Loading...
2007-04-03 PacketCITY OF ALAMEDA • CALIFORNIA SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY - - - APRIL 3, 2007 -- - -- 6 :00 p.m. Time: Tuesday, April 3, 2007, 6:00 p.m. Place: , , � s �,� , City Hall, corner of Santa Clara Avenue and Oak Street. Agenda: 1. Roll Call - City Council 2. Public Comment on Agenda Items Only Anyone Wishing to address the Council on agenda items only, may speak for a maximum of 3 minutes per item 3. Adjournment to Closed Session to consider: 3-A. WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIM (54 956.95) Claimant: Ronald Wilhite Agency Claimed Against: City of Alameda 3-B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9 Number of cases: One 4. Announcement of Action Taken in Closed Session, if any 5. Adjournment - City Council Beverly ' -tin, f Mayor Housing Authority of the City of Alameda 701 Atlantic Avenue - Alameda, California 94501 -2161 - TEL: (510) 747 -4300 FAX: (510) 522 -7848 - TDD: (510) 522 -8467 IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE BOARD: 1. Please file a speaker's slip with the Executive Director, and upon recognition by the Chair, approach the rostrum and state your name; speakers are limited to 3 minutes per item. 2. Lengthy testimony should be submitted in writing and only a summary of pertinent points presented verbally. 3. Applause and demonstrations are prohibited during Board of Commissioners meetings. AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS DATE & TIME Tuesday, April 3, 2007, 7:25 PM LOCATION City Hall, Council Chambers, Room 390, 2263 Santa Clara Ave., Alameda, CA Welcome to the Board of Commissioners of the Housing Authority of the City of Alameda meeting. Regular Board of Commissioners meetings are held on the first Tuesday of each quarter in the Council Chambers at City Hall. Public Participation Anyone wishing to address the Board on agenda items or business introduced by Commissioners may speak for a maximum of three minutes per agenda item when the subject is before the Board. Please file a speaker's slip with the Housing Authority Executive Director if you wish to address the Board of Commissioners. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1. ROLL CALL - Board of Commissioners 2. CONSENT CALENDAR • Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be approved or accepted by one motion unless a request for removal for discussion or explanation is received from the Board of Commissioners or a member of the public. 2 -A. Minutes of the Regular Board of Commissioner meeting held January 2, 2007. Acceptance is recommended. Regular Meeting of the Board of Commissioners April 3, 2007 Page 2 2 -B. Revising the Housing Authority's Budget for FY2007. The Housing Commission and Chief Executive Officer recommend the Board of Commissioners: 1. Approve the proposed budget revision for FY2007, and adopt the proposed resolution revising the budget for the Conventional Low -Rent Housing Program No. CA -062 (Esperanza); and 2. Approved the revised schedule of Authorized Positions. 2 -C. Revising the Housing Authority's Budget for FY2008. The Housing Commission and Chief Executive Officer recommend the Board of Commissioners: 1. Approve the proposed budget revision for FY2008; and 2. Adopt the proposed resolution revising the budget for the Conventional Low -Rent Housing Program No. CA -062 (Esperanza) 2 -D. Approving Award of Contract for Eagle Village Siding Replacement on Two Buildings. The Housing Commission and Chief Executive Officer recommend the Board of Commissioners: 1. Approve awarding a contract to B -Bros. Construction, Inc. for $153,100 plus up to an additional 10 percent for change orders for a not to exceed amount of $168,410, to replace the siding on two buildings at Eagle Village; and 2. Authorize the Executive Director to execute contract. 3. AGENDA None. 4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, Non - Agenda (Public Comment) 5. COMMISSIONER COMMUNICATIONS, (Communications from the Commissioners) 6. ADJOURNMENT * ** Note: * Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact Carol Weaver, Secretary, at 747 -4325 voice or 522 -8467 TDD at least 72 hours before the meeting to request an interpreter. * Accessible seating for persons with disabilities (including those using wheelchairs) is available. * Minutes of the meeting are available in large print. * Audiotapes of the meeting are available on request. * Please contact Carol Weaver at 747 -4325 voice of 522 -8467 TDD at least 72 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. CITYOFALAMEDA.CALIFORNIA SPECIAL MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION TUESDAY - - -- APRIL 3, 2007 - - - 7:27 P . M . Location: Ci. Council Chaers, City Hall, corner of Santa Clara Avenue and Oak Street. Public Participation Anyone wishing to address the Commission on agenda items or business introduced by the Commission may speak for a maximum of 3 minutes per agenda item when the subject is before the Commission. Please file a speaker's slip with the Deputy City Clerk if you wish to speak on an agenda item. 1. ROLL CALL - Community Improvement Commission 2. CONSENT CALENDAR 2 -A. Minutes of the Community Improvement Commission meeting held on March 20, 2007. (City Clerk) 2 -B. Recommendation to authorize the Executive Director to execute an amendment to the Master Consulting Agreement with Harris & Associates for Engineering and Construction Support Services for the final phase of the Bayport Project by extending the term six months and adding additional budget authority in an amount not to exceed $232,000. (Development Services) 3. AGENDA ITEMS None. 4. ADJOURNMENT - Community Improvement Commission Beverly Jo air AGENDA 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. TUESDAY REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2007 -- - -- - 7:30 P.M. [Note: Regular Council Meeting convenes at 7:30 pm, City Hall, Council Chaffers, 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 SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL 6 :00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CONFERENCE ROOM Separate Agenda (Closed Session) REGULAR MEETING OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD 7:25 P.M. OF COMMISSIONERS, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Separate Agenda SPECIAL MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT 7 :27 P.M. COMMISSION, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Separate Agenda 1. ROLL CALL - City Council 2. AGENDA CHANGES • 3. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS 3 -A. Proclamation honoring Tony Aiello upon his retirement from St. Joseph Notre Dame High School. 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 City Council Meeting held on March 15, 2007; and the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on March 20, 2007. (City Clerk) 4 -B. Bills for ratification. (Finance) 4 -C. Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications and authorize Call for Bids for Godfrey Park Play Field Renovations, No. P.W. 03 -07 -0 6 . (Public Works) 4 -D. Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications and authorize Call for Bids for Replacement of Curb, Gutter, and Related Improvements to address Street Ponding Citywide, No. P.W. 02- 07 -04 . (Public Works) 4 -E. Recommendation to appropriate $55,000 in Measure B funds and award a Contract in the amount of $231,000, including contingencies, to Republic Intelligent Transportation, Inc. for the In- Pavement Crosswalk Lights at various locations, No. P.W. 07- 04 -07. (Public Works) 4 -F. Recommendation to appropriate $8,200 in Measure B funds and award a Contract in the amount of $82,400, including contingencies, to Republic Intelligent Transportation, Inc., for the In- Pavement Crosswalk Lights at Eighth Street and Taylor Avenue, No. P.W. 05- -05 -04 . (Public Works) 4 -G. Recommendation to appropriate $12,400 in Measure B Funds and award a Contract in the amount of $136,400, including contingencies, to Cal -West Lighting and Signal Maintenance, Inc. for Installation of Countdown Pedestrian Signal Head and Audible Pedestrian Signal, No. P.W. 01- 07 -01. (Public Works) 4 -H. Recommendation to award Vehicle Tow Contract to Ken Betts Towing. (Police) 4 -I. Adoption of Resolution Authorizing the Destruction of Specified Unnecessary Records of the Human Resources Department. (Human Resources) 4 -J. Adoption of Resolution Adopting a Policy for Naming City Property, Facilities, and Streets. (Recreation and Parks/Planning and Building) Continued from March 20, 2007. 4 -K. Final Passage of Ordinance Amending the Lease Agreement Dated January 31, 1991, Between the City of Alameda (Lessor) and the Alameda Food Bank (Lessee) for Real Property Located at 1900 Thau Way. (Public Works) [Requires four affirmative votes] 5. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 5 -A. Recommendation to accept proposed bus shelter design standards for all future installations in the City of Alameda. (Public Works) 5 -B. Public Hearing to consider an appeal of a Planning Board decision to deny Planned Development (PD -05 -0002) for 2241 and 2243 Clement Avenue (Boatworks Project) ; and adoption of related resolution. (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 8. ADJOURNMENT - City Council • 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. w c Housing Authority of the City of Alameda 701 Atlantic Avenue - Alameda, California 94501 -2161 - TEL: (510) 747 -4300 - FAX: (510) 522 -7848 - TDD: (510) 522 -8467 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD TUESDAY, JANUARY 2, 2007 The Board of Commissioners was called to order at 7:38 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioner deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, Torrey and Chair Johnson Absent: None 2. CONSENT CALENDAR Commissioner Tam moved acceptance of the Consent Calendar with a r with the exception of item 2 -A. Commissioner Matarrese seconded. Motion passed 6 — 0. Commissioner Matarrese moved to adopt item 2 -A. Commissioner Gilmore seconded. Motion passed 5 — 0 with Commissioner Tam abstaining. Items accepted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk. *2 -A. Minutes of the Special Board of Commissioner meeting held November 21, 2006. g , Minutes were accepted. *2 -B. Audit Report for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2006. The Board of Commissioners accepted the audit report for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2006. *2 -C. Approving Budget Revision Number 2. The Board of Commissioners: 1) Approved roved the proposed budget revision, and 2) Adopted the proposed resolution revisin g the budget for the Conventional Low -Rent Housing Program No. CA-062 (Esperanza) *2 -D. Approving Award of Contracts for Painting and Repair g p Projects. The Board of Commissioners: 1. Approved awarding a contract to G & S Painting for $144,000 lus up to an p p additional 10 percent for change orders for the Housing Authority office painting p g project and 20 percent for change orders for the Esperanza repair and aintin p g project for a not to exceed amount of $171,300; and HABOC Item #2 -A CC 04 -03 -07 Minutes of the January 2, 2007 Regular Meeting of the Board of Commissioners Page 2 2. Approved awarding a contract to Bayview Painting for $293,000 with an additional 20 percent for change orders for the Independence Plaza repair and staining /painting project for an amount not to exceed $351,000; and 3. Authorized the Executive Director to execute both contracts. 3. AGENDA None. 4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. 5. COMMISSIONER COMMUNICATIONS Commissioner Torrey wished everyone a Happy New Year and welcomed Commissioner Tam to the Board. 6. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 7:40 p.m. Attest: Beverly Johnson, Chair Michael T. Pucci Executive Director 1 Secretary Housing Aot Authority of the City of Alameda 701 Atlantic Avenue - Alameda, California 94501 -2161 - Tel: (510) 747 -4300 - Fax: (510)522 -7848 - TDD: (510) 522 -8467 April 3, 2007 To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Board of Commissioners From: Debra Kurita Chief Executive Officer RE: Revising the Housing Authority's Budget for FY2007 BACKGROUND On January 2, 2007, the Board of Commissioners revised the Housing Authority's current budget. A minor budget revision is now proposed to increase the authorized spending limit on four projects to be completed before the end of the fiscal year. The Housing Commission had the opportunity to review this recommendation at its meeting of March 14, 2007, though the costs for the office repairs and the Parrot Village landscape improvements were not available at that time. A position change also is recommended. As staffing issues are the purview of the Board of Commissioners, this issue is being brought directly to the Board of Commissioners. DISCUSSION The Housing Authority has three projects underway this fiscal year. One is the painting project at Esperanza (ESP6 -07). The Board of Commissioners awarded a contract to G &S Painting to paint the buildings and make minor repairs if dry rot was found. A closer examination of the property lead staff to believe that dry rot may be more extensive than anticipated. As stated in a separate report, staff recommended and the Commission approved awarding a contract to Omega Termite and Pest Control for $67,345 to cover these repairs. The budget for the painting project needs to be increased to $260,000 to cover the additional cost for this contract as well as the inspections that located the damage. The project to repair minor dry rot and paint the Housing Authority office building is nearing completion. Extensive dry rot was discovered around the windows on the north side of the building. Additional dry rot and termite damage was found on the south side of the building. The amount of dry rot and the termite damage, which must be treated, was unexpected. The additional cost will be $0,500, increasing the cost for this project from $16,500 to $23,000. HABOC Item #2 -B CC 04 -03 -47 "Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service " Honorable Chair and Members of the Board of Commissioners April 3, 2007 Page 2 of 3 The residing replacement project at Eagle Village (EV4 -07) also is underway. In a separate report, staff recommends an increase in the budget from $167,200 to $335,610 to cover the additional cost of the contract to replace siding on two more buildings at this complex. The Housing Authority issued an Invitation for Bids for one other e project, the landscape p improvements at Parrot Village, for this fiscal year. Bids came in higher than anticipated. Staff recommends increasing the budget from $30,000 to $70,000 to cover the cost of this project. One position change is recommended. Currently, the Maintenance Services Coordinator position is unique to the Housing Authority. This p osition has been vacant for several months. It is believed that it will be in the interest of the Housing Authority to . � Y fill this position with an existing City position that has equivalent duties, the Public Works Supervisor position. The position has a higher salary range; however, the skills required for the position also are greater. Because of the savings from the position being vacant, no dollar adjustment is needed in the budget. A dollar adjustment may be Y needed next year, if the position change is approved; however, the amount will not be known until the position is filled and the step is determined. Staff recommends the adoption of the new schedule of Authorized Positions attached as Exhibit A. Any change to the budget that affects Esperanza must be accomplished by resolution. A copy of the proposed resolution is attached as Exhibit B. FISCAL IMPACT A transfer of $472,000 from the Housing Authority's General Fund operating reserve to p g Esperanza was originally anticipated to be needed to cover the painting project. This 1 was decreased to $293,331 when the bids came in lower than anticipated. With an additional contract to cover substantial dry rot repairs, the transfer would increase to $381,300, still substantially less than originally anticipated for this ro'ect. Housing 1 g Authority General Fund replacement reserves will cover the additional cost $0,500 for the office repairs and painting project. The additional cost of $158,410 at Eagle Village will be covered by the proceeds from the refinancing of that complex. The net result from these two changes to the budget g g would be an increase of $253,410, which will result in a decrease in the net surplus from $463,771 to $210,361. The additional cost for the Parrot Village landscape e i rove - m p improve- ments also will come from the proceeds from the refinancing. RECOMMENDATION The Housing Commission and Chief Executive Officer recommend the Board of Commissioners: Honorable Chair and Members of the Board of Commissioners April 3, 2007 Page 3 of 3 1. Approve the proposed budget revision for FY2007, and adopt the proposed resolution revising the budget for the Conventional Low -Rent Housing Program No. CA -062 (Esperanza); and 2. Approved the revised schedule of Authorized Positions. MTP:AO /ED Attachments Respectfully submitted, .--) l Michael Pucci Executive Director HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS -- FY2007 and FY2008 ADMINISTRATION Executive Director Housing Authority Manager for Admin. Operations Executive Assistant Sub-total CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT DIVISON Housing Authority Manager for Admin. Operations Reconstruction Specialist I Senior Clerk FINANCE DIVISION Finance Manager Accounting Officer Senior Account Clerk Account Clerk Intermediate Typist Clerk HOUSING ASSISTANCE DIVISION Housing Assistance Manager Housing Specialist III Housing Specialist II Housing Specialist I Intermediate Clerk Sub-total Sub-total Sub -total HOUSING MANAGEMENT DIVISION Housing Authority Manager for Housing Management Housing Manager Intermediate Clerk Independence Plaza Resident Manager Independence Plaza Assistant Resident Manager Anne B. Diament Resident Manager Anne B. Diament Assistant Resident Manager Esperanza Resident Manager Esperanza Assistant Resident Manager Eagle Village /Rosefield Village Resident Custodian Parrot Village Resident Custodian China Clipper Resident Custodian Maintenance Services Coordinator Public Works Supervisor Maintenance Worker II Maintenance Worker I Laborer Senior Clerk Custodian Sub-total TOTAL ADMINISTRATION TOTAL TENANT SERVICES TOTAL MAINTENANCE TOTAL AUTHORIZED FY2007 AND FY2008 1.00 0.50 1.00 2.50 Exhibit A PROPOSED REVISION (413107) 1.00 0.50 1.00 2.50 0.50 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.50 2.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 * 6.50 * 15.50 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.20 1.00 0.15 1.00 0.15 0.26 0.46 0.50 1.00 0.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 19.72 27.00 4.72 13.50 45.22 1.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 * 6.50 * 15.50 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.20 1.00 0.15 1.00 0.15 0.26 0.46 0.50 0.00 1.