Sill plate anchors shall be chemical anchors or expansion bolts in accordance with Section A304.3.1. b. All washer plates shall be 2 inches by 2 inches by 3/16 inch (51 mm by 51 mm by 4.8 mm) minimum. c. See Figure A3 -10 for braced panel layout. d. Braced panels at ends of walls shall be located as near to the end as possible. e. All panels along a wall shall be nearly equal in length and shall be nearly equal in spacing along the length of the wall. f. The minimum required underfloor ventilation openings are permitted in accordance with Section A304.4.4. TABLE A3 -B —SILL PLATE ANCHORAGE FOR VARIOUS LENGTHS OF SILL P1 ATE°,b NUMBER OF STORIES LENGTHS OF SILL PLATE Less than 12 feet (3658 mm) to 6 feet (1829 mm) Less than 6 feet (1829 mm) to 30 Inches (762 mm) Less than 30 inches footnote (782 mm)` One story Three connections Two connections One connection Two stories Four connections for 1/2 -inch (12.7 mm) anchors or bolts or Three connections for 5/8 -inch (15.9 nun) anchors or bolts '° connections One connection Three stories Four connections Two connections One connection a. Connections shall be either chemical anchors or expansion bolts. b. See Section A304.3.2 for minimum end distances. c. Connections shall be placed as near to the center of the length of plate as possible. TABLE A3-C —NOT USED 2006 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE 95 APPENDIX A EXISTING 2x BLOCKING OR RIM JOIST WITH EXISTING TOENAILS. SEE SECTION A304.1.3 EXISTING 2 -2x OR 1 -2x PLATE EXISTING CRIPPLE STUD WALL EXISTING SILL PLATE EXISTING STUD WALL WITH 2x SILL PLATE EXISTING WOOD FINISH FLOORING OVER 1x DIAGONAL SUBFLOOR OR OTHER SHEATHING MATERIAL OVER EXISTING FLOOR FRAMING t 4 IN. MIN 1 21/2 IN. MIN For SI: 1 inch = 25.4 mm. NOTES: 1. Plate washers shall comply with the following: 1/2 in. anchor or bolt -2 in. x 2 in. x 3/16 in. 5/8 in. anchor or bolt--2 in, x 2 in. x 3/16 m. 2. See Figure A3 -5 or A3 -6 for cripple wall bracing. CHEMICAL ANCHOR OR EXPANSION BOLT WITH PLATE WASHER AND NUT, AND SIZE AND SPACING AS REQUIRED BY SECTION A304.3.2 AND TABLE A3 -A FILL ANNULAR SPACE IN SILL PLATE WITH CHEMICAL ADHESIVE EXISTING FOUNDATION WALL EXISTING GROUND LEVEL FIGURE A3.3 —SILL PLATE BOLTING TO EXISTING FOUNDATION 98 2006 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE® EXISTING 2x BLOCKING OR RIM JOIST WITH EXISTING TOENAILS. SEE SECTION A304.1.3 EXISTING MUD SILL EXISTING FOUNDATION WALL — EXISTING GROUND LEVEL —\ 7 IN. 1 IN. APPENDIX A EXISTING STUD WALL WITH 2x SILL PLATE fEXISTING WOOD FINISH FLOORING OVER ix DIAGONAL SUBFLOOR OR OTHER SHEATHING / MATERIAL OVER EXISTING FLOOR FRAMING 21/2 IN. MIN f -F 9 IN. 1 IN. HOLE DIAMETER SHALL NOT EXCEED CONNECTOR DIAMETER BY MORE THAN 1/16 IN. For SI: 1 inch = 25.4 mm, 1 foot = 304.8 nun. NOTE: If shim space exceeds 2'12 in., alternate details will be required. 7 x 3/16 x 9 -IN. -LONG PLATE WITH TWO 1/2-IN.-DIAMETER CHEMICAL ANCHORS OR EXPANSION BOLTS TO FOUNDATION WALL AND THREE 3/8 -IN.- DIAMETER LAG SCREWS PREDRILLED INTO MUD SILL. PROVIDE SINGLE PIECE WOOD STRUCTURAL PANEL SHIM OR MULTIPLE LAYERS OF WOOD STRUCTURAL PANEL BETWEEN PLATE AND SILL WHEN SPACING EXCEEDS 3/16 IN. AND IS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO 3/4 IN. SEE TABLE A3 -A FOR SPACING. 4 IN. MIN 1 FT. 5 IN. MIN 1-- 2 IN. MIN. 3/81N. - DIAMETER LAG SCREW 21/2IN. MIN. INTO SILL SINGLE PIECE SHIM 5/16IN: DIAMETER LAG SCREW 1 IN. LONG 7 IN. x 9 IN. PLATE CONNECTION WHEN SHIM SPACE EXCEEDS 3/4 IN. IN WIDTH UP TO 21/2 IN. FIGURE A3-4A —SILL PLATE BOLTING IN EXISTING FOUNDATION— ALTERNATE 2006 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE® 99 APPENDIX A EXISTING END FLOOR JOIST WITH EXISTING TOENAILS. SEE SECTION A304.1.4. EXISTING 2x MUD SILL—\\ 4 IN. MIN EXISTING FOUNDATION WALL EXISTING GROUND LEVEL 7 x 3/16 x 9 -IN. -LONG PLATE. SEE FIGURE A3 -4A FOR CONNECTIONS. 4 IN. MIN For SE 1 inch = 25.4 mrn. FIGURE A3- 4B—SILL PLATE BOLTING TO EXISTING FOUNDATION WITHOUT CRIPPLE WALL AND FRAMING PARALLEL TO THE FOUNDATION WALL For SI: 1 inch = 25.4 mm. 10D SINGLE -PIECE SHIM PLACED FOR FULL CONTACT WITH PLATE. SEE FIGURE A3 -4A FOR BOLT AND LAG SCREW SIZES AND REQUIREMENTS. 4 IN. MIN 7 x 3/16 x 9 -IN. PLATE. BEVELED WASHER REQUIRED 4 IN. MIN ALTERNATE CONNECTION FOR BATTERED FOOTING FIGURE A3 -4C —SILL PLATE BOLTING IN EXISTING FOUNDATION— ALTERNATE 2006 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE EXISTING 2x BLOCKING OR RIM JOIST WITH EXISTING TOENAILS. SEE SECTION A304.1.3. EXISTING STUD WALL WITH 2x SILL PLATE GALVANIZED NAILS AT 4 IN. ON CENTER PER SECTION A304.4.1.1 15/32 -IN. -THICK WOOD STRUCTURAL PANEL. SEE FIGURE A3 -7 FOR PANEL AND NAILING LAYOUT. GALVANIZED NAILS AT 4 IN. ON CENTER PER SECTION A304.4.1.1 APPENDIX A EXISTING WOOD FINISH FLOORING OVER 1x DIAGONAL SUBFLOOR OR OTHER SHEATHING MATERIAL OVER EXISTING FLOOR FRAMING I I EXISTING 2 -2x OR 1 -2x PLATE For SI: 1 inch = 25.4 mm. NOTE: See Figure A3 -3 for sill plate bolting. EXISTING CRIPPLE STUD WALL EXISTING 2x MUD SILL EXISTING FOUNDATION WALL EXISTING GROUND LEVEL FIGURE A3- 5— CRIPPLE WALL BRACING WITH WOOD STRUCTURAL PANEL ON EXTERIOR FACE OF CRIPPLE STUDS 2006 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE® 101 APPENDIX A EXISTING 2x BLOCKING OR RIM JOIST WITH EXISTING TOENAILS. SEE SECTION A304.1.3. EXISTING 2 -2x EXISTING CRIPPLE STUD WALL NEW 2x BLOCKING WITH 4 -10d NAILS EACH BLOCK TO SILL --/V— EXISTING STUD WALL WITH 2x SILL PLATE EXISTING WOOD FINISH FLOORING OVER 1 x DIAGONAL SUBFLOOR OR OTHER SHEATHING MATERIAL OVER EXISTING FLOOR FRAMING L. EDGE NAILING PER SECTION A304.4.1.1 15/32 -IN. -THICK WOOD STRUCTURAL PANEL. SEE FIGURE A3 -7 FOR PANEL AND NAILING LAYOUT. EXISTING FOUNDATION WALL For SI: 1 inch = 25.4 nun. NOTE: See Figure A3 -3 for sill plate bolting. 102 EXISTING 2x MUD SILL EXISTING GROUND LEVEL FIGURE A3- 6— CRIPPLE WALL BRACING WITH WOOD STRUCTURAL PANEL ON INTERIOR FACE OF CRIPPLE STUDS 2006 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE® H APPENDIX A EXISTING CRIPPLE STUDS SEE ALTERNATES BELOW FOR VERTICAL PANEL JOINTS 8d NAILS AT 12 IN. ON CENTER AT INTERMEDIATE STUDS. MIN 2 NAILS EACH STUD. 2x BLOCKING FLAT ABOVE VENT OPENING. CONNECTTO STUDS WITH SHEET METAL CONNECTORS. 2- IN. -TO 3 -IN.- DIAMETER VENTILATION THOLES. SEE SECTION A304.4.3. 0.75H MIN 1IN. CLEAR 1IN. CLEAR 0± 8d NAILS AT 4 IN. ON CENTER ON ALL EDGES OF EACH INDIVIDUAL PIECE SILL BOLT VAPI 1111 AO. Mr EXISTING VENT EXISTING FOUNDATION WALL NEW 2x CRIPPLE STUD NAILED TO EXISTING STUD WITH 16d COMMON NAILS AT 6 IN. ON CENTER AT WOOD STRUCTURAL PANEL JOINT. 3 NAILS MIN. "2 IN. M1N --►I ' /BIN. MIN—* ' /2IN. MIN VERTICAL SPLICE AT DOUBLE STUD For SI: 1 inch = 25.4 mm. GROUND LEVEL EXISTING STUD 21/e IN. MIN ' /2IN. MIN ' /2IN. MIN ' /2IN. MINA j�- I--}� !•—' /2IN. MIN '/8 IN. MIN VERTICAL SPLICE AT SINGLE STUD FIGURE A3- 7— PARTIAL CRIPPLE STUD WALL ELEVATION 2006 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE 103 APPENDIX A EXISTING 1 -2x OR 2 -2x PLATE NEW 2x BLOCK BETWEEN EACH STUD WHEN EXISTING CRIPPLE STUD WALL HAS SINGLE TOP PLATE. NAIL TO TOP PLATE WITH 3 -16d NAILS. NEW 3 /4 -IN. WOOD STRUCTURAL PANEL BLOCKING INSTALLED TO FIT TIGHTLY BETWEEN FLOOR JOISTS. NAIL WITH 8d NAILS AT 4 IN. ON CENTER TO TOP PLATE OR SILL PLATE. SPACE BLOCKS AS FOLLOWS: EXISTING CRIPPLE STUD WALL. SEE FIGURE A3 -5 FOR BRACING. For SI: 1 inch = 25.4 mm, 1 pound = 4.4 N. 3- STORY: EVERY JOIST SPACE 2- STORY: EVERY JOIST SPACE ABOVE BRACED PANELS, ALTERNATE JOIST SPACES AT OTHER LOCATIONS 1- STORY: ALTERNATE JOIST SPACES NEW 2x SOLID BLOCKING INSTALLED TO FIT TIGHTLY BETWEEN FLOOR JOISTS fFRAMING CLIP FLAT EACH BLOCK TO PLATE WITH A HORIZONTAL CAPACITY OF 450 POUNDS FIGURE A3- 8— ALTERNATE BLOCKING WHERE RIM JOIST OR BLOCKING HAS BEEN OMITTED 104 2006 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE® EXISTING END FLOOR JOIST EXISTING 1 -2x OR 2 -2x PLATE NEW 2x BLOCK BETWEEN EACH STUD WHEN EXISTING CRIPPLE STUD WALL HAS SINGLE TOP PLATE. NAIL TO TOP PLATE WITH 3 -16d NAILS. APPENDIX A NEW 2x BLOCKING WITH 8d SHORT (2 -IN. LONG) NAILS AT 4 IN. ON CENTER [OR NO. 6 x 2 -IN. ROUNDHEAD WOOD SCREWS] TO FLOOR SHEATHING. PRENAIL WOOD STRUCTURAL PANEL BLOCK TO 2x BLOCK WITH 8d x 21/2 -IN. -LONG COMMON NAILS AT 4 IN. ON CENTER BEFORE CONNECTING ASSEMBLY TO FLOOR SHEATHING. NEW 2x BLOCKING AT 4 FT 0 IN. ON CENTER. INSTALL WHEN EXISTING END JOIST IS NOT CONNECTED TO TOP PLATE OR SILL PLATE. NEW 3 /4 -IN. WOOD STRUCTURAL PANEL BLOCKING CONTINUOUS OVER BRACED PANELS WITH 8d NAILS AT 4 IN. ON CENTER TO PLATE. SEE FIGURE FOR SPACING REQUIREMENTS BETWEEN BLOCKS. EXISTING CRIPPLE STUD WALL. SEE FIGURE A3 -5 FOR BRACING. For SI: 1 inch = 25.4 mm, 1 foot = 304.8 mm. NEW 2x BLOCKING AT 4 FT ON CENTER (SEE ABOVE) SHEET METAL FRAMING CLIP NAILED TO BLOCK WITH 8d SHORT NAILS. CONNECT TO TOP PLATE OF CRIPPLE STUD WALL WITH 2-NO. 8 x 11/2 -IN. -LONG WOOD SCREWS. FIGURE A3-9.