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 19.72 27.00 4.72 13.50 45.22 * One position in this category is unfunded. PHA/IHA Board Resolution Approving Operating Budget or Calculation of Performance Funding System Operating Subsidy U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Public and Indian Housing OMB Approval No. 2577 -0026 (Exp. 6/30/2001) Exhibit B Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 15 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. This agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless that collecton displays a valid OMB control number. This information is required by Section 6(c)(4) of the U.S. Housing Act of 1937. The information is the operating budget for the low- income housing program and provides a summary of proposed /budgeted receipts and expenditures, approval of budgeted receipts and expenditures, and justification of certain specified amounts. HUD reviews the information to determine if the operating plan adopted by the PHA and the amounts are reasonable and that the PHA is in compliance with procedures prescribed by HUD. Responses are required to obtain benefits. This information does not lend itself to confidentiality. Acting on behalf of the Board of Commissioners of the below -named Public Housing Agency (FHA }/Indian Housing Authority (IHA), as its Chairman, I make the following certifications and agreements to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regarding the Board's approval of (check one or more as applicable): [111 Operating Budget Submitted on: Operating Budget Revision Submitted on: Calculation of Performance Funding System Submitted on: Revised Calculation of Performance Funding System Submitted on: is El (date) 04/03/2007 I certify on behalf of the: (PHA/IHA Name) Housing Authority of the City of Alameda that: 1. All regulatory and statutory requirements have been met; 2. The PHA has sufficient operating reserves to meet the working capital needs of its developments; 3. Proposed budget expenditures are necessary in the efficient and economical operation of the housing for the purpose of serving low- income residents; 4. The budget indicates a source of funds adequate to cover all proposed expenditures; 5. The calculation of eligibility for Federal funding is in accordance with the provisions of' the regulations; 6. All proposed rental charges and expenditures will be consistent with provisions of law; 7. The PHA/IHA will comply with the wage rate requirements under 24 CFR 968.110(e) and (f) or 24 CFR 905.120(c) and (d); 8. The PHA /IHA will comply with the requirements for access to records and audits under 24 CFR 968.110(i) or 24 CFR 905.120(g); and 9. The PHA /IHA will comply with the requirements for the reexamination of family income and composition under 24 CFR 960.209, 990.115 and 905.315. I hereby certify that all the information stated within, as well as any information provided in the accompaniment herewith, is true and accurate. Warning: HUD will prosecute false claims and statements. Conviction may result in criminal and/or civil penalties. (18 U.S.C. 1001, 1010, 1012; 31 U.S.C. 3729, 3802) Board Chairman's Name (type) Beverly Johnson, Chair Previous edition is obsolete Signature Date form HUD -52574 (10/95) ref. Handbook 7575.1 Housing Authority of the City of Alameda 701 Atlantic Avenue - Alameda, California 94501 -2161 - Tel: (510) 747 -4300 - Fax: (510)522 -7848 - TOD: (510) 522 -8467 April 3, 2007 To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Board of Commissioners From: Debra Kurita Chief Executive Officer RE: Revising the Housing Authority's Budget for FY2008 BACKGROUND On April 4, 2006, the Board of Commissioners approved a two -year operating budget for all programs covering the fiscal years July 1, 2006, to June 30, 2007, and July 1, 2007, to June 30, 2008 (FY2008). On January 2, 2007, the Board of Commissioners approved Budget Revision Number 2. The FY2008 budget was prepared more than 12 months ago and needs to be updated with current income and expense estimates. The Housing Commission had the opportunity to review this recommendation at its meeting of March 14, 2007. DISCUSSION Several changes have taken place since the FY2008 budget was Iast approved. Changes in income include lowering the Esperanza operating subsidies by $18,285 to reflect current information from HUD. Section 8 administrative fees have been funded at 97 percent through December 31, 2007, and Port -in Vouchers have been absorbed by other housing authorities reducing administrative fees by $77,890. Other income has been reduced because Iast year's base calculation included the auto insurance claim payment for the front lobby accident. Interest income has been increased by $47,651 due to higher investment returns and more funds being available through an accumulation of operating reserve additions. Independence Plaza tax increment funds have been revised upward by $153,396 for additional expenses and EMP work planned this year at this complex. There are changes to expenses. Labor contracts have been approved and this revised budget incorporates the changes. Insurance costs have been lowered by $9,540 to reflect lower mortgage insurance rates for Independence Plaza and there have been overall reductions in general property and liability insurance costs across the board. Pass - through project -based housing assistance payments for Playa del Alameda are trending up and are revised up by $52,960. Attached is a spreadsheet that shows the current and proposed budget amounts (Exhibit A). HABOC Item #2 -C CC 04 -03 -07 Honorable Chair and Members of the Board of Commissioners April 3, 2007 Page 2 of 4 Extraordinary Maintenance and Capital Improvement Projects Under the new budget format, it is necessary to separate Extraordinary Maintenance Projects (EMPs) from what are considered Capital Improvement Projects (CIPs). CIPs are those that have a cost of at least $10,000 and add to the value of the property. Separate schedules are provided to accomplish this split. Since the original EMP Schedule was produced in March 2005, conditions have changed and a number of revisions are recommended to the lists of projects. These include eliminating some projects because we believe they are premature, including the seal coating project at the office (Housing Authority General Fund, $1,900), replacing the siding at Anne B. Diament Plaza, and replacing the unit entry doors at China Clipper Plaza. All projects at Esperanza are proposed to be eliminated because of a lack of funds. In addition to the projects that had been budgeted, Esperanza's 25 buildings also are in need of new roofs. At a cost of more than $200,000, new roofs are not affordable. Other projects are recommended to be added or changed. Additions include seal coating the small deck/roof area of the office building ($1,000) and new awnings at the back doors at Eagle Village. Awnings have been requested by tenants for many years but were never affordable. With the refinancing of Eagle Village, this project is now possible. The anticipated cost is $42,000. At the Town Hall meeting at Anne B. Diament Plaza, tenants requested additional security lighting in the parking lot. Additional lighting fixtures are estimated to cost $2,500; however, staff plans to look into the possibility of different light fixtures to produce more lighting at a lower cost. Anne B. Diament Plaza also is in need of a new roof, including the decorative shingles on the facade. This project is expected to cost $80,000. In conjunction with this project, staff plans to explore the possibilities of adding solar panels for electricity and water heating. We will explore what rebates are available and the expected savings to determine if this would be cost effective. China Clipper Plaza requires improvements to the lobby, including replacement of the worn and stained carpeting at the entry with tile ($3,000), ventilation in the hallways ($10, 000), and improvements to the elevator ($7,500). The budget includes the interior elevator improvements, though staff will be investigating the possibility that improvements also may be needed to mechanical components. The decorative roof shingles on the facade at Lincoln/Willow also need to be replaced ($5,400). The paint on the fencing at Independence Plaza has been pealing off and needs to be primed and painted ($55,000). Two projects at Anne B. Diament Plaza are proposed to be scaled back. Rather than completing the kitchen cabinet/countertop replacement of all units in one year, it is planned to be phased in over three years. The plan is to start with the 23 units on the third floor. As an interim measure on the other two floors, wooden cutting boards in the countertops will be replaced. Rather than replacing all bathtubs and surrounds, most of them will be refinished. Only those units that are damaged will be replaced, thus avoiding the additional cost of asbestos abatement which was not factored in to the additional budget estimate. Projects were originally budgeted at amounts recommended in the Needs Assessment. Some of these costs have been found to be unrealistic and this budget revision would Honorable Chair and Members of the Board of Commissioners April 3, 2007 Page 3 of 4 increase them based on more recent experience. These projects include replacing the p g angle stops and faucets at Anne B. Diament Plaza, though this project also would be expanded to include replacing the mixing valves in the showers. The cost would increase from $18,000 to $55,250. The cost to repair, reseal and stripe parking lots at China Clipper Plaza, Rosefield Village, and Independence Plaza also are expected to be higher than originally budgeted. The total increase for China Clipper Plaza and Rosefield Village, both part of the Housing Authority -Owned properties, would be $30,440. At Independence Plaza, the cost would be increased to $27,000. One project, adding new parking spaces at Independence Plaza is expected to be carried over from the current year (FY2007) to FY2008. This project has been budgeted at the same $150,000 for many years. It is believed that $190,000 for this project is more realistic. Exhibit B shows the list of current and proposed EMPs and CIPs included in this budget revision. Three new maintenance vehicles have been added at $20,000 each to replace existing aged maintenance vehicles. These vehicles are considered a CIP for budgeting purposes and are included in scheduled mentioned above. Travel and Training / Conferences Travel and training includes attendance at National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials (NAHRO) conferences as well as other training. The following shows the revised out -of -state training locations and the number of persons proposed to attend: Summer NAHRO Conference Chicago, Illinois PSWRC -NAHRO Fall Workshop Clark County, Nevada Accounting Training Nevada Maintenance Training Arizona NAHRO Legislative Conference Washington, D.C. One Commissioner Two Commissioners and Two Staff One Staff Two Staff One Staff Changes to the operating budget for Esperanza must be accomplished by resolution. A copy of this resolution is attached as Exhibit C. FISCAL IMPACT The current budget revision improves the operating surplus before depreciation from a deficit of $2,524 to a surplus of $664,784. CIPs totaling $392,000 will be paid for from Honorable Chair and Members of the Board of Commissioners April 3, 2007 Page 4 of 4 cash generated during the FY2008 fiscal year's operations. CIPs at Parrot Village and Eagle Village will be paid from 2005 bond loan funds designated for those projects totaling $242,000. The new parking lot at Independence Plaza would be paid for with replacement reserves of $150,000 and $40,000 from operating cash flow. Independence Plaza also will use $187,387 of cash generated from operating income to pay the principal portion of this complex's mortgage loan. RECOMMENDATION The Housing Commission and Chief Executive Officer recommend the Board of Commissioners: 1. Approve the proposed budget revision for FY2008; and 2. Adopt the proposed resolution revising the budget for the Conventional Low -Rent Housing Program No. CA -062 (Esperanza) Respectfully submitted, Ff Michael Pucci Executive Director MTP:AO /ED Attachments c c ©C,+D n ©NO10-r C0C 0 N ID G O, +D ,-r O► r► V 0 er +a n v , r C"7 C7 M C � ) CF .24 '2 N rn M ,. 00 - r-1 r~ y N N co F., G,,a,00G © 00V7n ►NOG d �, u, +�, v7 r- ,a N +a +�►� N C, v Cr, N 00►D117er n 1-: N en CO er0)Cw .co 13 N en r� wr 0r1 0r3 Ca N er r- *-+ .�+ r00 M1nNe") Q• r-rer V7a 0nM0► ❑ o. °o v^ --� et M 00 �o e* -• [. N N r'1 --� N ,--i PROPOSED REVISED SCHEDULE OF EMP AND CIP PROJECTS Exhbit B JULY 1, 2007 -JUNE 30, 2008 (FY2008) HOUSING:: A THORITY.:GENERALL FUND. GF1 08 pretest) GF2 -08 Seal coat deck/flat roof area of office building CURRENT . PROP. EMF FY2008 : FY2008 $ 1,900 $ GP. CIP FY2008 PROPOSED TOTALS 1,900 $ 1,000 1,000 ESPERANZA ESRZ OS 17,000 ESP) 48 ' -- - -- = - -- _•- : - -- - -- 26,000 29,000 $ LSP4�eo�- 8 • ESP5 08 3,500 1 111 . ............................... PROPOSED TOTALS 25,000 100,500 $ EAGLE: VILLAGE E AND PARROT VILLAGE .: EV1 -08 Add aluminum awnings on back doors $ - $ - $ 42 000 PV1 -08 Replace windows and sliding glass doors.....,,... 200,000 .................... _... ........................200,000 $ 242,000 PROPOSED TOTALS $ 200,000 $ HOUSING AUTHORITY - OWNED ABD1 -08 Repair asphalt and seal coat parking lot $ 14,000 $ 14,000 Replace kitchen cabinets/countertops, repaint and ' ......................................... �...............--.-----..---............ ..................�......... - -- 1111,, change flooring as needed (3rd Floor - up to 23 ABD2 -08 units} ........................................... ............................... 250, 000....,.......... • -1111 ... ......,,.. 1111 . Refinish or replace (as needed} bathtubs and ABD3-08 surrounds ...... ............................... .... ............................... 1.20, 000... -1111 1111,, Replace faucets and angle stops in most units, and mixing valves in all units (requires asbestos ABD4- 08....... abatement) ........................... 18,000 55,260 � repo e r d r►► r.-.+ ... .............................. 55, 00 D.................,..... -1111 1111,. ........ 1111... ........ ABD6 -08 Replace roll -up garage door 5,000 5 000 1111... ........,.. ......... ..... ................................... ............................ . .. .1111. ...........--- .- ........,,,.., ....................... ........................- - -...- -- - -- - .. ABD7- 08.,,,. Add security lightinginparking lot/rear area ................................................................ ...............- .......,,,,.,.. .....,.,,..,..........2,500.... .. ........ 1111 1111. ......... ABD8= 08...... Replace roof and decorate shingles ... ',,.. ......................... ........................... -... 20, 000 ..............CC2 -08 ,,,,,... Replace angle stops 5,500 , 500 ..............CC3 -08 __ Add drainage outside uni# ... �. 0�.....-----.,................................,.---...............................,..... ..........----- .- .- ..........8, 500..... .............. - - -- -1111 8540... ............. ..Cutlpatch,,.and...seajcoat deteriorated asphalt........................,,..-.--------------.................... ,...............................,,,,.,......... ............,.................. CC4 -08 paving -- - - - - -. in parking lot . .., ..... .... .................... �--1-- - - 0 -... ,0.....0.....0 .... ............ ............,,,.--- ..,2.,...0 .... ,0....0.,...0 .... Re p l a ce fire protection (alarm, p ull s , .... .... CC5 -08 .....,... smoke detectors) in common areas .................................................... ............................12, 000....... ,,,,,,,,,,, ,, ,,,,,,,,,, ........ 1111 1111,,, 1111,, 1111,, 1111,. CC6 -08 Replace window and door of cabana 3,000 ........... ..........................3,000 CC7 -08 .Repair..and paint cabana interior - 6:00(�� CC9 -08 CC Replace elevator interior finishes 7 500 10-08., n .Ad...haf Tway v en# ilatian ........................... �.............. ........."n neC11-08."....Replace-entryway floor coverin....... withtile ........................ .3 000... .................................. ..................... .... . . .... 1111 . LW1-08 ................Repair ,,,.,,and paint exterior 14,000 14,000 ..............LWZ -08 Replace wndows...........................,,,,,,...,..............,,.........---.....---.--.................,.....,.,.,,,,,.,.,........---..................................... ....,......,,,.._.............. .......................5400... LW3 -08 Replace decorative roof shingles 3,500 RV1- 08.....,,,,,. Seal coat parking lot ............ .................... ..... x}000...................,.,. 30,000 ... 1111., ... ... 1111 RV2 -08 Repairlreplace sewer pipe 17,000 - ...............SH'I- 08....... Repair exterior ............d........... ...r...o....t .�.. ...........................................................-.-.-.-.-.-.-...,.,.,...,.................................,,,,,,,,.,.--.--.--........... ............................. .................................. .3 .... 2.....0.....0................-...-.-..-........ .. . ................................... ,.,.,..,...........3....,2.....0....0ry SH2 -08 Replace galvanized piping 6,400 6,400 .SH3- 08 Replace remaining windows 6,400 8�000 ... . ..T R K 1 -0 8 11Re p l a ce � 3 maintenance .. . . ..... .. . PROPOSED TOTALS INDEPENDENCE -PLAZA IP1 -08 Seal coat parking lot $ 13,000 $ 27,000 $ 581,700 $ 200,760 160,000 41,500_ 80,000 37,000 ....1111,,,., • • .....................1 10,000 17, 000 60, 000 $ 405,500 190,000 190,000 837,500. 1P2 -08* Build new parking area for 20 cars $ 1P3 -08 Paint fence $ - $ 55,000 $ PROPOSED TOTALS $ 550,000 $ 82,000 $ PROPOSED GRAND TOTALS $ 1,434,100 $ 283,760 $ EMP and CIP Combined Total 1 Difference from Current $ 1,121,260 $ (312,840) * Carried over from prior year. PHA/IHA Board Resolution Approving Operating Budget or Calculation of Performance Funding System Operating Subsidy U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Public and Indian Housing OMB Approval No. 2577 -0026 (Exp. 6/30/2001) Exhibit C Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 15 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. This agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless that collecton displays a valid OMB control number. This information is required by Section 6(c)(4) of the U.S. Housing Act of 1937. The information is the operating budget for the low- income housing program and provides a summary of proposed /budgeted receipts and expenditures, approval of budgeted receipts and expenditures, and justification of certain specified amounts. HUD reviews the information to determine if the operating plan adopted by the PHA and the amounts are reasonable and that the PHA is in compliance with procedures prescribed by HUD. Responses are required to obtain benefits. This information does not lend itself to confidentiality. Acting on behalf of the Board of Commissioners of the below -named Public Housing Agency (PHA )/Indian Housing Authority (IHA), as its Chairman, I make the following certifications and agreements to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regarding the Board's approval of (check one or more as applicable): Operating Budget Submitted on: Operating Budget Revision Submitted on: Calculation of Performance Funding System Submitted on: Revised Calculation of Performance Funding System Submitted on: (date) 04/03/2007 I certify on behalf of the: (PHA/IHA Name) Housing Authority of the City of Alameda that: 1. All regulatory and statutory requirements have been met; 2. The PHA has sufficient operating reserves to meet the working capital needs of its developments; 3. Proposed budget expenditures are necessary in the efficient and economical operation of the housing for the purpose of serving low- income residents; 4. The budget indicates a source of funds adequate to cover all proposed expenditures; 5. The calculation of eligibility for Federal funding is in accordance with the provisions of the regulations; 6. All proposed rental charges and expenditures will be consistent with provisions of law; 7. The PHA /IHA will comply with the wage rate requirements under 24 CFR 968.110(e) and (f) or 24 CFR 905.120(c) and (d); 8. The PHA/IHA will comply with the requirements for access to records and audits under 24 CFR 968.110(i) or 24 CFR 905.120(g); and 9. The PHA/IHA will comply with the requirements for the reexamination of family income and composition under 24 CFR 960.209, 990.115 and 905.315. I hereby certify that all the information stated within, as well as any information provided in the accompaniment herewith, is true and accurate. Warning: HUD will prosecute false claims and statements. Conviction may result in criminal and/or civil penalties. (18 U.S.C. 1001, 1010, 1012; 31 U.S.C. 3729, 3802) Board Chairman's Name (type) Beverly Johnson, Chair Signature Date Previous edition is obsolete form HUD -52574 (10/95) ref. Handbook 7575.1 Housing Authority of the City of Alameda 701 Atlantic Avenue - Alameda, California 94501 -2161 - Tel: (510) 747 -4300 - Fax: (510)522 -7848 - TDD: (510) 522 -8467 April 3, 2007 TO: Honorable Chair and Members of the Board of Commissioners FROM: Debra Kurita Chief Executive Officer RE: Approving Award of Contract for Eagle Village Siding Replacement on Two Buildings BACKGROUND At the September 5, 2006, Board of Commissioners meeting, the Board awarded a contract to Bay Cities Construction for a residing project at Eagle Village for an amount not to exceed $167,700. This bid was to replace siding, as needed, on seven of the nine buildings at Eagle Village. The other two buildings which contain 15 of the 42 units at Eagle Village, need to be completely resided. The Housing Commission had the opportunity to review this recommendation at its meeting on March 14, 2007. DISCUSSION The project to replace windows on these two buildings is underway. The Housing Authority issued an Invitation for Bids to complete the residing project and three bids were received as follows: Contractor Bid Quality Plus Construction, Fremont $ 211,980 Bay Cities Construction, Oakland $ 1 94,100 B -Bros Construction, San Leandro $ 153,100 B -Bros, the lowest bidder, submitted a bid bond, has a valid contractor's license, meets insurance requirements, and has good references. FISCAL IMPACT The current budget for the residing project is $167,200, which covers the existing Bay Cities contract for seven of the nine buildings with a 10 percent contingency for any dry rot that might be found. A budget increase will be needed and is recommended in a separate report, to cover the additional cost for a contract with B -Bros Construction. A 10 percent contingency is recommended for a project of this type; therefore, the cost for this contract would be $153,100 plus the contingency for a total of $168,410 and HABOC Item #2 -D CC 04 -03 -07 Honorable Chair and Members of the Board of Commissioners April 3, 2007 Page 2 of 2 $335,610 for this project. The cost for this project will be paid from the Eagle Village and Parrot Village bond proceeds. RECOMMENDATION The Housing Commission and Chief Executive Officer recommend to the Board of Commissioners: 1. Award a contract to B -Bros. Construction, Inc. for $163,100 plus u p to an additional 10 percent for change orders for a not to exceed amount of $168,410, to replace the siding on two buildings at Eagle Village; and 2. Authorize the Executive Director to execute the contract. MTP:ED Respectfully submitted /01, Michael T. ' ucci Executive Director Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY - - -- FEBRUARY 20, 2007 - -- - 7:27 P.M. Chair Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 7:49 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Commissioners deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Chair Johnson - 5. Absent: None. MINUTES (07-- ) Minutes of the Community Improvement Commission (CIC) and Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA), and CIC Meetings held on February 20, 2007. Approved. Commissioner deHaan moved approval of the minutes. Commissioner Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY (07- ) Report on Alameda Theater, Cineplex, and Parking Structure Project Construction update. The Redevelopment Manager gave a brief presentation. Chair Johnson inquired whether there would be an opportunity to add items back, to which the Redevelopment Manager responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Matarrese inquired whether pictures [of the northside garage design] would be provided in April, to which the Redevelopment Manager responded in the affirmative. The Redevelopment Manager continued the presentation. Chair Johnson inquired whether the Cineplex construction schedule would be provided in the next couple of months. The Redevelopment Manager responded in the affirmative; stated twelve months is a realistic schedule; Council would be informed of any changes. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether options and timelines have Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission March 20, 2007 1 been researched for the northern side of the parking garage. The Redevelopment Manager responded options are being explored; stated hard costs would be provided to Council at the second meeting in April. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the parking garage is 25% complete because the vast majority of the work went into the foundation to which the Redevelopment Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the foundation was a very expensive part of the project. Commissioner deHaan stated a twelve -month buildout is scheduled for the Cineplex. The Redevelopment Manager stated the developer believes a twelve- month buildout is reasonable. Commissioner deHaan stated the cineplex would coincide with other construction if the schedule was compressed by a couple of months. The Redevelopment Manager stated the desire is to make the schedule shorter; twelve months is a realistic schedule. Chair Johnson stated the Historic Theater cannot open without tenant improvements. The Redevelopment Manager stated tenant improvements could happen earlier; the garage could open by itself in December. Robb Ratto, Park Street Business Association (PSBA), thanked the Commission for project support over the years. Chair Johnson stated the Alameda Theater has been closed for twenty -six years; a month or two is not going to make a difference. AGENDA ITEM (07- ) Public Hearing for the periodic review of the Five -year Implementation Plan, Fiscal Years 2004 -2005 through 2008 -2009, for the Business and Waterfront Improvement Project and the West End Community Improvement Project. The Housing Development Manager gave a brief Power Point presentation. Commissioner Tam stated the staff report references required expenditures under existing pass - through agreements and capital Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission March 20, 2007 2 improvements for the Alameda Unified School District; requested an explanation on how annual payments are made through the Education Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) and how the funding relates to School District housing, i.e, the conversion of Island High School. The Housing Development Manager responded ERAF is State funding; stated a portion of tax increment goes to the State to be distributed to school districts; the capital improvement and housing funds are a negotiated pass - through agreement; the housing funds are being accessed for the development of Island High School; she would need to verify whether capital improvement funds have been accessed. The Development Services Director stated two payments were required by the State over the last few years; one large bulk payment was made a few years ago; a decision was made to finance the second payment of $770,000 and pay it over ten years; capital improvement funding went to the School District for projects constructed over the past year such as Ruby Bridges Elementary School and the park and community building; the pass - through agreements reflect that the School District negotiated for 20% of the money instead of 80%; 20% of all redevelopment money collected must be spent on low and moderate income housing; the School District's goal is to develop affordable housing for teachers and employees; the City is banking the funds for the School District; redevelopment housing money must be used for affordable housing purposes. Commissioner Tam inquired whether three separate pots of money are set up for education from redevelopment districts, to which the Development Services Director responded in the affirmative. Commissioner deHaan inquired what was the payment two years ago. The Development Services Director responded the last payment was $470,000; stated the payment was over $1 million the year before. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the support was for Ruby Bridges Elementary School infrastructure. The Development Services Director responded the support was for infrastructure, land, and predevelopment activity. Commissioner deHaan stated the School District provided some funding for the building through a Bond Measure. The Development Services Director stated that she was not suggesting that the City paid for everything; significant money was contributed for infrastructure, site preparation, demolition, etc. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission March 20, 2007 3 Commission deHaan requested information on the amount of money the City contributed to the Ruby Bridges Elementary School construction. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing. Bill Smith, Alameda, stated the City should provide affordable housing. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the hearing. Commissioner Matarrese stated that the Business and Waterfront Improvement Project (BWIP) and West End Community Improvement Project (WECIP) unencumbered fund balances reflect 20% set -aside funds for housing; requested information on the 80% unencumbered funds; discussions are needed for funding other projects such as the Carnegie building, new Fire House, and Webster Street Streetscape Phase II project. The Housing Development Manager stated the numbers in the report reflect housing funds; State law is very prescriptive regarding the type of information in the Implementation Plan. Commissioner Matarrese stated that 80% of the picture is missing; he would like to plan some other activities such as the Carnegie interior renovation or Webster Street Streetscape completion; inquired whether the matter should be agendized. The Development Services Director responded the matter could be addressed as part of the budget report, which is scheduled for May. Commissoner deHann requested that historical funding information be provided. Commissioner Matarrese stated that some generated funds would pay the debt for completed projects; choices should be provided for the 80% unencumbered portion. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the lifespan for redevelopment projects was 30 or 35 years. The Development Services Director responded each project is different; stated a 25 to 30 year lifespan is typical when a redevelopment project area is originally adopted. ADJOURNMENT Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission March 20, 2007 There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 8:31 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger Secretary The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Community Improvement Commission March 20, 2007 5 CITY OF ALAMEDA MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Community Improvement Commission From: Debra Kurita Executive Director Date: April 3, 2007 Re: Authorize the Executive Director to Execute an Amendment to the Master Consulting Agreement with Harris & Associates for Engineering and Construction Support Services for the Final Phase of the Bayport Project by Extending the Term Six Months and Adding Additional Budget Authority in an Amount Not to Exceed $232,000 (of which $78,000 will be Reimbursed by the Homebuilder for In -Tract Plan Review and Inspection) BACKGROUND Harris & Associates ( "Harris ") was selected in 2001, through a formal competitive selection process, as the City Engineer for the East Housing and FISC Catellus Project. As the designated City Engineer for the Project, Harris is responsible for plan review development approvals and ensuring compliance with all City Public Works standards. Harris also resolves any non - standard issues or exemptions with Public Works as required and serves as the City's construction inspector for both private in -tract and public backbone improvements on the Project. The proposed amendment to the Agreement will extend the term of the contract to December 31, 2007, and add additional budget authority in an amount not to exceed $232,000, of which $78,000 will be reimbursed by the Bayport homebuilder for private in-tract p �n -tract infrastructure inspections. DISCUSSION The existing Agreement expires June 30, 2007. A six -month term extension provides for Harris & Associates' continuation as the City Engineer for the Bayport project through its anticipated outside completion date of December 2007, for the inspection and acceptance of off -site traffic mitigation improvement projects at the intersections of Ralph Appezzato Memorial Parkway /Webster Street and Mariner Square Drive /Constitution Way. Special CIC Agenda Item #2 -B 04 -03 -07 Honorable Chair and Members of the Community Improvement Commission April 3, 2007 Page 2 of 3 Under the terms of the Agreement, Harris is compensated pursuant to costs estimated based on the Project schedule for various activities. These include: program management, technical reviews, construction services, special assignments, and acceptances for both public and private in -tract demolition and infrastructure improvements. The current project schedule shows estimated completion dates for the following remaining work: • Public Backbone Infrastructure Improvements and Acceptances (Stormwater Treatment Pond, Sanitary Sewer Lift Station No. 6, Haile Sanitary Sewer Lift Station, Storm Drain Outfall, 51" & Tinker Backbone Infrastructure, and the Storm and Sanitary Sewer Trunk Lines): June 2007 • Warmington In-tract Infrastructure Improvement Inspections and Acceptances: June 2007 • Off -Site Traffic Mitigation Projects (Webster Street/Ralph M. Appezzato Memorial Parkway and Mariner Square Drive /Constitution Way Intersection Improvements) Inspections and Acceptances: December 2007 The complete build -out of Bayport and sales of Bayport homes is projected to be complete by the spring of 2008. In accordance with the Disposition and Development Agreement ( "DDA "), as amended, consultant services related to the construction of project backbone infrastructure, including engineering and inspection services, are paid for from revenues generated by the Project. Consultant services related to the construction of in -tract infrastructure are paid for directly by the Developer. The services being performed by Harris under the existing contract, and proposed to be continued under this extension, include services related to both in -tract as well as backbone infrastructure construction. The portion of those services related to in -tract infrastructure, and consequently reimbursed directly by the Developer, are estimated to be approximately $78,000. The portion of those services related to the construction of backbone infrastructure, and consequently funded from Project Revenues, are estimated to be approximately $154,000. The proposed contract amendment increases the total contract amount with Harris from $2.52 million to $2.85 million. The percentage of this amount allocated towards the development of the residential backbone infrastructure is approximately four percent of the total $71.4 million budget for the construction of residential backbone infrastructure. The Public Works Department typically budgets four percent for its internal engineering and inspection functions for infrastructure projects implemented throughout the City. BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT The proposed Amendment will be funded from Bayport project revenues pursuant to the Disposition and Development Agreement. No General Fund monies will be used for implementation of the Project. Honorable Chair and Members of the Community Improvement Commission MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE April 3, 2007 Page3of3 The proposed Amendment to Agreement is in conformance with the City's Fiscal Neutrality Policy. RECOMMENDATION Authorize the Executive Director to execute an Eighth Amendment to the Master Consulting Agreement with Harris & Associates for engineering and construction support services for the final phases of the Bayport Project by extending the term six months and adding additional budget authority in an amount not to exceed $232,000 and extending the term of the Agreement to December 31, 2007. Respe9tply submitte Leslie A. Little Development Services Director DK/LAL /DC: dc Douglas Cole Redevelopment Manager Proc&zmation WHEREAS, Tony Aiello was born and raised in Pittsburg, California, and educated at St. Mary's College and San Francisco State University; and W1-EREAS, Tony Aiello began his long and successful career at St. Joseph High School in 1962, when he became a social studies teacher and a baseball coach, and later served as Athletic Director from 1965 -1967; and w1-(EgEAs, Tony Aiello was appointed Vice Principal of St. Joseph High School in 1967 and became the first lay principal at St. Joseph High School in 1970, a position he held until 1985; and v1-OE:gE74s, Tony Aiello was appointed principal of St. Joseph Notre Dame High School in 1985 when St. Joseph High School and Notre Dame High School joined together and has served in that position ever since; and W1-(EgEAS, Tony Aiello was an active member of many professional education associations and was awarded the Diocesan Merit Medal from the Diocese of Oakland in 1995, the California Interscholastic Federation Distinguished Service Award in 2003, and the North Coast Section California Interscholastic Federation Phil Hempler Distinguished Service Award in 2006; and 4-TJgE74s, Tony Aiello oversaw the successful $9 million capital campaign that has provided the school with a modern library and music room as well as a state -of -the -art science center and renovated gymnasium; and )IVHE1ZEAS, Tony Aiello is retiring on May 12 after 44 successful years of service to the St. Joseph Notre Dame High School community. NOW, 7E1EFO1E BE IT 1ESOLVED, that I, Beverly J. Johnson, Mayor of the City of Alameda, do hereby honor Tony Aiello upon his retirement and thank him for his contributions to the children of Alameda and their families as teacher, coach, and principal. City Council Beverly J. Johnson Agenda Item #3 -A Mayor 04-03-07 A=Ial UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY- -MARCH 15, 2007- -7:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 7:15 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent: None. (07- ) Joint Study Session with the Board of Education to discuss cooperative programs and joint efforts City and School District staff gave a Power Point presentation. The following speakers addressed the Council and School Board: Gretchen Lipow, Alameda; Trish Spencer, Alameda; Roxanne Clement, Bay Farm Media Center; Kris Murray, Alameda Education Foundation; Anne Taylor, Alameda; James R. Flowers, Alameda; and Jeanne Kettles, Alameda. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 9:32 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council March 15, 2007 UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- -MARCH 20, 2007- -6:00 p.m. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:40 p.m. ROLL CALL -- Present: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent: None. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (07- ) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation; Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9; Number of cases:. One. (07- ) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency Negotiators: Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee Organizations: All City Bargaining Units. Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Anticipated Litigation, Council authorized settlement of an employment dispute; regarding Labor, Council received a briefing from its Labor Negotiators on the status of negotiations with the Police Association Non -Sworn bargaining unit; no action was taken. 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 March 20, 2007 UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY MARCH 20, 2007 - - -- - 7:30 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Regular City Council Meeting at 8:31 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent: None. AGENDA CHANGES PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS (07- ) Proclamation declaring March 25 through March 31 as Boys and Girls Club Week. Mayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Site Director Mark Morales, Member Jamie Moreno, and Director George Phillips. Mr. Phillips thanked Council for the help and assistance given to the Boys and Girls Club. Michael John Torrey, Alameda, stated the Boys and Girls Club provides a great service. (07- ) Commendation presented to the family of Ruth Blackwell Herch. Mayor Johnson read and presented the commendation to Professor David Blackwell and family. Professor Blackwell read a statement and thanked Council for the commendation. * ** Mayor Johnson called a recess at 7:40 p.m. to convene the Special Community Improvement Commission Meeting and reconvened the Regular Meeting at 8:31 p.m. * ** CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Johnson announced that the Recommendation to award Contract Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 20, 2007 1 to Pacific States Environmental Contractors [paragraph no. 07- was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote --- 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] ( *07- ) Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Community Improvement Commission Meeting held on February 20, 2007; and Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on March 6, 2007. Approved. ( *07- ) Ratified bills in the amount of $2,486,622.05. (07- ) Recommendation to award Contract in the amount of $198,360 to Pacific States Environmental Contractors, Inc. for the demolition of boarded and vacant structures at 110 and 112 Norfolk Road located on Orion Street and 100 and 104 Miramar Road located on Stardust Place. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether deconstruction would not be allowed because the buildings have asbestos. The Development Services Director responded in the affirmative; stated fixtures and other reusable items would be recycled. The Development Manager stated the bid package included the City's construction and demolition debris procedures which require that construction and debris be recycled; approximately 70o would be recycled after abatement. Councilmember deHaan stated that there is an opportunity to go after blighted areas, particularly Alameda Point; inquired whether additional funding is available for other buildings. The Development Manager responded the current Community Development Block Grant funding would allow the project to be completed and the site secured; stated there is not enough money in the budget to take down additional buildings. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether there would be some cost recovery when the developer is chosen. The Development Manager responded the Blight Buster Program is intended to be a revolving loan fund; stated costs are anticipated Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 20, 2007 2 to be passed on to the Master developer. Mayor Johnson inquired whether further demolition or deconstruction would occur before the Master Developer was selected, to which the Development Manager responded in the negative. Councilmember deHaan moved approval of the staff recommendation. Vice Mayor Tan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote --- 5. ( *07-- ) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Lease Agreement Dated January 31, 1991, Between the City of Alameda (Lessor) and the Alameda Food Bank (Lessee) for Real Property Located at 1900 Thau Way. Introduced. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (07- ) Adoption of Resolution Adopting a Policy for Naming City Property, Facilities, and Streets. Continued to April 3, 2007. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Boards and Commissions review the list annually and make recommendations for Council approval, to which the Recreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson stated that Council should initiate the process and request the Board or Commission to review the matter. The Recreation and Parks Director stated language could be added to direct the individual Board or Commission to update the list and not recommend a name until directed by Council. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether the Historical Advisory Board is the repository for the names but does not take action, to which the recreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Gilmore stated that Criteria #6 notes that only one name would be used for each property or facility; inquired whether one park name would be used for all park components, to which the Recreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Gilmore stated many streets cross a broad street and the name becomes another name on the other side; inquired whether the procedure would be discontinued, to which the Recreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 20, 2007 3 Mayor Johnson stated that she wants additions and deletions to come to Council annually; Council should initiate the process for naming or renaming streets or facilities; she does not want Council review to be in the last step of the process. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the policy states that an individual needs to be deceased for a minimum of three years, to which the Recreation and Parks Director responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson stated the Boards and Commissions have violated the policy for the past two names. The City Manager requested clarification on whether the Boards and Commissions would perform an annual review and that recommendations would come to Council first. Mayor Johnson stated that the Boards and Commissions would review the list annually and make recommended changes to Council for approval; requested that the resolution be revised to reflect recommended changes and brought back to Council. (07- ) Resolution No. 14077, "Directing Staff to Monitor the Chuck Corica Golf Complex Budget, Consider Results of Operational Review, and Implement Operational Changes to Ensure a Balanced Budget." Adopted. The Finance Director gave a brief presentation. The City Manager clarified that the anticipated revenue would be $60,000, which would leave a $20,000 deficit. Mayor Johnson requested that the Golf Commission be added to the last Whereas statement and the first NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED; more detailed budget reporting is needed. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the unreserved balance would be $2.2 million at the end of the year. The Finance Director responded the unrestricted fund balance was $2,358,000 a t the end of February. Councilmember deHaan inquired what was the unrestricted fund balance at the beginning of the year, to which the Finance Director responded $2,611,000. Councilmember deHaan inquired what was the unrestricted fund balance five years ago, to which the Finance Director responded Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 20, 2007 4 approximately $6 million. Mayor Johnson stated that some money went to capital improvement funding. Councilmember deHaan stated capital improvements should be fulfilled. Mayor Johnson stated that the Golf Commission would be reviewing the funding for Capital Improvement Projects; noted that the Recreation and Park Director will be the Interim Golf Manager. Councilmember Gilmore inquired what accounts for the $200,000 month -to -month swing in expeditures. The Finance Director responded September's expenditures include a $100,000 increase because there was a third pay period in the month; stated $13,000 was spent for painting the driving range structure; July expenditures are low because less maintenance work is done; utility costs fluctuate from the first three months to the second three months. Mayor Johnson stated that the Golf Commission should recommend and set a reserve; the Golf Commission would need to give special approval to draw from the reserve balance. The Finance Director stated that money is made in July and August; money is drawn in September and October. Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether there is a high variability in utility use. The Interim Golf Manager responded swings occur; stated water is saved on rain days. Vice Mayor Tam stated higher golf participation occurs in July and August; irrigating in the winter months seems odd. Councilmember deHaan stated Capital Improvement Projects take place in the winter. Mayor Johnson requested a list of Capital Improvement Projects; stated maintenance is critical and cannot be deferred. The Finance Director stated some maintenance costs are routine and are included in the operating costs. Mayor Johnson stated that project schedules and goals need to be Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 20, 2007 5 developed. The Finance Director stated $56,600 has been expended for Capital Improvement Projects through February. Mayor Johnson inquired what was done with the $56,600. The Finance Director responded some money was spent for golf amenity projects; stated $54,600 was expended for the Clubhouse project. Mayor Johnson stated a capital improvement schedule needs to be established. Councilmember Matarrese stated the resolution is a good start; he likes the idea of recognizing the Golf Commission's role and responsibility and adding language to recognize keys points, such as directing staff and the Golf Commission to monitor the Golf Complex; recognizing the need to operate under a balanced budget is essential; a trigger point should occur when operating under a balanced budget is not possible; the Golf Commission should evaluate the matter and make a recommendation to allocate the money needed to close the gap; action is not driven by monitoring the budget and providing a monthly report; the Golf Complex is a City asset that generates revenue. Mayor Johnson stated that Council needs to establish an annual reserve for bad months; the reserve should be replenished in good months. Councilmember deHaan stated rainy days are the difficult portion of the equation; a monthly budget is needed with all elements taken into consideration. Mayor Johnson stated the Interim Golf Manager needs time to balance the budget and get things under control; the Clubhouse funding should be restricted; separate accounts should be established for operating reserves. The Finance Director stated Council could designate unrestricted reserve funds for a specific purpose; staff cannot set up a designated reserve without Council direction. Mayor Johnson requested that the matter come back to Council to address how much unrestricted funds would be needed. The City Manager suggested the recommended changes be made and the matter be brought back [of restricting funds for the Clubhouse] Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 20, 2007 with the budget update in May. Vice Mayor Tam stated thatshe does not want to delay the operational review. The City Manager stated the Request for Proposal process is already underway; the Interim Golf Manager would be making recommendations also. Mayor Johnson stated the Interim Golf Manager should not wait until June to make recommendations. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the Return on Investment (ROI) is back to what it used to be. The Finance Director stated the formula went from 1% in previous years to 0.3% this year. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether a further reduction is anticipated in the future, to which the Finance Director responded in the negative. Councilmember Gilmore stated that there is a practical consideration; decreased expenditures and increased revenues are needed to balance the budget; golf course maintenance and personnel reductions are the only ways to decrease expenditures; the Golf Commission and staff are trying to increase revenues through the proposed fee increases; the proposed fee increases are not a guarantee for increased revenue; a lot of rainy days could reduce revenue; decisions should not be made until the Consultant's report is reviewed. Councilmember Mataresse stated using unrestricted fund s also an option to close the gap; an•informed decision would be made by the Golf Commission if necessary; he is looking for a trigger point to make sure that the gap is known and a conscience decision is made. Mayor Johnson stated that the Interim Golf Manager needs time to review the budget; maintenance should not be cut. Councilmember Gilmore stated that she likes the idea of having a reserve fund for operations and leaving the balance for capital improvements; a $79,000 deficit is anticipated for the end of the Fiscal Year; inquired whether Council could propose that the restricted operation fund is whatever the amount is between now and the end of the Fiscal Year; Council could have further discussions before any more money is spent. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 20, 2007 7 The Finance Director stated the net loss is $112,000 through February; three month projections add to the amount; reserves need to be in the neighborhood $250,000 to $300,000. The City Manager clarified that Councilmember Gilmore was referring to the amount that would be needed for the end of the year. The Finance Director stated $79,000 would be needed at the end of the year. Mayor Johnson stated the goal for a balance budget needs to be implemented as soon as possible. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether a motion needs to be made to set the operating reserve fund. The Finance Director responded that an additional clause could be added to the existing resolution stating that an $80,000 operating reserve be expended from the unrestricted fund balance. Mayor Johnson inquired whether language could be added stating that the unrestricted fund balance is now restricted. The Finance Director responded said matter could be addressed as part of the budget. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether depreciation is part of the $79,000. The Finance Director responded depreciation is added into the expenditure and then taken out in order to get the net gain or loss without depreciation. Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether $80,000 is a conservative amount if fee increases are approved, to which the Finance Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Gilmore moved adoption of resolution with direction to add language: 1) referencing the Golf Commission and 2) setting a $79,157 operating reserve fund; and approval of direction to have directed restricted funds addressed when the budget is presented. Vice Mayor Tam seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (07- ) Resolution No. 14078, "Amending Master Fee Resolution No. 12191 by Changing Various Chuck Corica Golf Complex Rates." Adopted. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 20, 2007 8 The Interim Golf Manager gave a brief presentation. Bob Wood, Golf Commission Chair, gave a brief report. Councilmember Gilmore stated that the new fee schedule is in the middle of the pack; inquired how the golf course compares in terms of condition and age. Mr. Wood responded the golf course is an older course; stated the Earl Fry Course will celebrate its 80th anniversary in May; course conditions vary with seasons; drainage is a problem; recycled water is used, which results in salt buildup; traditionally fees have been low. Vice Mayor Tam stated the proposed weekend rates are $40/$36; inquired whether other golf courses have made significant improvements and how the higher fees are warranted. Mr. Wood responded Metropolitan Golf Course is completely rebuilt; stated Monarch Bay had a complete upgrade five or six years ago; Harding Park has been completely rebuilt; expensive improvements need to be recouped through fees. Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether the golf courses are City run. Mr. Wood responded Metropolitan Golf Course is owned by the City of Oakland; stated Monarch Bay is owned by the City of San Leandro; Harding Park is owned by the City of San Francisco. Vice Mayor Tam inquired whether the golf courses are operated by outside professionals, to which Mr. Wood responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Metropolitan and Monarch Bay are privately operated, but Harding Park is operated by the City of San Francisco. Mr. Wood responded he would be surprised if Harding Park was operated by the City of San Francisco. Mayor Johnson called the speakers. Jon Hasegawa, Alameda, stated he opposes any fee increase. Robb Ratto, Alameda, stated Friday rates should be weekday rates; encouraged marketing and maintenance. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 20, 2007 9 George Humphreys, Chuck Corica Senior Golf Club, stated setting a fee prior to the operational audit is premature. Neil Coe, Chuck Corica Senior Golf Club, stated there are not many players on Fridays. Mayor Johnson stated the Monday through Friday rate was changed to Monday through Thursday because the golf course was so crowded on Fridays; the situation does not exist now; inquired whether the Monday through Friday weekday rate should return. Jane Sullwold, Golf Commissioner, responded Friday play was busy when monthly passes were good on Fridays; stated additional revenue was not being generated. Mayor Johnson suggested having Monday through Friday rates with no passes allowed. Ms. Sullwold stated the proposal allows passes on the Jack Clark course on Fridays. Councilmember Gilmore stated that the fee schedule is confusing; the fee schedule could be changed twice in four to six months if fee changes are approved and the Consultant's Operational Efficiency Report suggests a rate change; suggests postponing the matter until the Consultant's report is reviewed and the Golf Commission can meld the recommendations and come up with a fee schedule. Mayor Johnson inquired whether a consultant reviewed the fee schedule recently. Mr. Wood responded a consultant reviewed the fee schedule last year. Mayor Johnson stated the current consultant would not be looking at an in -depth fee analysis but would review operation. Mr. Wood encouraged Council to review the previous [Consultant's] report; stated the public should not be confused; prime golfing months are coming up soon. Mayor Johnson stated a lot of changes are not being made; the biggest change is the non - resident monthly pass fee; she opposes a non - resident monthly pass; no other golf course gives a non- resident monthly pass; monthly pass abuse needs to stop; penalties should be imposed. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 20, 2007 10 councilmember deHaan inquired whether tournament play would be discouraged with increased fees; stated the non- resident monthly pass fee is a big jump; he agrees with the Monday through Friday fee; marketing is key; golfing is a good experience at a fair price in Alameda. Bill Schmitz, Golf Commissioner, stated the tournament fee includes a cart. Mayor Johnson stated a non - resident senior monthly pass could be considered. councilmember Matarrese stated he likes the idea of making Friday a weekday again; fee increases can be disassociated from the operational audit; inquired whether fees were part of the RFP. The Assistant City Manager responded the RFP was general and includesa review of all operational revenues. Councilmember Matarrese stated he is inclined to make some fee .adjustments now with the understanding that fee adjustments are precluded in the future. The City Manager stated that she would recommend that any future increases would not be taken lightly rather than precluded. Mr. Wood inquired whether the Monday through Friday weekday rate would be for everyone except monthly pass holders, to which Mayor Johnson responded in the affirmative. Mr. Wood stated the Golf Commission has scheduled a meeting tomorrow night at 6:30 p.m. in Room 361 to discuss policy changes; encouraged attendance. Mayor Johnson inquired whether fee policy changes would come back to Council. The City Manager responded some policies would come back to Council; stated the Golf Commission may have the authority to move forward with other policies. Mayor Johnson requested clarification on whether juniors would be allowed to play on the Earl Fry Course on Monday through Friday after 12:00 p.m. and on the Jack Clark Course at any time, to which Mr. Wood responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson inquired when juniors would be able to play on weekends. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 20, 2007 11 Mr. Wood responded after twilight on the Earl Fry Course and at all times on the Jack Clark Course. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the $1 fee would be maintained for juniors. Mr. Wood responded the $1 fee would be maintained for resident juniors. Councilmember Gilmore inquired whether Golf Commission policy discussions would include monthly pass abuse. The Interim Golf Manager responded monthly pass abuse would not be discussed tomorrow night because the matter was not included on the agenda; stated he would be reviewing the matter. Mayor Johnson stated identification should be required for monthly passes. Councilmember deHaan stated that everyone agrees that Friday rates should be the same as weekday rates; recommended that Friday tournament rates be dropped to the Monday through Thursday rate; he would like to have the non - resident monthly pass stay at $130 with a $3 surcharge. Ms. Sullwold stated non-residents would not be bearing any of the additional expense that residents would bear if the rate stays the same. Mayor Johnson stated a senior non - resident monthly pass should be considered; the senior resident monthly pass is reasonable. Ms. Sullwold stated most non - resident pass holders play ten rounds a month, which amounts to $19.50 per round. Mayor Johnson stated monthly passes provide a huge discount. Councilmember Matarrese suggested that the senior non - resident monthly pass fee be $130. Mayor Johnson suggested that the senior non - resident monthly pass fee be $160 with no surcharge. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Golf Commission was comfortable with making policy changes, to which Ms. Sullwold responded in the affirmative. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 20, 2007 12 Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolution with direction to: 1) make the Friday fee schedule the same as Monday' through Thursday instead of the weekend rate, with the exception of monthly pass holders; 2) add a $160 non - resident senior monthly pass fee with no surcharge; 3) make the tournament schedule Monday through Friday with clarification that carts are required and included in the fee. Councilmember Matarrese stated that he appreciates all the hard work done by staff and the Golf Commission. Councilmember deHaan stated some rates have been reduced; golfers will be coming back to play golf on Fridays. Councilmember Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (07- ) Bill Smith, Alameda, discussed electric vehicles. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (07- ) Councilmember deHaan stated tires are embedded along the shoreline of Mount Trashmore; requested that staff look into removing the tires. (07- ) Councilmember deHaan suggested inmplementing a summer work program to remove graffiti at bus shelters and utility boxes throughout the City. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the graffiti abatement program was still in place. The City Manager responded that the matter would be reviewed. (07- ) Councilmember deHaan requested a moment of silence in recognition of entering the fourth year of the Iraq War and in remembrance of service members who have lost their lives. (07- ) Councilmember Matarrese stated a Green Building Code presentation was made to the Planning Board; requested that staff accelerate implementing said code. (07 ) Councilmember Matarrese requested an update on the next phase of bus shelter installation. (07- ) Councilmember Matarrese stated an order was issued to Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 20, 2007 13 call up eight hundred California National Guard members based in Walnut Creek; he has the same concerns that he had a year ago regarding bringing the National Guard home; revisiting the issue is appropriate. ADJOURNMENT (07- ) There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 10:48 p.m. in a moment of silence with thoughts and prayers for those who have lost their lives or have been wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 20, 2007 14 March 29, 2007 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 1; 57843 - 158289 EFT 332 EFT 333 EFT 334 EFT 335 EFT 336 EFT 337 EFT 338 EFT 339 Void Checks: Amount $3,322,760.76 $12,943.50 $12,943.50 $33,007.87 $22,227.97 $84,540.83 $94,459.54 $4,600.00 $3,600,000.00 156786 ($236.24) 156842 ($404.75) 156873 156891 ($954.60) 156942 ($403.48) 157929 ($128.00) ($1,019.00) GRAND TOTAL Respectfully submitted, Council Warrants 04/03/07 $7,184,337.90 BILLS #4-B 4/3/2007 CITY OF ALAMEDA MEMORANDUM Date: April 3, 2007 To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers From: Debra Kurita City Manager Re: Adopt Plans and Specifications and Authorize Call for Bids for Godfrey Park Playfield Renovations, No. P.W. 03-07-06 BACKGROUND On November 1, 2005, the City Council approved funding to renovate and reconfigure the playing field at Godfrey Park. The field still uses the original irrigation system constructed in the 1950s, which is inefficient, leaks, provides inadequate coverage, and results in poor turf conditions. In addition, the topography of the field does not allow for adequate drainage. Due to these limitations, the field is unavailable for sporting events many times during the year. DISCUSSION The proposed project consists of installing a new irrigation system, planting new sod, and regrading the field to improve drainage. In addition, the project will reconfigure the baseball field to maximize its use and allow for a variety of sporting events, including baseball and either an international -size soccer field or several smaller soccer fields. A copy of the plans and specifications are on file in the City Clerk's office. BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT The project is budgeted under CI P# 00 --01, with funds available from the Capital Improvement Tax, the Dwelling Unit Tax, and the General Fund. MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE This action does not affect the Municipal Code. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this project is Categorically Exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(c), Existing Facilities. City Council Agenda Item #4 -C 04 -03 -07 Honorable Mayor and Councilmember RECOMMENDATION Page 2 April 3, 2007 Adopt plans and specifications and authorize call for bids for Godfrey Park Playfield Renovations, No. P.W. 03- 07 -06. Respec ly submitted, Matthew T. Naclerio Public Works Director Prepared by: o- NA*9_, Robert Claire Civil gineer MTN:RC:gc City of Alameda Memorandum Date: April 3, 2007 To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers From: Debra Kurita City Manager Re: Adopt Plans and Specifications and Authorize Cali for Bids for Replacement of Curb, Gutter, and Related Improvements to Address Street Ponding Citywide, No. P.W. 02 -0 7 -04 BACKGROUND The City's storm drainage system relies on the curb and gutter network to carry storm water flow from the streets to drainage structures such as culverts, catchbasins, and mains. Due to the City's flat topography, the grades for the curbs and gutters are similarly flat and prone to ponding as street trees mature and raise the curbs and gutters. The ponded water is inconvenient for residents and prematurely accelerates the deterioration of the asphalt pavement. DISCUSSION Consistent with the Comprehensive Sidewalk Repair Program accepted by Council on February 6, 2007, staff has developed a program to address priority ponding sites. This first phase will replace curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street pavement at locations that experience ponding for several days after rains have subsided or have ponding that extends into the travel way or sidewalk area. The project will also evaluate the trees causing the ponding concern in accordance with the Comprehensive Sidewalk Repair Program. The proposed project will repair approximately 1,300 feet of curb and gutter. Subsequent phases will address ponding sites at street culverts uplifted by tree roots and ponding in the parking lane. A copy of the plans and specifications are on file in the City Clerk's office. BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT The project is budgeted under CIP# 90-06, with funds available from the Urban Runoff Clean Water fund. MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE This action does not affect the Municipal Code. City Council Agenda Item #4-D 04 -03 -07 Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Page 2 April 3, 2007 In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this project is Categorically Exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(c), Existing Facilities. RECOMMENDATION Adopt plans and specifications and authorize call for bids for Replacement of Curb, Gutter, and Related Improvements to Address Street Ponding Citywide, No. P.W. 02-07-04. Respectfully submitted, Matthew T. Naclerio Public Works Director Prepared by: Cc� ekoy C.W. Chung Associate Civi Engineer MTN:CWC:gc CITY OF ALAMEDA MEMORANDUM Date: April 3, 2007 To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers From: Debra Kurita City Manager Re: Appropriate $55,000 in Measure B Funds and Award a Contract in the Amount of $231,000, Including Contingencies, to Republic Intelligent Transportation, Inc., for In- Pavement the Crosswalk Lights At Various Locations, No. P.W. 07 -04 -07 BACKGROUND On January 16, 2007, the City Council adopted plans and specifications and authorized call for bids for In- Pavement Crosswalk Lights at Various Locations, No. P.W. 07- 04 -07. The project consists of installing solar- operated, in- pavement lights at the following four unsignalized intersections: Park Street at Pacific Avenue, Park Street at Webb Avenue, Park Street mid -block between Santa Clara Avenue and Central Avenue, and Webster Street at Taylor Avenue. A new wheelchair ramp will also be constructed on Park Street at Pacific Avenue. The City received a state Hazard Elimination Safety Grant for the project. DISCUSSION To solicit the maximum number of bids and the most competitive price, specifications were provided to 13 separate building exchanges throughout the Bay Area. In addition, a notice of bid was published in the Alameda Journal. Bids were opened on February 14, 2007. Five contractors submitted bids. The list of bidders from lowest to highest for total J ro'ect cost is as follows: p Bidder Republic Intelligent Transportation, Inc. Columbia Electric, Inc. Vellutini Corporation DBA Royal Electric Rays Electric Tennyson Electric, Inc. Location Novato, CA San Leandro, CA Sacramento, CA Oakland, CA Livermore, CA Bid Amount $229,820.00 $243,533.00 $251 548.50 $293,413.00 $374,785.00 The plans and specifications included the purchase of spare in- pavement lights and controllers for provide a reserve supply for maintenance staff. The bid price for these parts was $20,000. Since the City can purchase these parts directly from the vendor at a more competitive price, staff recommends that this bid item be deleted. The contractor has agreed to this approach, and the contract price will be reduced by $20,000. Staff City Council Agenda Item #4 -E 04 -03 -07 Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers Page 2 April 3, 2007 recommends awarding a contract to Republic Intelligent Transportation, Inc., for a total amount of $231,000, including an approximate 10% contingency. A copy of the contract is on file in the City Clerk's Office. BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT The project is budgeted under CIP# 90 -35, with funding available from a Hazard Elimination Safety Grant Fund and Measure B. An additional $55,000 in Measure B funding is required to fully fund the project and funds are available. This additional amount will allow the contractor to install a higher quality solar in-pavement Tight that has been used successfully in the City. MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE This action does not affect the Municipal Code. RECOMMENDATION Appropriate $55,000 in Measure B funds and award the contract in the amount of $231,000, including contingencies, to Republic Electric Intelligent Transportation, Inc., for In-Pavement Crosswalk Lights at Various Locations, No. P.W. 07- 04 -07. Respectf IIy submitted, Matthew T. Naclerio Public Works Director Prepared by: Oat, ta-z4ftup Wall Waziri aineer Associate Civil MTN:WW:gc cc: Watchdog Committee CITY OF ALAMEDA MEMORANDUM Date: April 3, 2007 To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers From: Debra Kurita City Manager Re: Appropriate $8,200 in Measure B Funds and Award a Contract in the Amount of $82,400, Including Contingencies, to Republic Intelligent Transportation inc., for In- Pavement Crosswalk Lights at Eighth Street and Taylor Avenue, No. P.W. 05 -05 -04 BACKGROUND On May 23, 2005, the City received a $55,440 State Safe Routes to School grant to improve pedestrian access at Washington School by installing in- pavement crosswalk lights. This project will install: hard -wired in- pavement lights at the existing crosswalk at Eighth Street and Taylor Avenue; signage, including flashing pedestrian crosswalk signs to meet Manual Uniform Traffic Control Devices requirements; and truncated domes at the curb returns. DISCUSSION To solicit the maximum number of bids and the most competitive price, specifications were provided to 18 separate building exchanges throughout the Bay Area. In addition, a notice of bid was published in the Alameda Journal. Bids were opened on February 14, 2007. Five contractors submitted bids. The list of bidders from lowest to highest for total project cost is as follows: Bidder Republic Intelligent Transportation, Inc. Columbia Electric, Inc. Rays Electric, Inc. Tennyson Electric Vellutini Corporation DBA Royal Electric Location Novato, CA San Leandro, CA Oakland, CA Livermore, CA Sacramento, CA Bid Amount $74,880.00 $81,120.00 $85,392.00 $97,572.00 $118,080.00 Staff recommends awarding a contract to Republic Intelligent Transportation, Inc., for a total amount of $82,400, including a 10% contingency. A copy of the contract is on file in the City Clerk's office. City Council Agenda Item #4 -F 04 -03 -07 Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT Page 2 April 3, 2007 The project is budgeted under C I P# 90-41, with funds available from a Safe Routes to School grant and Measure B. An additional $8,200 in Measure B dollars is required to fully fund the project, and these funds are available. MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE This action does not affect the Municipal Code. RECOMMENDATION Appropriate $8,200 in Measure B funds and award a contract in the amount of $82,400, including contingencies, to Republic Intelligent Transportation, Inc., for In- Pavement Crosswalk Lights at Eighth Street and Taylor Avenue, No. P.W.05-05-04. Respectfully submitted, Matthew T. Naclerio Public Works Director Prepared by: ()ILL Lao IN/i Wall Waziri Associate Civil Engineer MTN:WW:gc cc: Watchdog Committee City of Alameda Memorandum Date: April 3, 2007 To: Honorable Mayor and Cou ncil members From: Debra Kurita City Manager Re: Appropriate $1 2,400 in Measure B Funds and Award a Contract in the Amount of $136,400, Including Contingencies, to Cal -West Lighting and Signal Maintenance Inc., for Installation of Countdown Pedestrian Signal Head and Audible Pedestrian Signal, No. P.W. 01 -07 -01 BACKGROUND On February 20, 2007, the City Council adopted plans and specifications and authorized