---CONNECTION OF CRIPPLE WALL TO FLOOR SHEATHING WHEN FLOOR FRAMING IS PARALLEL TO WALL 2006 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE 105 APPENDIX A REQUIRED BRACING NOT SHOWN FOR THIS WALL REQUIRED BRACING FOR 1 -STORY BUILDING 4 -11 FT. 10IN. 5FT41N 30 FT. ►I• 11 FT. 101N.-1 .4-4FE-1- 5 FT. 4 IN. U 4FT w 1 NOTES: 1. Bracing shown assumes cripple stud height of 24 in. 2. Minimum panel length shall be two times the cripple stud wall height. 3. All panels along a wall shall be nearly equal in length and nearly equal in spacing along the wall. Wherever possible, panels should be laid out to begin and end on studs while maintaining required panel lengths. This may require the occasional addition of a new stud. 4FT 5 FT 4IN. 4FT. 5 FT. 41N. 4FT. 4 4 ww I L REQUIRED BRACING FOR 2 -STORY BUILDING 8 FT.� 8 FT 8 FT. REQUIRED BRACING FOR 3 -STORY BUILDING Bracing determination: 1 -story building —each end and not less than 40% of wall length.' Transverse wall-30 ft. x 0.40 = 12 ft. minimum panel length = 4 ft. 0 in. 2 -story building—each end and not less than 50% of wall length.' Longitudinal wall -40 ft. x 0.50 = 20 ft. 0 in. minimum of bracing. 3 -story building —each end and not less than 80% of wall length.' Transverse wall —30 ft. x 0.80 = 24 ft. 0 in. minimum of bracing. 'See Table A3 -A for buildings with both plaster walls and rooting exceeding 6 psf (287 N /m'). For 5I: 1 inch = 25.4 mm, 1 foot = 304.8 mm. FIGURE A3 -10 —FLOOR PLAN — CRIPPLE WALL BRACING LAYOUT 106 2006 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE® Approved as to Form CITY OF ALAMEDA ORDINANCE NO. New Series AMENDING THE ALAMEDA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING ARTICLE XVIII (EARTHQUAKE HAZARD REDUCTION IN EXISTING WOOD FRAME ONE AND TWO STORY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES) TO CHAPTER XIII (BUILDING AND HOUSING) BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Alameda that: Section 1. The Alameda Municipal Code is amended by adding Article XVIII, Earthquake Hazard Reduction in Existing One to Two Story Residential Structures, to Chapter XIII, Building and Housing, consisting of subsections 13- 70.1 through 13 -70.6 which shall read as follows: ARTICLE XVIII. EARTHQUAKE HAZARD REDUCTION IN EXISTING WOOD FRAME ONE TO TWO STORY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES 13 -70.1 Purpose The provisions of this article are intended to promote public safety and welfare by reducing the risk of earthquake- induced damage to existing wood frame residential structures. The voluntary minimum standards contained in this Article shall substantially improve the seismic performance of these residential buildings but will not necessarily prevent all earthquake damage. When fully followed, these standards will strengthen the portion of the structure that is most vulnerable to earthquake damage. This article does not require alteration of existing electrical, plumbing, mechanical, or fire safety systems unless they constitute a hazard to life or property. 13 -70.2 Scope This chapter sets standards for strengthening that may be approved by the Building Official without requiring plans or calculations prepared by an architect or engineer. In accordance with the restrictions outlined below one of two prescriptive standards may be used. a . Standard Plan A — Residential Seismic Strengthening Plan. The provisions of this article may be applied to one and two story, conventional light - frame wood construction, Group R, Division 3 Occupancies. 1. The provisions of this article do not apply to buildings or elements thereof, listed below. (a) Buildings without a continuous perimeter concrete foundation. 1 Introduction of Ordinance # 5 -A 8 -1 -06 (b) Buildings with cripple walls that exceed four feet in height. (c) Buildings exceeding two stories in height. (d) Buildings or portions thereof, constructed on a concrete slab on grade. (e) Buildings where the Building Official determines conditions exist that are beyond the scope of the prescriptive requirements of this chapter. b . Chapter A3 2006 International Existing Building Code. The provisions of this article may be applied to one to two story, conventional light -frame wood construction, Group R, Division 3 Occupancies, containing one or more of the structural weaknesses specified in Sec 13 -70.2 (b) 2 1. The provisions of this section do not apply to the buildings, or elements thereof, listed below. These buildings or elements require analysis by an engineer or architect in accordance with Section A301.3 of the 2006 International Existing Building Code to determine appropriate strengthening: (a) Group R -1, R -2 or R -4 occupancies with more than four dwelling units. (b) Buildings with a lateral- force - resisting system using poles or columns embedded in the ground. (c) Cripple walls that exceed 4 feet in height. (d) Buildings exceeding three stories in height and any three -story building with cripple wall studs exceeding 14 inches in height. (e) Buildings where the Building Official determines that conditions exist that are beyond the scope of the prescriptive requirements of Chapter A3 of the 2006 International Existing Building Code. (f) Buildings or Portions thereof constructed on concrete slabs on grade. 2. Structural Weaknesses. For the purposes of this section structural weaknesses shall be as specified below. (a) Sill plates or floor framing that are supported directly on the ground without an approved foundation system. (b) A perimeter foundation system that is constructed only of wood posts supported on isolated pad footings. (c) Perimeter foundation system that is not continuous. Exceptions: 1. Existing single story exterior walls not exceeding 10 feet in length, forming an extension of floor area beyond the line of an existing continuous perimeter footing. 2. Porches, storage rooms, and similar spaces not containing fuel- burning appliances. (d) A perimeter foundation system that is constructed of 2 unreinforced masonry or stone. (e) Sill plates that are not connected to the foundation or that are connected with less than what is required by the building code. Exceptions: 1. When approved by the Building Official connections of a sill plate to the foundation made with other than sill bolts may be accepted if the capacity of the connection is equivalent to that required by the building code. (f) Cripple walls that are not braced in accordance with the requirements of Section A304.4 and Table A3 -A of the 2006 International Existing Building Code, or cripple walls not braced with diagonal sheathing or wood structural panels in accordance with the building code. 13 -70.3 Submittal Requirements a. Standard Plan A — Residential Seismic Strengthening Plan. When submitting for building permit using the provisions of Section 13- 70.2(a) the applicant shall be required to submit 4 copies of the completed Standard Plan A — Residential Seismic Strengthening Plan available for the City of Alameda Permit Center. b. ChapterA3 2006 International Existing Building Code. When submitting for building permit using the provisions of Section 13- 70.2(b) the applicant shall be required to submit 4 copies of all necessary plans to show compliance with ChapterA3 of the 2006 IEBC. 13 -70.4 Fees Plan review and inspection fees shall be established by resolution of the City Council. 13 -70.4 Inspections a. Construction or work for which a permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the Building Official and such construction work shall remain accessible and exposed for inspection purposes until approved. The following inspections by the Planning and Building Department may be required for work permitted under this chapter: 1. Pre - construction, 2. Footings or forms, 3. Foundation bolt / anchor plate installation, 4. Concrete slab or underfloor inspection, 5. Installation of blocking, 3 6. Plywood panel installation on cripple wall, 7. Metal hardware installation, 8. Other inspections as required by the California Building Standards Code. 9. Final lnspection. Prior to final inspection, smoke detectors shall be installed in the attached dwelling (s) in accordance with the building code requirements. 13 -70.5 Incentives a. The requirements of this Chapter are voluntary. In order to encourage the largest application of this Chapter the following incentives are offered for those projects that use the prescriptive provisions of Section 13 -70.2 (a) or (b). 1. Plans are not required to be prepared by a licensed architect or engineer. 2. Projects do not require upgrades of the plumbing, mechanical, electrical or fire life /safety systems unless they constitute a hazard to life or property. 