call for bids for Installation of Countdown Pedestrian Signal Head and Audible Pedestrian Signal, No. P.W. 01- 07 -01. The project consists of installing new pedestrian signal heads with audible "chirping" features at 24 existing signalized intersections throughout the City. DISCUSSION To solicit the maximum number of bids and the most competitive price, specifications were provided to 18 separate building exchanges throughout the Bay Area. In addition, a notice of bid was published in the Alameda Journal. Bids were opened on March 26, 2007. Seven contractors submitted bids. The list of bidders from lowest to highest for total project cost is as follows: Bidder Cal -West Lighting and Signal Maintenance, Inc. Republic Intelligent Transportation, Inc. Richard A. Heaps Mike Brown Electric Company Electrical - Telecom Security Network Steiny and Company, Inc. Dan Electric Location San Jose, CA Novato, CA Sacramento, CA Cotati, CA Novato, CA Vallejo, CA Alameda, CA Bid Amount $132,050 $137,820 $160,150 $166,194 $166,585 $202,525 $250,000 Staff recommends awarding a contract to Cal -West Lighting and Signal Maintenance, Inc., for a total amount of $136,400, including contingencies. A copy of the contract is on file in the City Clerk's office. City Council Agenda Item #4 -G 04 -03 -07 Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT Page 2 April 3, 2007 The project is budgeted under CI P# 00-05, with funds available from Measure B. An additional $1 2,400 in Measure B dollars is required to fully fund the project, and sufficient funds are available. MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE This action does not affect the Municipal Code. RECOMMENDATION Appropriate $1 2,400 in Measure B funds and award a contract in the amount of $1 30,400, including contingencies, to Cal -West Lighting and Signal Maintenance Inc., for Installation of Countdown Pedestrian Signal Head and Audible Pedestrian Signal. No. P.W. 01- 07 -01. Respectfully submitted, s- Matthew T. Naclerio Public Works Director Prepared by: N Trung N uyen Assistant Engineer MTN:TN:gc cc: Watchdog Committee AGENDA ITEM #4 -H (Recommendation to award Vehicle Tow Contract to Ken Betts Towing) IS WITHDRAWN FROM THE AGENDA CITY OF ALAMEDA Memorandum TO: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Debra Kurita City Manager DATE: April 3, 2007 SUBJECT: Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the Destruction of Specified Unnecessary Records. BACKGROUND The Human Resources Department has decreasing usable office and storage space due to the steady accumulation of hard copy records. The proposed resolution would authorize the destruction of documents that are no longer needed by the Department. DISCUSSION State Gov't Code Sec. 34090 allows public entity records to be destroyed after various periods of time, depending on the type of record, as long as written approval from the City Attorney and authorization from the City Council is obtained. Human Resources seeks to discard records related to recruitment exam lists from the year 2000 through 2003. A list of the documents is attached to this report. BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS/ FINANCIAL IMPACT The cost for the destruction of records, which includes shredding and hauling, is approximately $559 and was included in the FY 2006/07 Human Resources Department budget. The documents should not be recycled in their present state due to the confidential nature of information that may be contained in them. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a Resolution authorizing destruction of the specified unneeded records. Attachment Respec ly Submitted, wren Willis Human Resources Director City Council Report Re: Agenda item #4 -I 04 -03 -07 1 1 1 1 1 . REQ, Rif I TM ENT EXAM LISTING BEFORE YEAR- X000 EXAM NO 0695 -0746 0768PT 0 778 0779 096 -01 096 -02 .096 -24 096 -26 096 -27 096 -28 096 -53PT 096 -70. 097 -04 • 097 -05 097 -06 097-1 097 -39 097-41 097 -42 097-43 - 097-61 097 -66 097 -67 097-68. 098 -01PR 098 -08 1 JOB CODE. 4-040 4070 4081 4065 1. EXAIVLINATION TITLE _I Police Officer- Lateral Police Technician I- Jailer Police Assistant Police Technician II- Dispatcher 4080 Police Technician III • 4040 Police Officer- Recruit 4040 Police Officer- Academy Graduate. • 4065 Pyrili _' Technician 11- :Dispat , .er 4040 Police Officer- Recruit • 4040 • Police Officer - Academy Graduate 4040 Police Officer- Lateral 4081 Police Assistant 4065 Police Technician II- Dispatcher 4040 Police Officer- Recruit 4040_ Police Officer-Academy - Graduate'- 4040 . - Police O fficer- Lateral 4065 Police Technician 11- Dispatcher 4081 Police Assistant 4040 Police Officer- Recruit 4040 Police Officer-Academy Gra duat e Police officer- Lateral Police Assistant Police Officer - Recruit Police Officer - Academy Graduate 4040 Police Officer - Lateral 4080 Police Technician 111- 4065 Police Technician IL- Dispatcher 4040 4081 4040 4040 Tuesday, January 23;, 2007 OPENED , 3/24/1993 10/15/1993 8/25/1994 7/11/1994 6/24/1994 1/1/1996 1/1/1996- 4/25/1996 5/20/1996 5/20/1996 5/20/ 1996 5/13/1996 12/12/1996 1/10/1997 '1/.10/1997 1/10/1997 3/28/1997 6/17/1997 6/26/1997 6/6/1997 1- CLOSED 4/17/1993 10/22/1 -993 9/2/1994 7/25/1994 7/8/1994 1/22/1996 1/22/1996 1 DATE PURGED 5/20/1996 • 6/17/1996 6/17/1996 6/17/1996 9/25/1996 1/7/1997 1/29/1997. 1/29/1997 I 1/29/1997. r. - 4/22/1997 L - 6/26/1997 7/22/1997 7/22/1997 • _ 6/26/1997 7/22/1997 .1.0/3/1997 2/3/1998 10/24/1997 11/17/1997 10/24/1997 11/17/1997 10/24/1967 11/17/1997. 1/15/1998 2/5/1998 1/29/1998 . - - - 2/20/1998 i City Council Attachment to Report Re: Agenda Item #4 -I 04 -03 -07 REXRUITMENT.EXAMLISTING BEFORE YEAR UUU DATE PURGED EXAM NO 98 _09 • -Police Assistant. • 98-4' S 4 5PT Golf Course Starter '9s -sl: Police Technician II- Dispatcher X98 ..69. 1470 -1465 Crime Analyst II /III )98-10 1410 • Police Communications Records Supervisor X98 71. 1410 Police Information. Systems • Coordinator Fart Time r 3530 . . Librarian ... Part- Time -.:- .Police TechnicianIl - 1 JOB CODE EXANEINATION TITLE 999 -07PT 099-08 099- 10PT 099 -29PT 099 -32• 099-33 099 -34PT 099-38 099 -39 099 -40 099 -4IPT • 099 -44 099 -46 099 -47PT 099 -48 099 -50 4081 5023 4065 Dispatcher 4081 Police Assistant 3521 Library Aide • Development Rev Mgr 7260 Distribution Engineer 5003 -5004 AV Technician 4040. Police Officer - Recruit 4040 Police Officer-Academy Gracluate . • - 4040 Police Officer- Lateral 7550 Ele ctri c Meter Reader 511.0 Recrestion..Program . Co ordulator- • CIasSes /P'. acilites 6020 Planner I • 1.501 Office . Clerk(Part -time) 1688 Risk Manager . OPENED 1660 Telecommunications Maintenan ce Technician 099 -51 3270 Permit Technician (Promotion) . 2062 Animal Shelter Assistant (Part -fie) 099 -52PT 099 -53 099 -54 2520 Maintenance Worker II - AHA. (Promotional) 3140 Construction. Manager Wednesday,. February 14, 2007 2/6/1998 7/30/1998 9/25/1998 CLOSED 4/9/1998 12/31/1999 10/23/1998 1/19/1999 2/22/1999 12/11/1998 1/25/1999 1/8/1999. 2/16/1999 1/23/1999 2/5/1999 3/4/1999 6/4/1999 6/18/1999 6/25/1999 6/25/1999 7/9/1999 7/9/1999 7/9/1999 7/2/1999 .7/30/1999 8/12/L999 8/20/1999 8/20/1999. 9/13/1999 6/8/2000 3/8 199ro. 7/2/1999 9/17/1999 9/24/1999 7/2/1999 1011/1999 8/3/1999. 7/20 /1999 7/8/1999 8/3/1999 8/3/1999 8/3/1999 7/27/1999 9/9/1999 9/1/ 1999 9/30/1999 9/8/1999 9/28/1999 "10/1/1999 10/13/1999 7/13/1999 10/28/1999 Page 2 of 3 _ RECRtJITMENT EXAM LISTING BEFOREirEAJ 2000 1 CLOSED I DATE PURGED l EXAM NO 099 -55 099 -56 099-57 099-59 099 -61 099 -62 099 -64 099 -66 099 -67PT 099 -68 099 -69PT JOB CODE EXAMINATION TITLE Telecommunications Engineer 3070 Construction Inspector 5260 Park Maintenance Worker- Pools 3120 Assistant Engineer 2555 Public Works Maintenance Foreperson • 1677/1680 Accountant II (Promotional) _2520.c Works:.Maintenance • Worker fl' (Promotional) 101.7 Deputy City Attorney II . 4081 -4082 'Police Assistant I/II • 6040 Assistant Facilities Manager 2052 Community Development. Assistant (Adm Asst) Wednesday, February 14, 2007 OPENED 10/8/1999 1/21/2000 10/15/1999 11/8/1999 10/20/1999 11/10/1999 10/28/1999 11/23/1999 11/3/1999 11/16/1999 11/3/1999 11/16/1999 11/12/1999 11/19/1999 11/23/1999 12/10/1999 12/30/1999 12/1/1999 12/3/1999 1/6/2000 12/20/1999 2/21/2000 • ^ -I... • Page 3 of 3 EXAM NO • 200 -01 200 -02 200-03 200 -04PT 200 -05PT 200-06 200-07 200 -08 200 -09PT 200 -10PT 200 =11 ii 200 -13 200 -14 200 -15 200 -17 200 -18 200-19 200 -20 200 -23 200 -25 200 -26PT 200 -27 RECRtTITMENT EXAM LISTING YEAR 2000 JOB CODE 1770 EXAMINATION TITLE Program Specialis I- Conmmunity Development 1715 Community Development Manager- Alameda Point 1410 Administrative Management Analyst 5023 Golf Course Starter 2061 Maintenance Assistant - Golf Cart/Range Crew 1408 Senior Management Analyst. -APIA . -> 3270 • Permit Technician 3175 Supervising Civil Engineer 2062 Anunal Shelter Assistant Part Time . 4061 Crossing Guard Relief Part- Time 1785 Development Specialist II- Economic Development 3120 3140 5110 1682 4040 4040 Assistant Engineer Associate Civil Engineer Recreation Program Coordinator -Teen Program Supervising_ Accountant Police Officer - Recruit Police Officer- Academy Graduate 4040 Police Officer - Lateral 1760 Reconstruction Specialist ecialist I P 1410 Administrative Management Analyst- Environmental Di . 3515 Library Technician Part- Time 7560 Customer Service Representative - AP & T- 200-29 6030 • Planner II (Promotional) 200-30 4070 Police .Technician I- Jailer Wednesday, February 14, 2007 OPENED 1 CLOSED DATE PURSED 1/14 /2000 2/7/2000 1/14/2000 1/14/2000 1/28/2000 1/26/2000 1/1/2000 12/31/2000 [ 1/1/2000 12/31/2000 1/24/2000. 1/27/2000 2/4/200 2/15/2000 2/15/2000 3/3/2000 2/25/2000 2/24/2600 3/7/2000 2/27/2001 3/17 /2000 3/17 /2000 3/17/200 3/23/2000 4/12/2000 .2/8/2000 2/17/2000 r 2/22/2000. 3/8/2000 12/31/2001 4/4/2000 6/28/2001 3/10/2000 6/27/2000 3/13/2001 4/10/2000 4/10/2000 0. 4/10/2000 5/2/2000 5/16/2000 4/20/2000 4/20/2000 5/11/2000 5/16/2000 5/4/2000 5/19/2000 5/ 11/2000 6/6/2000 Page 1 of 3 RECRUITMENT EXAM LASTING YEAR 2000 EXAM 110 200 -32 200 -33 200 -34PT 200 -35PT 200 -37 200 -38PT 200-39 200-40 200 -41 200 -43 200 -44 200 -45 200 -46 200-47 200 -48PT 200 -49PT 200 -50 200 -51 200 -52PT 200 -53 200-54 200 -55 200 -58 200 -58 200 -59 200 -60 JOB CODE 1785 1 EXAMINATION TITLE l Development Specialist II- Housing Dev 1408 Senior Management Analyst Human Resources 3530 Librarian - Part-Time 3521 OPENED 3/3/2000 CLOSED 1 4/4/2000 5/31/2000 6/26/2000 6/9/2000 12/31/2002- Lib r ary Aide Part -Time Year- 6/9/2000 6/30/2000 Round 6040 Planner III 6/23/2000 150 1 Office Clerk 6/29/2000 -r ., ' Assistant 6/29/2000 1550 Office As 4060 6/29/2000 3140 7/7/2000 1015 4065 'police Technician 111 Construction Manager - Associate Civil Engineer Assistant City-Attorney Police Technician II- Dispatcher . 1140 Recreation and Park - Director 4500 Firefighter /Paramedic - 5110 Recreation Program Coordinator- Seniors 4081 -4082 Police Assistant I /II 3521 Library Aide (Part -time) 1510 Clerk - Alameda Housing Authority Senior Account Clerk Law Clerk Part - Time 1620 2052 1650 Computer Services Technician 4040 • Police Officer- Recruit '4040 Police Officer - Academy Graduate 4040 Police Officer- Lateral 4030 Police Sergeant 5120 Recreation Supervisor - Youth Programs 3270 Permit Technician Wednesday, February 14, 2007 7/28/2000 8/3/2000 7/14/2000 7/14/2000 7/27/2000 DATE PURGED 7/13/2000 7/24/2000 7/14/2000 8 /8/2000 7/14/2000 8/3/2000 8/4/2000 8/31/2000 8/11/2000 8/30/2000 8/3/2000 9/20/2000 8/7/2000 8/11/2000 8/18/2000 8 /30/2000 9/8/2000 9/29/2000 9/19/2000. 9' / 19/2000 9/21/2000 9/22/2000 9/28/2000 9/1/2000 9/6/2000 9/8/2000 9/28/2000 10/6/2000 10/6/2000 10/6/2000 10/13/2000 10/23/2000 10/27/2000 Page 2of3 RECRUITMENT EXAM LISTYNG YEAR 2000 EXAM NO 200 -62P'r 200 -63 200 -64 20065 200 -66 200 -67 20068 200 -69 200 -70 200 -71 • 200-72 200 -77 200 -79 JOB CODE 2052 L EXAMINATION TITLE Community Outreach Liaison Part -Time 1780 Development Specialist I- Housing Development 1018/1017 Deputy City Attorney I/II 2077 Code Compliance Officer 3235 Plans Examiner 4040 Police Officer Academy Graduate 4040 Police Officer ,Lateral. 3140 Construction Manager 4020 Police Lieutenant 5103 Recreation Services Manager 1420 Management Analyst - Redev/Econ Dery 2510 Public Works Maintenance Worker I 1510 Clerk/Intermediate Typist Clerk ;Wednesday, February 14, 2007 1 OPENED 9/26/2000 9/28/2000 10/11/2000 10/13/2000 12/18/2000 10/25/2000 10/25/20.00 10/20 /2000 10/24 /2000 10/26 /2000 10/26/2000 12/7/2600 12/27/2000 CLOSED _ 10/24 /2000 12/14/2001 11/6/2000 1/16/2001 1/9/2001 1:/9/2001 3/1/2001 11/15 /2000 11/16 /2000 11/17/2000 12/27/2000 1/29/2001 DATE PURGED Page 3 of 3 RECI2UITMENT EXAM LISTING YEAR 2001 IEXA-M NO 201 -01PT 201 -02PT 201 -03 201 -05 201-09 201 -11 201-12 201 -13 201 - I4PR 201 -16 201 -18 201 -19 201 -20 201 -21 201 -23 201 -26PR 201 -27PR 201 -28PR 201.29PT 201 -30 201 -31 201 -34 201 -36 201 -38 201 -40 201-41 JOB CODE 5023 EXAMINATION TITLE Golf Course Starter 2061 Maintenance Assistant Golf Cart Range Crew 7560 Customer Service Repre sentative -AP &T 1620 Senior Account Clerk 7260 Distribution Engineer (Electrical) 2570 Traffic,Signal Maintenance Technician 4690 Supervisin g al Anim trol- ,Officer 4070 Police Technician- I- Jailer 1550 Office Assistant 7795 Meter Service Technician 4040 Police Officer- Recruit 4040 Police Officer - Academy Graduate 4040. Police- Officer- Lateral 4065 Police Technician II- • Dispatcher' 1408 Systems Coordinator (Admin Mgmt Analyst) 1460 Crime Analyst III 4060 Police Technician III 7610 Marketing Coordinator Administrative Clerk Part- Time 3140. Associate Civil Engineer 1540 Senior Typist Clerk 1410 Customer Service Supervisor Supervising Transportation Engineer 4040 Police Officer- Lateral 1677/1680 Accountant I /II 4010 Police Captain Wednesday, February 14, 2007 OPENED f CLOSED 1/2/2001 12/31/2001 1/2/2001 12/31/2001 1/4/2001 1/12/2001 1/24/2001 1/24/2001 1/29/2001 2/13/2001 2 /20 /2001 2/13/2001 DATE PURGED Zr2%2o0f`- 2/26/2001 1 1/31/2001 2/8/2001 2 /22 /2001 3/9/2001 3/9/2001 3/9/2001 3/16/200 2/23/2001 2/26/2001' 3/2/2001 3/30/2001 3/30/2001. 3/30/2001 1- 5/4 /20o 1 3/15 /2001 3/21/2001 3/22/2001 3/22/2001 4/19/2001 5/4/2001 3/21/2001 4/27/2001 5/4/2001 5/8/2001 5/10/2001 5/15/2001 3/30/2001 4/2/2001 4/2/2001 4/2/2001 5/22/2001 .7/26/2001 4/16/2001 5/18/2001 - 7/26/2001 8/2/2001 6/22/2001 6/8/2001 Page 1 of 2 L CLOSED •1 RECRUITMENT EXAM LIST'ING YEAR 2001 EDAM NO 201 -42 201 -43 201 -46 201 -48 201 -52 201 -54 201 -55IP 201 -5 201 -60 201 -61 201 -64 201-65 201 -66 201 -67 201 -70 201 -71 201 -72 201 -73 201 -74 20.1 --75 201 -78 201 -79PT 201 -84 201 -85 JOB CODE' 6040 7260 EXANIINATION TITLE Planner III • Distribution Engineer - Electrical 1510 Clerk (AKA) and Intermediate Typist Clerk 7615 Marketing Specialist 5260 Park Maintenance Worker 1713 • Development Manager 1540 Senior Typist Clerk 4095 An naal • ,Control :Officer, • 1410/ 1408 Senior /Administrative . Management Analyst -'HR 1770 -1775 Program Specialist VII- Transportation Programs 1430 Administrative Services Co ordinator- Planning 4040 Police Officer - Recruit . 4040 Police Officer- Academy Graduate 4040 3075 H671 6020 1695 4040 Police Officer- Lateral Senior Construction Inspector • • Maintenance Worker I - AAA. Planner .I Financial Services & Budget Manager Police Officer- Lateral l OPENED I 5/18/F001' 5/31/200 1 5/21/2001 6/14/2001 6/8/2001 6/20/2001 6/27/2001 7/11 /2001 7/13/2001 7/2612±001 7/26/2001 8/3/2001 7/13/2001. 8/9/2001 7/18/2001 9/14/2001 8/17/2001 8/20/2001 8/24/2001 - 12/17/2001 8/10/2001 8/31/2001 8/17/2001 9/7/2001 8/17/2001 ' 9/7/2001 8/17/2001 ' 9/5/2001 4040 Police Officer - Academy Graduate 3540 Senior Librarian 2062 1465 7130 Wednesday, February 14, 2007 Animal Shelter Assistant Year -Round Part-Time Administrative Technician II Stock Clerk (Alameda da Power 11/9/2001 12/5/2001 & Telecom) 9/6/2001 10/19/2001 10/19/2001 DATE PURGED 9/7/2001 9/20/2001 r 9/25/2001 11/13/2001 11/13/2001 11/1/2001 4/26/2002 11/1/2001 10/26/2001 11/20/2001 10/31/2001 11/9/2001 11/27/2001 Page 2 of 2 EXAM NO 202-61 202 -02 202 -03 RECRUIT1YdENT EXAM LISTING YEAR 2002 JOB CODE 7054 1590 EXAMINATION TITLE Utility Services Manager Deputy City Clerk 5110 Recreation Program Coordinator (Teen Programs) 202 -04PT' 2061 Maintenance Assistant -Golf 'Cart/Range Crew 5023 Recreation Leader 1I 1030 Assistant Utility Analyst 1510 Intermediate Typist Clerk 4051 Crossing Guard ;F 3521 Library Aide 7550 Meter Reader - Collector 3235 Plans Examiner 4040 Police Officer- Recruit 2052 Law Clerk Part -Time 4070 Police Technician I- Jailer 1770 -1775 - Program Specialist I/II- Clean, Water Program 4040 - Police Officer-Academy Graduate . 4040 Police Officer- Lateral 7775 Journey Lineworker 4511 Literacy Project Supervisor - Part -Time 7560 Customer Service Representative 7711 Electrical Equipment Superintendent 7710 • Environmental, Health & Safety Coordinator 7704 Assistant Line Superintendent 1540 'Senior Typist Clerk 7785 Apprentice Lineworker 2053 Child Services Coordinator W20 Senior Account Clerk - Promotional 202- -05PT 202 -06 202 -07 2CPwA9PT 202 -10PT 202 -11 202 -14 202-15 202 -16PT 202 -17 202 -18 202 -19 - 202 -20 202 -21 202 -22PT 202 -23 202 -24 202 -25 202 -26 202 -27 202 -28 202 -29PT 202 -30PR Wednesday, February 14, 2007 OPENED 1/2/2002 1/2/2002 1/2/2002 1/1/2002 CLOSED l 1/30/2002 1/31/2002 1/28/2002 12/31/2002 1/2/2002 12/31/2002 2/15/2002 3/15/2002 1/18,2002 2i8/2002 L- DATE PURGED :1/1/2002 F,:.4: 2y31/2002 2/5/2002 2/11/2002 2/26/2002 3/11/2002 3/7/2002 3/12/2002 3/20/2002 3/11/2002 3/11./2002 5/6/2002 3/26/2002 4/11/2003 5/6/2002 5/6/2002 5/6/2002 • 4/22/2002 5/6/2002 4/26/2002 5/13/2002 2/28/2002 2/26/2002 3/29/2002 4/26/2002 3/21/2002 4/18/2002 4/30/2002 4/26/2002 4/26/2002' 12/31/2002 5/2/2002_ 4/25/2003 5/24/2002 5/24/2002 5/24/2002 5/17/2002 5/24/2002 5/24/2002 Page 1 of 4 EXAM NO. I f f RECRUITMENT EXAM LiSTINGYEAR 2002 202 -31PT 202 -32 202 -33PR 202 -34 202 -35 202 -36 202 -37 202 -39PT 202 -40 262 -41PR 202 -42 202 -46 202 -47PT 202 -48 202 -49 202 -50 202-51 • 202 -52 202 -53 202 -54PT • 20 2 -5 5 JOB CODE 3515 EBAlVII11TATION. TITLF Library Technician Part - Time 4500 Firefighter /Paramedic 1550 Office Assistant - Promotional H671 Maintenance Worker I - AHA 6670 - Housing Manager 1650 • Computer Services Technician 1720 Cvmmuntty ''Development • Program' aila -Promo. 3521 -3522 Library Aide I -II 6040 Planner III • 10.15 Assistant City Attorney - Promo 3550 Supervising Librarian 7797 Electrical Helper 2052 -2053. Housing Development Project Assistant Assoc Engr (Project Mgr) 3175 Supervising Civil Engineer ?801 Cable Technicians I 7802 Cable Technician II 7803 Cable Technician III CATLT- Head -End Technician 4081 -4082 Police Assistant I -II OPENED 202 -55PR 2555 4034 • 202 -56 202.56PR . 4030 202-57 ' 1775 1546 1550 202 -58 202 -59 Wednesday, February 14, 2007 Public Works Foreperson Plumbing CLOSED. 5/13/2002 , 5/10/2002 6/7/2002 5/13/2002 5/31/2002 5/31/2002 5/31/2002 5/24/2002 6/28/2002 6/28/2002 6/21/2002 6/10/2002 6/21/2002 Public Works Maintenance Foreperson Police Sergeant (Promotional) Police Sergeant Program Specialist II- Recycle -Waste Engineering Office Assistant Office Assistant 6/4/2002, 7/15/2002 6/10/2002 6/10/2002 7/29/2002 6/27/2002 9/27/2002 8/6/2002 8/12/2002 8/12/2002 8/5/2002 8/5/2002 7/24/2002 7/26/2002 12/30/2002 8/22/2002 6/21/2002 �. 1 DATE PURGED 9/3/2002 8/9/2002 8,5/2002. f 8/30/2002 8/30/2002 8/23/2002 8/23/2002 9/9/2002 8/9/2002 7/26/2002 8/16/2002 7/30/2002 8/16/2002 7/30/2002 8/16/2002 8/1/2002 8/16/2002 8/12/2002 8/23/2002 8/26/2002 9/9/2002 Page 2 of 4 RECRUITMETdT EXAM LISTING YEAR 2(102 r EXAM NO 202 -61 202 -62 - 202 -63 202 -•64PT 202 -65 202 -66 202 -67 202 -67PR 202 -68. 202 -69 202 -70 .: 202 -71 202 -73 202 -74 202-75 202 -75PR 202 -76 202 -76PR 202 -78 202 -79 202 --80PT 202 -81 202 -82 202 -83 JOB CODE 7130 EXAMINATION TITLE Stock Clerk 7560 Customer Service Representative 1770 Program Specialist (- Alternate Modes Law Clerk (Admin Asst II) 4065 Police Technician II- Dispatcher 6642 Housing Specialist II 1610 :. Account Clerk 1610 Account Clerk 1410. AMA - Environmental Programs 3245 Combined Building Inspector 5120 Recreation Supervisor (Youth /Cultural Arts Program 3140 Associate Civil Engineer 3080 Construction Inspection and Survey Supv 2510 Public Works Maintenance Worker I -- Maintenance Worker II (Promo) 2520 Public Works. Maintenance Worker II Senior Management Analyst (Promo) . 1408 Senior Management Analyst 7745 Line Working Supervisor 3140 Construction Manager 2063 Animal Shelter Assistant 1408 Cable Analyst 4070 Police Technician I- Jailer 7800 CATV Technical Operations Superintendent - APT Wednesday, February 14, 2007 OPENED 8/19/200 10/7/200 CLOSED 2 8/30./2002 2 10/18/2002 8/19/2002 8/14/200 8/19/200 1/28/2003 2 10/31/2002 2 9/16/2002 9/8/2002 ..9:/1612002 9/13/2002. 9/13/2002 9/22/2002 9/24/2002 9/29/2002 10/7/2002 10/11/2002- 10/28/200 10/2/2002 9/23/2002 9/23/2002 10/21/2002 10/25/2002 6/24/2003 5/19/2003 10/29/2002 2 11/5/2002 10/28/2002 10/28/2002 10/25/2002 11/7/2002 11/8/2002 11/13/2002 11/25/2002 11/22/2002 11/25/2002 11/5/2002 11/4/2002 11/4/2002 11/13/2002 6/24/2003 12/26/2002 12/9/2002 12/18/2002 12/3/2002 DATE PURGED. Page 3 of 4 FLECRUITMENT EXAM LISTING YEAR 2002 DATE PURGED 1 EXAM NO 202-84 202 -85 202-86 202 -87- 202-88 1_ JOB CODE 1 7805 7810 3070 6641 7815 EXAMINATION TITLE Data Technician APT Senior Data Technician - APT Construction Inspector Housing Specialist I - AHA Telecommunication Operations Working Supervisor - • 'Wednesday, February 14, 2007 OPENED I 1 CLOSED 12/15/2002 1/10/2003 12/10/2002 12/24/2002 11/24/2002 11/26/2002 12/16/2002 12/31/2002 12/18/2002 1/10/2003 Page4of4 EXAM. NO 203 -01PT 203 -02PT 203-03PT 203-04PT 203-05 203 -06 RECRITITMENT EXAM LIS'TFPiTG YEAR 2003 JOB CODE 4061 3530 5023 2061 3150 1500 EXAMINATION .TITLE Crossing Guard Relief Librarian - Part -Time Recreation Leader II Maintenance Assistant -Golf - Senior Engineer Telephone Operator - Receptionist 203 -07 PR 1520 Senior Account Clerk • 203 -07PR Senior Account Clerk (Promotional) 203 -08 7620 Marketing Assistant 203 -O9PR 7312 Information Systems Operation Technician 203 -1 OPR - 7315. Information Systems Application Specialist 203 --11, 1713 Development Manager -- - P Housing • 4040 Police Officer- Lateral 7775 Journey Lineworker 5003 Studio 31, Technician 1510 Intermediate Clerk 4040 Police Officer- Academy Graduate 2062 Animal Shelter Assistant 3235 - Plans Examiner 3515 Library Technician Part-. Time 203 -12 203 -13 203=14PT• 203 -15 203 -16 203 -17PT 203 -18 203 -19PT 203 -20 203 -20PR 203 -21PR 1540 Senior Clerk 1540 Senior Clerk (Promotional) 7799 Utility Construction Foreperson (Promotional) 203 -22 1625 Accountin g Technician 203 -22PR 1625 Accounting Technician 203 -23 7560 Customer Service Representative 203 -24PR 3215 Supervising Buildin g Inspector • Wednesday, February 14, 2007 OPENED 1/1/2003 1/1/2003 1/1/2003 1/1/2003 1/7/2003 1/13/2003 1/13/200 1/13/2Q0 CLOSED 12/31/2003. 1/13/2003 12/31/2003 12/31 /2002 3/11/2004 1/23/2003 DATE PURGED 3 1/20/2003 I• 3 _1/20/2003 2/5/2003 5/9/2003 3/21/200 1/31/200 2/19/2003 5/30/2003 3 4/4/2003 3 2/28/2003 10/24/2003 3/7/2003 2/24/2003 2/14/2003 2/21/2003 2/28/2003 3/7/2003 3/14/2003 4/7/2003 3/21/2003 3/21/2003 4/20/2003 4/4/2003 - 4/11/2003 5/2/2003 11/7/2003 12/31/2003 5/1/2003 3/3/2003 11/7/2003 3/20/2003 9/4/2003. 3/31/2003 4/25/2003 4/4/2003 4/4/2003 5/5/2003 4/11/2003 4/25/2003 5/9/2003 Page 1 of 3 RECRUITMENT EXAM LISTiNG YEAR 2003 EXAM NO 203 -25PR 203 -26PT 203 -27 203 -29PR 203 -3.0 203 -31PT 203 -32 - '2203 -33 203 -34 203 -35PR 203 -36 203 -37 203 -38 203 -39PR 203 -40 203 -41 203 -42 203 -43 203 -44PT 203 -45 203 -47 20 3 -48P'F 203 -49PT 203 -50 203 -51 203 -52 203 -53PR i JOB CODE 7750 r;XANIINATION TITLE Electrical Maintenance . Working Supervisor - APT 3521 -22 Library Aide I -II 7804 Cable Head -End Technician 4020 Police Lieutenant 2020 Laborer 2062 Animal Shelter Assistant 4065 Police Technician II - Public Safety Dispatcher 2077 Code Compliance Officer L` 1410/140 6650 1540 1770 7260 4505 5120 1770 =177 8 Senior Management Analyst /HR Analyst Housing Authority Manager Senior Clerk Program Spec I -Solid Waste /Recycle Distribution Engineer Fire Apparatus Operator Recreation Supervisor • (Youth /Cultural Arts Program 5 Program Spec I /II - Clean Water Program. . 1550 Office Assistant 6020 Planner I . - 2062 Animal Shelter Assistant 7770: Electrical Maintenance Technician 2603 Public Works Superintendent 2052 Part -Time Law Clerk 4081 Police Assistant I /Part -Time 2370 Senior Fleet Mechanic 4040 Police Officer (Academy Grad) 4057 Police Officer- Recruit 2560 PW Maintenance Foreperson (Concrete) OPENED CLOSED 5/15/2003 5/30/2003 5./8/2003 6/23/2003 5/23/2003 7/2/2003 5/27/2003 6/16/2003 ,641'0964e, 6/16/2003 Wednesday, February 14, 2007 7/15/2003 7/25/2003 8/5/2003 8/4/2003 8/1/2003 8/22/2003 8/5/2003 8/14/2003 7/8/2003 6/20/2003 7/9/2003 6/27/2003 7/1/2003- 8/14/2003 6/27/2003 DATE PURGED 7/21/2003 8/15/2003 2/11/2003 9/4/2003 8/18/2003 10/22/2003 10/8/2003 8/14/2003 8/28/2003 8/15/2003 .9/16/2003 8/19/2003 9/22/2003 9/8/2003 9/16/2003 9/11/2003 10/3/2003 10/24/2003 2/21/2003 10/24/2003 10/31/2003 9/30/2003 10/24/2003 10/14/2003 11/25/2003,, 11/5/2003 11/7/2003 11/7/2003 11/14/2003 Page 2 of 3 l JOB CODE RECRUITMENT EXAM EXAM NO 263 -54PT 203 -55PR 203-56 203 -57PR 203 -58' 203 -59 203-61 203 .. &32PR r• 3521 -22 4010 1408 7798 iISTING YEAR 2003 EXAMINATION TITLE Library Aide I -II Police Captain Media Director (SMA) Telecom Operations Supervisor 4610 Emergency Medical Services Education Coord Account Clerk 1610 1055 1460 Wednesday, February 14, 2007 Alameda Point Project Manager - - Administrative Technician III OPENED 11/4/2003 11/10/2003 11/21/2003 12/17/2003 12/1/2003 11/25/2003 12/3/2003 12/12/2003 1 CLOSED 11/25/2003 11/24/2003 12/9/2003 12/24/2003 12/18/2003 12/10/2003 2/26/2004 12 /18 /2003 DATE PURGED . Page 3 of 3 - CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. AUTHORIZING THE DESTRUCTION OF SPECIFIED UNNECESSARY RECORDS OF THE HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT WHEREAS, state law permits a public entity to discard specified city records after passage of time on written authority of the City Attorne y and approval of Council; and WHEREAS, the Human Resources Department seeks to free up space by discarding specified unnecessary records older than three y ears as described in Attachment 1; and WHEREAS, written approval for the destruction of the records has been provided by the City Attorney. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Human Resources Department is hereby authorized to destroy the specified records. Resolution #4 -1 CC 04 -03 -07 12ECRUITIVIENT EXAM LISTING BEFCE YEAR 2000 EXAM NO .0695 0746 0768PT 0778 0779 096 -01 096 -02 096 -24 096 -26 096 -27 JOB CODE EXAMINATION TITLE 4040 Police Officer-Lateral 4070 . Police Technician I-- Jailer 4081 Police Assistant 4065 Police Technician II- Dispatcher 4080 Police Technician III 4040 Police Officer- Recruit 4040 • Police Officer- Academy Graduate. 4065 Police Technician II- Dispatcher 4040 Police Officer- Recruit 4040 Police Officer- Academy Graduate 096 -28 4040 Police Officer - Lateral 036 -53PT • - 4081 Police Assistant 096 -70 4065 Police Technician II- Dispatcher 097 -04 097.05 097 -06 097 -18 . 097.39 097 -41 097-42 097 -43 - 097.61 097 -66 -097 -67 097 -68 098 -01PR 098 -08 4040 Police Officer- Recruit 4040 Police Officer- Academy Graduate . 4040 . Police Officer- Lateral 4065 Police 'Technician II- Dispatcher 4081 Police Assistant 4040 Police Officer- Recruit 4040 Police Officer- Academy Graduate 4040 Police Officer- Lateral 408 1 Police Assistant 4040 Police Officer - Recruit 4040 Police Officer- Academy Graduate 4040 Police Officer - Lateral 4080 Police Technician III 4065 Police Technician I1- Dispatcher Tuesday, January 23,-. 2007 OPENED 3/24/ 1993 10/15/1993 8/25[1994 7/11/1994 6/24 /1994 1/1/1996 1/1/1996- - CLOSED 4/17/1993. 10/22/.1993 9/2/1994 7/25/1994 - 7/8/1994 1/22/1996 1/22/1996 4/25/1996 '5/20/1996 5/20/1996 5/20/1996 5./20/1996. 5/13/1996 12/12/1996 1/10/1997 -1/10/1997 1/10/1997' 3/28/1,997- 6/17/1996 6/17/1996 6/17/1996 9/25/1996 1/7/1997, 1/29/1997. 1/29/1697' 1/?9/1997 4/22/1997 6/17/1997 6/26/1997 6/26/1997 7/22/1997 6/26/1997 7/22/1997 6/26/1997 10/3/1997 10/24/190. 10/24/1997 7/22/1997 2/3/1998 11/17/1997 11/17/1997 10/24/1997 11/17/1997. 1/15/1998 2/5/1998 1/29/1998 2/20/108 DATE PURGED ■ . Page 1 of '3 RECRUITIVLENT EI XM LYSTING BEFORr YEAR 2000• EXAM NO 098 -09 098 -45PT 098 -61, 098 -69. • 098-70 098-71 099 -97PT 099 -08 099 -10PT 099 -29PT 099-32 099 -33 099 -34PT 099 -38 099 -39 699 -40 099 -41PT 099 -44 099 -46 • 099 -47PT 099-48 099 -50 099 -51 099 -52PT 099 -53 099-54 JOB CODE EXAMINATION TITLE 4081 Police Assistant 5023 -Golf Course Starter 4065 Police Technician 11-- Dispatcher 1470-1465 Crime Analyst II /111 1410 Police Communications Records Supervisor 1410 Police Information Systems Coordinator 3530 = • Librarian = Part-Time 4065- Police Technician II- Dispatcher Police Assistant 4081 3521 7260 Library Aide Development Rev Mgr Distribution Engineer 5003 -5004 AV Technician - 4040 Police Officer-Recruit 4040 Police Officer - Academy - Graduate 4040 Police Officer- Lateral 7550 Electric Meter Reader 5110 Recreation.Prograun Coordinator- - Classes /Facilites 6020 Planner I 1501 Offii,ce Clerk(Part -time) 1683 Risk Manager 1660 Telecommunications Maintenance Technician 3270 Permit Technician (Promotional) 2062 Animal Shelter Assistant (Part - time) • 2520 Maintenance Worker H - AHA (Promotional) 3140 Construction Manager OPENED 2/6/1998 7/30/1998 9/25/1998 1/19/1999 12/11/1998 1/8/1999 1/23/1999 2/5/1999. 3/4/1999 6/4/1999 6/18/1999 6/25 /1999 6/25/1999 7/9/1999 7/9/1999 7/9/1999 7/2/1999 . 7/30/1.999 .. 8/12/1999 8/20/i999 8/20/1999 9/13/1999 CLOSED. 4/9/1998 12/31/1999 10/23/1998 9/17/1999 ' 9/24/1999 7/2/1999 10/1/1999 2/22/1999 1/25/1999 2/16/1999 6/8/2000 . 3/5/1999 7/2/1999 8/3/1999. 7/20/1999 . 7/8/1999 8/3/1999 8/3/1999 8/3/1999 7/27/1999 9/9/1999. 9/1/1999 9/30/1999 9/8/1999 9/28/1999 10/1/1999 10/13/1999 7/13/1999 . 10/28/199 DATE PURGED Wednesday, February 14, 2007 Page 2 of 3 __ RECRUITMENT EXAM LISTING BEFA� YEAR 2000 EXAM NO 099.55 099 -56 099-57 099 -59 099 -61 099-62 099 -64 099-66 099-67PT 099-68 099 -69PT JOB ,CODE EXAIVIINATION TITLE Telecommunications Engineer 3070 Construction Inspector 5260 Park Maintenance Worker - Pools 3120 Assistant Engineer 2555 Public Works Maintenance Foreperson 1677/ 1680 Accountant II (Promotional) 2520 - Public Works . Maintenance Worker II (Promotional) 10.17 Deputy City Attorney II 4081 -4082 Police Assistant I /II 6040 - Assistant Facilities Manager 2052 Community Development Assistant (Adm Asst) OPENED 10/8/1999 10/15/1999 10/20/1999 10/28/1999 11/3/1999 11/3/1999 11/12/1999 11/19/1999 11/23/1999 12/10/1999 12/30/1999 CLOSED 1/21/2000 11/8/1999 11/10/1999 11/23/199.9 11/16/1999 11/16/1999 12/1/1999 12/3/1999 1/6/2000 12/20/1999 2/21/2000 DATE PURGED Wednesday, February 14, 2007 Page 3 of 3 RECRUITNZNT EXAM LISTING a EAR 2000 EXAM NO 200 -01 200 -02 200 -03 200 -04PT 200 -05PT JOB CODE 1770 EXAMINATION TITLE Program Specially I- Commu nity Development 1715 Community Development Manager - Alameda Point 1410 Administrative Management Analyst • 5023 Golf Course Starter 2061 Maintenance Assistant - Golf Cart /Range Crew 200 -06 1408 Senior Management Analyst - .AHA 3270 Permit Technician 3175 Supervising Civil Engineer 2062 Animal Shelter Assistant Part Time 200 -10PT 4061 Crossing Guard Relief Part- 200 -07 200-08 200-09PT 200;-11 200 -13 200 -14 200 -15 200 -17 200-18 200 -19 200 -20 200 -23 200 -25 200 -26PT 200 -27 200-29 200 -30 Time 1785 Development Specialist II- Economic Development 3120 Assistant Engineer 3140 Associate Civil Engineer 5110 Recreation Program Coordinator -Teen Program 1682 Supervising- Accountant 4040 Police Officer- Recruit 4040 Police Officer - Academy Graduate 4040 Police Officer - Lateral 1760 Reconstruction Specialist I 1410 Administrative Management Analyst - Environmental Di 3515 Library Technician Part- Time 7560 Customer Service Representative - AP & T 6030 • Planner II (Promotional) 4070 Police Technician I- Jailer Wednesday, February 14, 2007 OPENED 1/14/200 1/14/200 1/14/2000 1/1/2000 1/1/2000 V24/2000 CLOSED 0: 2/7/2000 0 1/28/2000 1/26/2000' 12/31/2000 12/31/2000 . .2/8/2000 1/27/2000 2/4/2060 2/15/2000 2/15/2000 3/3/2000 2/25/2000 2/24/2000 3/7/2000 2/27/2001 3/17/2000 3/17/2000 3/17/2000- 3/23/2000 4/12/2000 2/17/2000 2/22/2000 3/8/2000 12/31/2001 4/4/2000 6/28 /2001 3/10/2000 6/27 /2000 3/13/2001 4/10/2000 4/10/2000 4/10/2000 5/2/2000 5/16/2000 4/20/2000 5 4/20/2000 5 5/4/2000 .5 5/11/2000 /11 /2000 /16/2000 /19/2000 6/6 /2000 DATE PURGED Page 1of3 RECRUITMr:NT EXAM LISTING YAR 2000 EXAM NO 200-32 200 -33 200 -34PT 200 -35PT 200 -37 200 -38PT 200 -39 200 -40 200 -41 JOB CODE 1785 EXAMNATION TITLE Development Specialist II- Housing Dev 1408 Senior Management Analyst - Human Resources 3530 Librarian - Part -Time 3521 Library Aide Part-Time Tear - Round Planner III Office Clerk Office •Assistant 6040 1501 1550 4060 3140 Police Technician III Construction Manager - Associate Civil Enginee r 200-43 1015 Assistant City Attorney 200 -44 4065 Police Technician II- Dispatcher 200 -45 1140 Recreation and Park Director 200 -46 4500 Firefighter/Paramedic 200.47 ^ 5110 Recreation Program Coordinator- Seniors 200 -48PT 4081 -4082 Police Assistant I /II 200-49PT 3521 Library Aide (Part- time) 200 -50 1510 Clerk - Alameda Housing Authority 200 -51 200 -52PT 200 -53 200 -54 200 -55 200 -56 200-58 200 -59 200 -60 1620 - Senior Account. Clerk 2052 Law Clerk Part -Time 1650 Computer Services Technician • 4040 Police Officer -- Recruit 4040 Police Officer-Academy Graduate 4040 Police officer- Lateral 4030 - Police Sergeant 5120 Recreation Supervisor - Youth Programs 3270 Permit Technician Wednesday, February 14, 2007 OPENED 3/3/2000 5/31/200 6/9/200 6/9/200 CLOSED 4/4/2000 0 6/26/2000 0 . ' 12/3.1/2002. O 6/30/2000 6/23/2000 6/29/2000 6/29/2000 6/29/2000 7/7/2000 7/13/200 7/14/200 7/28/2000 8/3/2000 7/14/2000 7/14/2000 7/27/2000 O - 7/24/2000 O 8/8/2000 7/14/2000 8/4/2000 8/11/200 8/3/2000 8/31/2000 O 8/30/2000 8/3/2000 8/7/2000 8/11/2000 8/18/2000 8/30/2000 9/8/2000 9/29/2000 9/19/2000 9/19/2000 9/21/2000 9/22/2000 9/20/2000 9/1/2000 9/6/2000 9/8/2000 9/28/2000 10/6/2000 10/6/2000 10/6/2000 10/13/2000 10/23/2000 9/28/2000 10/27/2000 DATE PURGED Page 2 of 3 JOB CODE RECRUITMENT EXAM LISTING TEAR 2000 EXAM NO 200-62PT 200-63 200-64 200 -65 200 -66 200-67 200-68 200 -69 200 -70 200-71 200 -72 200-77 200 -79 2052 EXAMINATION TITLE Community Outreach Liaison Part -Time 1780 Development Specialist I- Housing Development 1018/1017 Deputy City Attorney I /II 2077 Code Compliance Officer 3235 Plans Examiner 4040 Police Officer - Academy Graduate 4040 Police Officer-Lateral 3140 Construction Manager 4020 Police Lieutenant 5103 Recreation Services Manager 1420 Management Analyst - Redev/Econ Dev 2510 Public Works Maintenance Worker I 1510 Clerk /Intermediate Typist Clerk OPENED 9/26/2000 9/28/2000 10/11 /200 CLOSED 10/24/2000 0 12/14/2001 10/13/2000 12/18 /2000 10/25/2000 10/25/2000 10/20 /2000 10/24 /2000 10/26/2000 10/26/2000 12/7/2000 12/27/2000 11/6/2000 1/16/2001 1/9/2001 1/9/2001 3/1/2001 11/15 /2000 11/16/2000 11/17 /2000 12/27/2000 1/29/2001 DATE PURGED . Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - Page 3 of 3 RECRUITb,.ENT EXAM LISTING TEAR 2001 `EXAM NO 201 -01PT 201 -02PT 201 -03 201-05 201 -09 201 -11 201 -12 201 -13 201 -14PR 201 -16 201 -18 201-19 201 -20 201 -21 201 -23 20 I -26PR 201 -27PR 201 -28PR 201 -29PT 201 -30 201-31 201 -34 201.36 201 -38 201 -40 201 -41 JOB CODE 5023 EXAMINATION TITLE Golf Course Starter 2061 Maintenance Assistant Golf Cart Range Crew 7560 Customer Service Representative -AP &T 1620 Senior Account Clerk 7260 Distribution Engineer (Electrical) 2570 'Traffic Signal Maintenance Technician 4090 Supervising Animal Control Officer 4070 1550 7795 4040 4040 Police Technician I- Jailer Office Assistant Meter Service Technician Police Officer- Recruit Police Officer- Academy Graduate 4040 Police Officer- Lateral 4065 Police Technician II- Dispatcher 1408 Systems Coordinator (Admire Mgmt Analyst) Crime Analyst III 1460 4060 Police Technician III 7610 Marketing Coordinator Administrative Clerk Part- Time 3140 Associate Civil Engineer 1540 Senior Typist Clerk 1410 Customer Service Supervisor Supervising Transportation Engineer 4040 Police Officer-Lateral 1677/1680 Accountant I /II 4016 Police Captain Wednesday, February 14, 2007 OPENED 1/2/2001 1/2/2001 1/4/2001 - 1/12/200 1/24/200 1/24/200 CLOSED 12/31/2001 12/31/2001 1/29/2001 1 2/13/2001 1 2/20/2001 1 2/13/2001 2/2/2001 1/31/2001 2/8/2001 2/22/2001 3/9/2001 3/9/2001 3/9/2001 3/16/200 2/26/2001 2/23/2001 2/26/2001- 3/2/2001 3/30/2001 3/30/2001 3/30/2001 1 5/4/2001 3/15/2001 3/21/2001 3/22/2001 3/22/2001 4/19/2001 5/4/2001 3/21/2001 4/27/2001 5/4/2001 5/8/2001 5/10/2001 5/15/2001 3/30/2001 4/2/2001 4/2/2001 4/2/2001 5/22/2001 7/26/2001 4/16/2001 5/18/2001 - 7/26/2001 8/2/2001. 6/22/2001 6/8/2001 DATE PURGED Page 1 of 2 RECRUITNlLNT EXAM LISTING Y.L;AR 2001 EXAM NO 201-42 201-43 201 -46 201 -48 201 -52 • 201 -54 201 -551P 201 -59 201 -60 JOB CODE 6040 7260 1510 7615 5260 1713 1540 4095 .... 1410/1400 201 -61 1 ■ 70 -1775 201 -64 • 1430 201 -65 4040 201 -66 201-67 201 -70 201 -71 201 -72 201-73 201 -74 20175 201-78 201 -79PT 201 -84 201-85 4040 4040 3075 H671 6020 1695 4040 4040 3540 2062 1465 7130 Wednesday, February 14, 2007 EXAMINATION TITLE Planner IYI Distribution Engineer - Electrical Clerk (A HA) and Intermediate Typist Clerk Marketing Specialist Park Maintenance Worker Development Manager Senior Typist Clerk Animal Cont�colicer- . .Senior/Administrative Management Analyst -HR Program Specialist Transportation Programs Programs Administrative Services Coordinator-Planning Police Officer- Recruit Police Officer- Academy Graduate Police Officer - Lateral Senior Construction Inspector Maintenance Worker I - AHA. Planner .I Financial Services & Budget Manager Police Officer- Lateral Police Officer- Academy Graduate Senior Librarian AYiimal Shelter Assistant Year -Round Part -Time Administrative Technician II Stock Clerk (Alameda Power & Telecom) • • • OPENED 5/18/200 5/21/200 CLOSED . 1 " 5/31/2001 1 6/14/2001. 