13 -70.6 Findings The City of Alameda is located within Seismic Zone 4. The City Council desires to lessen the risks to life and property of the residents of the City of Alameda posed by a major earthquake in Northern California. The California Building Code does not contain provisions governing the earthquake retrofit of existing wood frame residential structures. The City Council, therefore, has determined to implement voluntary prescriptive retrofit standards for existing one to two story residential structures and to provide incentives to encourage the use of these standards. Section 2. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is, for any reason, held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of Alameda herby declares that it would have passed this ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional. 4 Section 3. All former ordinances or parts thereof conflicting or inconsistent with the provisions of this ordinance hereby adopted, to the extent of such conflict only, are hereby repealed. Section 4. The City Clerk of the City of Alameda is hereby directed to cause this ordinance to be published in the Official Newspaper of the City of Alameda Section 5. This ordinance and the rules, regulations, provisions, requirements, orders and matters established and adopted hereby shall take effect and be in full force and effect 30 days after the date of its final passage and adoption. Attest: Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda Presiding Officer of the Council 5 I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was duly and regularly adopted and passed by Council of the City of Alameda in regular meeting assembled on the day of , 2006, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City this day of , 2006. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda Seattle Mayor Nickels - US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement 1 of 4 http://www.ci.seattle.wa.us/rnayor/climate/ SEATTLE.GOV City Services Departments Staff Directory Op AA Greg Nickels, Mayor Office of the Mayor News Room Issues and Topics Accomplishments Awards & Recognition About the Mayor Mayor's Staff Mayor's Priorities Photo Gallery Boards and Commissions About Seattle City Contacts SEARCH: I Go Seattle.gov 0 This Department Home ?al` About Us I ® Contact Us 1 Quick Jump: Select an Issue... Nickels Newsletter Get the mayors inside view. delivered to your inbox 0141-cIry Clean & Green Seattle Making our city a more livable place Wha ► Seattle to award funds for community technology projects ■ Mayor Nickels Leads Trade Mission to Anchorage ■ New Red Light Cameras Catch Bad Drivers In Act ► More News Releases What is the Agreement? Who;; is,involved? How can 1 participate? . What,others are saying Whom do 1 contact: ? - For more information <' Resources for Local Governments. Green Ribbon Commission on Climate Protection On February 16, 2005 the Kyoto Protocol took effect in the 141 countries that ratified it. That day Mayor Nickels challenged mayors across the country to join Seattle in taking local action to reduce global warming pollution. On March 30, 2005, 10 mayors representing more than 3 million Americans, joined together to invite cities from across the country to take additional actions to significantly reduce global warming pollution. Read the letter they sent to more than 400 other US mayors or the endorsed agreement with signature page. On June 13, 2005, the Mayors Climate Protection Agreement was passed unanimously by the U.S. Conference of Mayors. Watch the video feature di. Mayors inside and outside of the Conference continue to formalize their commitment by signing on to the agreement. December 4 -8, 2005 Mayor Nickels traveled to Montreal, Canada for the United Nations Climate Change Conference. Representatives from all over the world gathered for international meetings and negotiations on climate protection. Read the Mayor's Bloq Entries from the trip Letter to Mayors from Mayor Nickels 1 FAQ on Montreal Events As of July 14, 2006 266 mayors representing over 47 million Americans have accepted the challenge. You can read worldwide headlines about this locally- started initiative. Mayor Nickels continues to work on these and other environmental issues in Seattle. His Environmental Action Agenda includes City efforts to improve healthy habitats and clean water, to increase sustainable forests, and to reduce paper use and increase recycling. He is also studying the Green Ribbon Commission's Report and Recommendations and will release Seattle's Climate Action Plan in autumn 2006. WHAT IS THE U.S. MAYORS' CLIMATE PROTECTION AGREEMENT? Climate disruption is an urgent threat to the environmental and economic health of our communities. Many cities, in this country and abroad, already have strong local policies and programs in place to reduce global warming pollution, but more action is needed at the local, state, and federal levels to meet the challenge. On February 16, 2005 the Kyoto Protocol, the international agreement to address climate disruption, became law for the 141 countries that have ratified it to date. On that day, Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels launched this Agenda Item #7 -A 8 -1 -06 Seattle Mayor Nickels - US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement http: / /www.ci.seattle.wa.us /mayor /climate/ initiative to advance the goals of the Kyoto Protocol through leadership and action by at least 141 American cities. Mayor Nickels, along with a growing number of other US mayors, is leading the development of a US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement ; our goal was for at least 141 mayors to sign onto the Agreement by the time of the U.S. Conference of Mayors June 2005 meeting in Chicago . Under the Agreement, participating cities commit to take following three actions: • Strive to meet or beat the Kyoto Protocol targets in their own communities, through actions ranging from anti - sprawl land -use policies to urban forest restoration projects to public information campaigns; • Urge their state governments, and the federal government, to enact policies and programs to meet or beat the greenhouse gas emission reduction target suggested for the United States in the Kyoto Protocol -- 7% reduction from 1990 levels by 2012; and • Urge the U.S. Congress to pass the bipartisan greenhouse gas reduction legislation, which would establish a national emission trading system For Mayors: Agreement Q & A - Acrobat PDF In addition to building a coalition of at least 141 cities to sign onto the US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement, Mayor Nickels, along with the other participating mayors, led a successful effort to win endorsement of the Agreement by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, through passage of a resolution at their June 2005 meeting. U.S. Mayor's Conference website Mayor Nickels' Web conference Media Coverage United Nations Background on Climate Change Back to Top WHO IS INVOLVED? On March 30, 2005 Mayor Nickels, along with nine other US mayors, sent a letter, and a draft resolution to over 400 mayors across the country, seeking their participation. Participating Cities As of July 14, 266 mayors have signed onto the agreement. To view these names, click here. ADDITIONAL WEST COAST CITIES RONNERT PARK, CA CLOVERDALE. CA DEL MAR. CA COTATI, CA WINDSOR, CA SAN RAFAEL, CA LOS ALTOS HILLS, CA SONOMA, CA PLEASANTON, CA SAUSALITO. CA NOVATO, CA BA W A \ LYNN 00 WAA �rf���'RIRS WA D ELINC A SH , r' A COWW.US, OR ASHLAND, cM ARCATA. CA‘ CA\ Ii;7p%p57A�.S.A RTALUMA,t* KRAF.UY CA y1 g411.M�ID, C ' SAM MT(O. CA SAN ANTED, CA., PAIo ALTO, CA' SANTACRUI, CA/ CAPULIA, CA ADDITIONAL EAST COAST CITIES WASHINGTON. DC MANCHESTER, NH BRICK, NJ WEST ORANGE, NJ ROBRINSVILLE, NJ ALBANY, NY EASTON, CT MANSFIELD, CT CLOSTER. NJ HOPEWELL, NJ SOMERVILLE, MA IRVINGTON, NY' NIGHTSTOWN, NJ FAIRFIELD, CT RINGWOOD, NJ STRATFORD, CT LONG HILL TWP, NJ EWING, NJ WEST WINDSOR, N1 HIPIMDPAM, R NEW BEDFORD, MA NLNt,W YAUMGOSA, NT ' L dLMLLIMGT MO$ GI ply W ROC16TFS. N, MAGMA RreFIr FLEFELS 0H HULL, MA HOPEWELL TAW, Ni ALUA51. K AMMO BAY CA SAN WE celsad, CA SANTA MAPAARA, iK WE L01. AN LON GN I'' PORT ST. LOCH FL NEST PWJ5 N'ACH, FL POWSNIO EFACI . FL TER, SL I ,U HOLLY FILL, FL KAUAI. IP 4 k 'ta HoKOLULU. 111 MAUI. HI NJPl� P1 FL eCAVICO4T IF. weir, F KLY W('.( Fl AS OF JULY 14, 2006 266 MAYORS PILO, I HI HAVE RESPONDED TO MAYOR NICKELS' CHALLENGE TO ADOPT THE GOALS OF THE KYOTO PROTOCOL Read the text of the US Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement 2 of 4 7/20/2006 10:03 AM Seattle Mayor Nickels - US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement 3 of 4 (Endorsed Language) http://www.ci.seattle.wa.us/mayor/climate/ Back to Top HOW CAN I PARTICIPATE? The 2005 Conference of Mayors is the official nonpartisan organization of the nation's 1183 U.S. cities with populations of 30,000 or more. The Conference might be over and the resolution passed, but there is still work to be done. If your city is interested in signing on to the US Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement, we urge you to complete the participation form and return it via email to kim.drury(n�seattle.gov or john.mauro(a�seattle.gov. You can also fax your form to us at: (206) 684 -3013. There are several national non - profits that are active in assisting local and national leaders on environmental issues. For more information on what others are doing, and how they might assist you on getting your leaders involved, please visit: Climate Solutions, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Sierra Club, Kyoto USA, the Climate Crisis Coalition, The Virtual March, or ICLEI. Back to Top WHERE CAN I FIND MORE INFORMATION? Mayors . b..,:.. Green Ribbon Comm ssionjJ Climate Protection Learn more about the effects of climate disruption and general climate information, a range of actions and best practices that reduce emissions, what Seattle is doing to meet the Kyoto target, and what other cities are doing. Media Coverage Note: some articles require a subscription to access • Laurie David: Ticked Off in Seattle: A Tale of Two Washingtons -- The Huffington Post, April, 2006 • A Green Santa Monica -- Santa Monica Mirror, April 20, 2006 • Press Conference: Green Ribbon Commission on Climate Protection E. -- Seattle Channel, March 24, 2006 • In Our View - Mayors Take Lead -- Vancouver Columbian, March 28, 2006 • How to Seize the Initiative Climate change cover story -- Time Magazine, March 24, 2006 • Spreading the Word on Global Warming 11. -- ABC World News Tonight, March 24, 2006 • Seattle to Kyoto: you can't get there by car -- Seattle Times, March 24, 2006 • City commits to big cut in greenhouse gas emissions -- Seattle PI, March 24, 2006 • Seattle Cools Down Global Warming, - Seattle PI, March 22, 2006 • Climate of change in Seattle, Seattle PI, March 17, 2006 • U.S. grassroots warms up to global- warming fight G lobe and Mail, December 3, 2005 • Seattle Tackles Greenhouse Gases, NPR, November 28, 2005 • Dateline Earth Seattle PI (Slog], November 23, 2005 • Greg Nickels, The Pied Piper from "Warriors & Heroes - Twenty-five leaders who are fighting to stave off the planetwide catastrophe" Rolling Stone Magazine, November, 2005 • A rapid warm -up for the Northwest Christian Science Monitor, October 23, 2005 • Clearing The Air PBS, August 15, 2005 • Seattle leads the US in rallying cities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 1. BBC News, August 15, 2005 • Major Cities' Efforts to Curb Global Warming di. The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, August 15, 2005 • U.S. Mayors Abide by Kyoto Treaty PBS, August 8, 2005 • Seattle leads cities in reducing greenhouse gases Aspen Times, July 23 2005 • Blue Skies, Green Cities IPS, July 19 2005 • Mayors brainstorm green ideas North Lake Tahoe Bonanza, July 15 2005 • The Revolution will be Localized Grist Magazine, July 14 2005 • Mayors brainstorm green ideas A.P, July 14 2005 • Mayors showcase 'green cities' at meeting Seattle P.1., July 12 2005 • Climate issues heat up Desert News, July 10 2005 • State to tackle climate change Arizona Republic, July 10 2005 • Missouri mayors commit to combating global warming Joplin Independent, July 8 2005 • At G8 we'll be watching our leaders on global warming Whitier Daily News, July 5 2005 • Seattle's a hothouse of green power Houston Press, June 29, 2005 • Not Easy Being Green Houston Press, June 23, 2005 • U.S. mayors take stand against pollution Lansing Pulse, June 22, 2005 • Mayors taking up mandate on Kyoto Pasadena Star News, June 19, 2005 • Bush May Be Trying To Pretend That Global Warming Isn't Real The Record, June 16, 2005 7/20/2006 10:03 AM Seattle Mayor Nickels - US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement http: / /www.ci.seattle.wa.us /mayor /climate/ • Political Climate Change The Stranger, June 16, 2005 • City City Bang Bang Grist Magazine, June 15, 2005 • US mayors support Nickels' climate plan Seattle P.1., June 14, 2005 • World's Mayors Sign Global Warming Mitigation Plan E/The Environmental Magazine, June 14, 2005 • Mayors flex their opinions Long Beach Press Telegram, June 13, 2005 • Nickels pushing pro -Kyoto resolution to mayors The Seattle Times, June 9, 2005 • By any means necessary The Daily Texan, June 6, 2005 • Global - warming fight goes grass roots The Christian Science Monitor, June 6, 2005 • Cities lead the way to greener world New Scientist, June 4, 2005 • Schwarzenegger unveiling global warming plan at UN conference AP, June 1, 2005 • World's mayors seek to fight global warming, make cities greener AP, May 30, 2005 • California's record on pollution control acts as role model for city leaders Financial Times, May 22, 2005 • Kyoto treaty embraced at local level Denver Post, May 22, 2005 • Beyond Kyoto Living on Earth, May 20, 2005 • Maui, Big Isle mayors join national eco -pact Honolulu Advertiser, May 17, 2005 • US cities snub Bush and sign up to Kyoto The Guardian [London], May 17, 2005 • U.S. Mayors Support Global Warming Treaty ABC News [AP], May 16, 2005 • US mayors pledge action against global warming New Zealand Herald, May 16, 2005 • Seattle leads U.S. cities joining Kyoto Protocol International Herald News Tribune, May 15, 2005 • Bipartisan Action on Climate Change Charging Rino [Blog], May 15,2005 • Rebuffing Bush, 132 Mayors Embrace Kyoto Rules New York Times, May 14, 2005 (subscription needed) • Companies make peace with Kyoto Protocol LA Weekly, March 4 -10, 2005 • American Cities Show Solidarity with Kyoto Signatories e/The Environmental Magazine, March 2, 2005 • Cooperation in the Air Los Angeles Times - February 28, 2005 • Santa Monica Joins Initiative to Lower Emissions Santa Monica Look Out News - February 25, 2005 • Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce - February 23, 2005 (Note: need Subscription to access) • Seattle Dreams of 'Green' Team Seattle PI - February 17, 2005 • Activist touts local initiative to cut pollution Seattle Times - February 17, 2005 • Seattle mayor promotes climate protection KTVB.com (Idaho News) - February 17, 2005 • Mayor Is on a Mission to Warm U.S. Cities to the Kyoto Protocol L.A. Times - February 22, 2005 Back to Top CONTACT For more information, or to sign on to the Mayor's Climate Agreement, please contact Kim Drury or John Mauro with the Office of Sustainability • Office of the Mayor • Office of Sustainability and Environment • Office of Intergovernmental Relations Back to Top Mayor's Office: Seattle City Hall, 600 Fourth Avenue, 7th Floor Mailing address: PO Box 94749 Seattle, WA 98124 -4749 Seattle.qov: Services 1 Departments 1 Staff Directory 1 Mayor 1 City Council Copyright © 1995 -2006 City of Seattle Questions /Complaints 1 Privacy & Security Policy 4 of 4 7/20/2006 10:03 AM CITY OF ALAMEDA MEMORANDUM DATE: August 1, 2006 TO: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Debra Kurita City Manager RE: A Report to the City Council on Big Box Retail Policies and Regulations BACKGROUND At the July 18, 2006 meeting of the City Council, Council Member deHaan requested information regarding big -box retail policies and regulations. DISCUSSION Recent community interest in examining the impacts of big box retail development in a number of California cities and counties has resulted in several comprehensive reports. The first comprehensive report includes a summary of California big -box ordinances and related legal cases that discusses the pros and cons of super center development in terms of consumer savings, employee wages, tax revenues, and various environmental impacts. The second comprehensive report is an executive summary of the analysis of the impact of big box grocers in Southern California. The third comprehensive report is an analysis of the economic impact of Wal -Mart super centers on existing businesses in Mississippi. All three comprehensive reports are on file in the City Clerk's office. RECOMMENDATION Review and discuss the attached information regarding big box retail stores and provide direction to staff. Attachments On file in the City Clerk's Office: Respectfully submitted, / Cathyf' oodbury, Director Planning & Building Department 1. California Responses to Supercenter Development Survey 2. Orange County Report on the Impact of Big Box Grocers on Southern California 3. Report on the Economic Impact of Wal -Mart Supercenters on Existing Businesses in Mississippi Agenda Item # 7 -B 8 -1 -06