6/8/2001 6/20/2001 6/27/2001 7/11/2001 7/13/2001 7/26/2001 7/26/2001 8/3/2001 8/10/2001 8/17/2001 8/17/2001 8/17/2001 9/5/2001 9/6/2001 10/19/2001 - 10/19/2001 11/1/2001 11/1/2001 7/13/2001 8/9/2001 7/18/2001 9/14/2001 8/17/2001 8/20/2001 '8/24/2001 12/17/2001 8/31/2001 9/7/2001 9/7/2001 9/7/2001 9/20/2001 9/2572001 11/13/2001 11/13/2001 4/26/2002 10/26 /2001 11/20/2001 10/31/2001 11/9/2001 11/9/2001 11/27/2001 12/5/2001 DATE PURGED Page 2 of 2 RECRUIT1bxr:NT EXAM LISTING :EAR 2002 EXAM NO 202 -01 202 -02 • 202 -03 202 -04PT 202:-05PT 202 -06 202-07 202 -09PT 202 - 1OPT 202-11 202 -14 202 -15 202 -16PT 202 -17 202 -18 202 -19 202 -20 202 -21 202 -22PT 202 -23 202 -24 202 -25 202 -26 202 -27 202 -28 202 -29pT 202 -30PR JOB CODE 7054 .1590 5110 2061 5023 7080 1510 4061 3521 7550 3235 4040 2052 4070 1770 -1775 4040 4040 7775 3511 7560 7711 7710 7704 1540 7785 2053 1620 Wednesday, February 14, 2007 EXAMINATION TITLE Utility Services Manager Deputy City Clerk Recreation Program Coordinator (Teen Programs) Maintenance Assistant -Golf Cart /Range Crew Recreation Leader II Assistant Utility Analyst Intermediate Typist Clerk Crossing Guard Library Aide Meter Reader - Collector Plans Examiner Police Officer- Recruit Law Clerk Part -Time Police Technician Program Specialist I/II - Cle an Water Program Police Officer - Academy Graduate Police Officer- Lateral Journey Lineworker Literacy Project Supervisor - Part -Time Customer Service Representative Electrical Equipment Superintendent Environmental, Health & Safety Coordinator Assistant Line Superintendent Senior Typist Clerk. Apprentice Lineworker Child Services Coordinator Senior Account Clerk - Promotional OPENED 1/2/2002 1/2/2002 1/2/2002 1/1/2002 1/2/2002 2/15/2002 1/18/2002 1/1/2002' 2/5/2002 2/11/2002 2/26/2002 3/11/2002 3/7/2002 3/12/2002 3/20/2002 3/11/2002 3/1.1/2002 5/6/2002 3/26/2002 4/11/2003 5/6/2002 5/6/2002 5/6/2002 4/22/2002 5/6/2002 4/26/2002 5/13/2002 [ CLOSED 1/30/2002 1/31/2002 1/28/2002 12/31/2002 12/31/2002 3/15/2002 2/8/2002 12/31/2002 2/28/2002 2/26/2002 3/29/2002 4/26/2002 3/21/2002 4/18/2002 4/30/2002 4/26/2002 4/26/2002 12/31/2002 5/2/2002_ 4/25/2003 5/24/2002 5/24/2002 5/24/2002 5/17/2002 5/24/2002 5/24/2002 DATE PURGED Page 1 of 4 RECRUITMENT EXAM LISTING 1 x:AR 2002 EXAM NO 202 -31PT 202 -32 202 -33PR 202-34 202 -35 202 -36 . 202 -37 202 -39PT 202 -40 202 -41PR 202 -42 202 -46 202 -47PT 202 -48 202-49 202 -50 202 -51 202 -52 202 -53 202 -54PT 202 -55 202 -55PR 202 -56 202 -56PR . 202 -57 202 -58 202 -59 JOB CODE EXAMINATION TITLE 3515 • Library Technician Part- . Time 4500 Firefighter/Paramedic 1550 Office Assistant -- Promotional H671 Maintenance Worker 1- AHA 6670 Housing Manager 1650 Computer Services Technician 1720 compu nity .Development ti '. w Program Manager - Promo 3521 -3522 Library Aide I -II 6040 Planner III 1015 Assistant City Attorney - Promo 3550 Supervising Librarian 7797 Electrical Helper 2052 -2053 . Housing Development Project Assistant • Assoc Engr (Project Mgr) 3175 Supervising Civil Engineer 7801- Cable Technician I 7802 Cable Technician II 7803 Cable Technician III CATV- Head -End Technician 4081 -4082 • Police Assistant I -II Public Works Foreperson, Plumbing • 2555 Public Works Maintenance Foreperson 4630 Police Sergeant (Promotional) 4030 Police Sergeant 1775 Program Specialist II- Recycle-Waste 1546 Engineering Office Assistant 1550 Office Assistant Wednesday, February 14, 2007 OPENED 5/13/2002 5/10/200 5/13/200 CLOSED. 2 6 /7/2002 2 5/31/2002 5/31/2002 5/31/2002 5/24/2002 6/10/200 6/28/2002 6/28/2002 6/21/2002 2 6/21/002 6/4/2002 7/15/200 6/10/200 . 12/30/2002 2 8/22/2002 2 6/21/2062 6/10/2002 7/20/2002 6/27/2002 9/27/2002 8/6/2002 8/12/2002 8/12/2002 8/5/2002 8/5/2002 7/24/2002 7/26/2002 7/26/2002 7/30/2002 7/30/2002 8/1/2002 8/12/2002 8/26/2002 9/3/2002 8/9/2002 8/5/2002 9/12/2002 8/30/2002 8/30/2002 8/23/2002 8/23/2002 9/9/2002 8/9/2002 8/16/2002 8/16/2002 8/16/2002 8/16/2002 8/23/2002 9/9/2002 DATE PURGED Page 2 of 4 RECRUITIV.LENT EXAM LISTING EAR-2OO2 EXAM NO 202 -61 202 -62 202-63 202 -64PT 202-65 202 -66 202 -67 202 -67PR 202 -68. 202 -69 202-70 202 -71 202-73 202 -74 202 -75 202 -75PR 202 -76 202 -76PR 202 -78^ 202-79 202 -SOPT 202 -81 202-82 202-83 JOB CODE 7130 EXAMINATION TITLE Stock Clerk 7560 Customer Service Representative , 1770 Program Specialist I- Alternate Modes Law Clerk (Admin. Asst II] 4065 Police Technician II- Dispatcher 6642 Housing Specialist II .1610 + Account Clerk . 1610 Account Clerk 1410 AMA - Environmental Programs • 3245 Combined Building Inspector 5120 Recreation Supervisor [Youth /Cultural Arts Program 3140 Associate Civil Engineer 3080 Construction Inspection and Survey Supv 2510 Public Works Maintenance Worker I - Maintenance Worker II (Promo) 2520 Public Works. Maintenance Worker II Senior Man agem a nt Analyst (Promo) 1408 Senior Management Analyst 7745 Line Working Supervisor 3140 . Construction Manager 2063 Animal Shelter Assistant 1408 Cable Analyst 4070 Police Technician I- Jailer 7800 CATV Technical Operations Superintendent - APT Wednesday, February 14, 2007 OPENED . CLOSED 8/19/2002 8/30./2002 10/7/2002 10/18/2002 8/19/2002 1/28/2003 8/14/2002 10/31/2002 8/19/2002 9/16/2602 9/8/2002 9/16/2002- 9/13/2002 9/13/2002 10/2/2002 9/23/2002 9/23/2002 10/21/2002 9/22/2002 10/25/2002 9/24/2002 9/29/2002 10/7/2002 10/11/2002 10/28/2002 10/28/2002 10/28/2002 10/25/2002 11/7/2002 11/8/2002 11/13/2002 11/25/2002 11/22/2002 11/25/2002 6/24/2003 5/19/2003 10/29/2002 11/5/2002 11/5/2002 11/4/2002 11/4/2002 11/13/2002 .6/24/2003 12/26/2002 12/9/2002 12/18/2002 12/3/2002 DATE PURGED. Page 3 of 4 RECRUITMP.NT EXAM LISTING ILAR 2002 FRAM NO 202 -84 202-85 202-86 202-87 202 -88 -4. JOB CODE 7805 7810 3070 6641 7815 • EXAMINATION TITLE Data Technician - APT Senior Data Technician - APT Construction Inspector Housing Specialist I - AHA Telecommunication Operations Working Supervisor - OPENED .12/15/2002 12/10/2002 11/24/2002 11/26/2002 12/16/2002 CLOSED 1/10/2003 12/24/2002 12/31/2.002 12/18/2002 1/10/2003 DATE PURGED Wednesday, February 14, 2007 Page 4 of 4 RECRIJIT1NT EXAM LISTING EAR 2003 EXAM . NO 203 -01PT 203 -o2PT 203 -03PT 2034O4PT 203 -05 203-06 . . 203-07 PR 203 -O7PR 203 -b8 203 -09PR 203 -1 oPR 203-11. 203 -12 203-13 203-14PT 203-15 203 -16 203 -17PT 203 -18 203 -19PT 203-20 203 -20PR 203 -21PR 203 -22 203 -22PR 203 -23 203 -24PR JOB CODE EXAMINATION TITLE 4061 . Crossing Guard Relief 3530 Librarian - . Part -Time 5023 Recreation Leader II 2061 Maintenance Assistant -Golf 3150 Senior Engineer 1500 Telephone Operator - Receptionist 1620 Senior Account Clerk Senior Account Clerk (Promotional) 7620 Marketing Assistant 7312 Information Systems Operation Technician 7315 Information Systems Application Specialist 1713 Development Manager - Housing 4040 Police Offiicer- Lateral 7775 Journey Lineworker 5003 Studio 31 Technician 1510 Intermediate Clerk - 4040 Police Officer - Academy Graduate 2062 Animal Shelter Assistant 3235 • Plans Examiner 3515 Library Technician Part - Time 1540 Senior Clerk 1540 Senior. Clerk (Promotional) 7799 Utility Construction Foreperson (Promotional) 1625 Accounting Technician 1625 Accounting Technician 7560 Customer Service Representative 3215 Supervising Building Inspector OPENED 1/1/2003 1/1/2003 1/1/2003 1/1/2003 1/7/2003 1/13/2003 1/13/2003 102/2Q03 2/5 /2003 5/9/2003 3/21 /2003 1/31/2003 10/24/2003 3/7/2003 2/24/2003 2/14/2003 2/21 /2003 2/28/2003 3/7/2003 3/14/2003 4/7/2003 3/21/2003 3/21/2003 4/20/2003 4/4/2003 4/11/2003 5/2/2003 CLOSED 12/31/2003 1/13/2003 12/31/2003 12/31/2002 3/11/2004 1/23/2003 1/20/2003 1/20./2003 2/19/2003 . 5/30/2003 4/4/2003 2/28/2003 11/7/2003 12/31/2003 5/1/2003 3/3/2003 11/7/2003 3/20/2003 9/4/2003. 3/31/2003 4/25/2003 4/4/2003 4/4/2003 5/5/2003 4/11/2003 4/25/2003 5/9/2003 DATE PURGED Wednesday, February 14. 2007 _ Page 1 of 3 RECRUITNtENT EXAM LISTING YAR 2003 EXAM NO 203 -25PR 203 -26PT 20327 203 -29PR 203 -30 • 203 -31PT 203 -32 • 203 -33 203 -34 203 -35PR 203 -36 203 -37 203 -38 203 -39PR 203 -40 203-41 203-42 20343 203 -.44PT 203 -45 203 -47 203 -48PT 203 -49PT 203-50 203 -51 203 -52 203-53PR JOB CODE 7750 EXAMINATION TITLE Electrical Maintenance Working Supervisor - APT 3521 -22 Library Aide I -II . 7804 Cable Head -End Technician 4020 Police Lieutenant 2020 Laborer 2062 Animal Shelter Assistant 4065 Police Technician II - Public Safety Dispatcher 2077 Code Compliance Officer 1410/1408 Senior Management Analyst /HR Analyst 6650 Housing Authority Manager 1540 Senior Clerk 1770 Program Spec I -Solid Waste /Recycle 7260 Distribution Engineer 4505 Fire Apparatus Operator 5120 Recreation Supervisor (Youth /Cultural Arts Program 1770 -1775 Program Spec I /I1 - Clean Water Program 1550 Office Assistant 6020 Planner I 2062 Animal Shelter Assistant 7770 Electrical Maintenance Technician 2603 Public Works Superintendent 2052 Part-Time Law Clerk 4081 Police Assistant I /Part -Time 2370 Senior Fleet Mechanic 4040 Police Officer (Academy Grad) 4057 Police Officer - Recruit 2560 PW Maintenance Foreperson (Concrete) OPENED CLOSED 5/15/2003 5/30/2003 • 5/8/2003 6/23/2003 5/23/2003 7/2/2003 5/27/2003 6/16/2003 6/16/2003 6/16/2003 7/15/2003 7/25/2003 8/5/2003 8/4/2003 8/1/2003 8/22/2003 8/5/2003 8/14/2003 8/15/2003 8/19/2003 9/8/2003 9/16/2003 9/11/2003 10/3/2003 10/24/2003 2/21/2003 8/14/2003 7/8/2003 6/20/2003 7/9/2003 6/27/2003 7/1/2003 8/14/2003 6/27/2003 7/21/2003 8/15/2003 2/11/2003 9/4/2003 8/18/2003 10/22/2003 10/8/2003 8/28/2003 .9/16/2003 9/22/2003 9/30/2003 10/24/2003 10/14/2003 11/25/2003 11/5/2003 11/7/2003 10/24/2003 11/7/2003 10/31/2003 11/14/2003 PATE PURGED Wednesday, February 14, 2007 Page 2 of 3 RECRUITMENT EXAM LISTING MAR 2003 EXAM NO 203 -54PT 203 -55PR 203 -•56 203 -57PR 203 -58 203 -59 203-61 203 -62PR JOB CODE EXAMINATION TITLE 3521 -22 Library Aide I -II 4010 Police Captain 1408 Media Director (SMA) 7798 Telecom Operations Supervisor 4610 Emergency Medical Services Education Coord 1610 Account Clerk 1055 . Alameda Point Project Manager 1460 Administrative Technician III OPENED 11/4/2003 r ' 11/10/2003 11/21/2003 12/17/2003 12/1/2003 11/25/2003 12/3/2003 12/12/2003 CLOSED 11/25/2003 11/24/2003 12/9/2003 12/24/2003 12/18/2003 12/10/2003 2/26/2004 12/18/2003 DATE PURGED . Wednesday, February 14, 2007 Page 3 a 3 1, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular meeting assembled on the day of , , 2007, by the following vote to wit: AYES NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, 1 have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said City this day of • , 2007. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda CITY OF ALAMEDA Memorandum April 3, 2007 TO: Honorable Mayor and Cou ncil members FROM: Debra Kurita City Manager RE: Review Existing Policies on Naming City Streets and Facilities and Adopt a Resolution Adopting a Policy for Naming City Property, Facilities and Streets BACKGROUND In early 2006, Council requested that staff agendize a review of current policies regarding the naming of City streets and facilities. Staff conducted a survey of neighboring municipalities and public agencies and presented the data to Council during their meeting of June 6, 2006. The Council reviewed the report, provided direction, and requested that the item be brought back with the noted modifications as well as a recommendation. Staff presented a draft proposal during the meeting of March 20, 2007, and Council requested minor modifications clarifying that any name changes will be initiated by the City Council. DISCUSSION The current policy for Naming City Property and the existing Street Naming Policy have been combined and amended in the proposed Policy for Naming City Property, Facilities and Streets (see attached). The proposed policy continues to place the responsibility for recommending potential names for facilities with the appropriate board or commission following a request from Council to initiate the process. The criteria for selection for both facilities and streets will continue to emphasize names that represent geographic areas, prominent members of the community, and individuals who have made significant contributions to the City, including elected and appointed officials. With the exception of street names, which are approved by the Planning Board, all recommendations will be forwarded to Council for final approval. Amendments to the combined policy include: • A provision establishing an annual review of potential names by the appropriate board or commission. • A limit of 20 characters in a street name in accordance with the 911 Emergency Communication System. • Inclusion of restrictions regarding the period of time an individual would need to be deceased prior to having his or her name considered. City Council Report Re: Agenda Item #4-J 04 -03 -07 Honorable Mayor and Page -2- Councilmembers • A provision directing that the Council will initiate the naming process by requesting the appropriate board or commission begin the process to recommend potential names. Since the Housing Authority of the City of Alameda is a separate legal entity from the City of Alameda, the Authority Board will take action in lieu of the Council in naming Housing Authority facilities. BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT The administration of a naming policy would have no impact on the General Fund. The implementation of such a policy would be absorbed in the operating budgets of the appropriate departments. MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE This policy complements the Alameda Municipal Code Section 30 -84.5, governing the naming of City streets and the existing policy for naming other City facilities. RECOMMENDATION Review the existing policies regarding the naming of City streets and facilities and adopt the resolution adopting the Policy for Naming City Property, Facilities and Streets. Respectfully submitted, Alameda Recreation & Parks DK:DL:CW:bf Attachment Cathy oodbury, Director Planning & Building Department City of Alameda California April 3, 2007 POLICY FOR NAMING CITY PROPERTY, FACILITIES AND STREETS INTRODUCTION: It is the City of Alameda's goal to establish a uniform policy to name City facilities and portions thereof, including but not limited to: Parks and Park facilities, Golf Complex, Alameda Power & Telecom facilities, Libraries, Housing Authority facilities, fire stations, City Hall, Police Department facilities, parking lots, ferry terminals, City streets and entryways to the City. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to honor persons, places and/or events in the history of the City by naming City facilities after them. This process acknowledges and memorializes a specific person or event and enhances the value and heritage of the City. PROCEDURES: Boards and Commissions represent the community, and they have direct responsibility for various City facilities as prescribed in the City Charter and Alameda Municipal Code. It shall be the responsibility of the following Boards and Commissions to review the list of street and facility names annually and provide additions or deletions to the Historical Advisory Board. The Boards and Commissions most closely related to these facilities will, upon request from the City Council, make recommendations for potential names and the City Council will grant final approval. Recreation Commission — City Parks, Swim Centers, Boat Ramps, and Associated Facilities Golf Commission — Golf Complex and Associated Facilities Public Utilities Board — Alameda Power & Telecom Facilities Library Board — Libraries 1 Policy for Naming City Property, Facilities and Streets — April 3, City Council Attachment to Report Re: Agenda Item #4-J 04 -03 -07 Housing Commission -- Housing Authority Facilities* Planning Board — Streets and all other City facilities *The Housing Authority of the City of Alameda is a separate legal entity from the City of Alameda. As such, the Authority Board will take action in lieu of the City Council in naming Housing Authority facilities. Groups from within the community and individuals may make a recommendation to the Board or Commission at the time consideration is given to naming a facility and may initiate such action. The Board or Commission will then forward their recommendation to the City Council. If a facility does not have a connection to a Board or Commission, the Planning Board will be the body that recommends a name to the City Council. The City Council will consider a recommendation from a Board or Commission and make the final decision to name a City property or facility at a public meeting in order to receive comments in an open forum. The Historical Advisory Board will continue to maintain the List of Street and Facility Names, including available names and those that have been used. Additions or deletions to the list shall be recommended by the appropriate board or commission based on written documentation of the historic importance of the name in Alameda history and as outlined in this policy and then forwarded to the City Council for final approval. Only names that appear on the list of Street and Facility Names shall be utilized for the naming of new streets or renaming of existing streets. The Planning Board shall approve names for new streets. CRITERIA: In selecting the name for a City property, facility or street, the following criteria shall be used: 1. A name that reflects the location of the facility by geographic area; 2. A name that reflects the history of a facility such as the family name of the builder, developer or person who may have donated the land when the individual has been deceased a minimum of three years; 3. A name that recognizes a significant contributor to the advancement of the City, such as a former Mayor, Councilmember, Board or Commission Member, officers or employees of the City, or member of the community when the individual has been deceased a minimum of three years; 4. A name that recognizes the donor of a significant gift of land or funds for a City facility. 2 Policy for Naming City Property, Facilities and Streets — April 3, 2007 5. A name that is listed on the List of Street and Facility Names of the City of Alameda. 6. Only one name shall be used for each property or facility and all its various components. NAMING STREETS: General Considerations for Naming Streets: 1. Priority shall be given to utilizing street names that represent persons, places or events associated with the historical development of the City of Alameda. 2. Where feasible and appropriate, historic street names shall be chosen which directly relate to that portion of the City in which the street to be named is located. 3. Consistency in naming shall be maintained within a Subdivision Tract, Planned Development, or other development or geographic area where street names themes currently exist, are planned or are discernible. 4. Street names shall remain the same across intersecting streets and throughout the length of the street. 5. The use of the same name but different suffices for adjacent streets shall be avoided, with the exception of a small court or cul -de -sac adjacent to a main road. For example, Brighton Court off Brighton Road. 6. A street name shall not intersect another street name at more than one location. The use of circle or loop as a suffix is not encouraged except under limited, specific design situations. 7. Similarly spelled or pronounced street names shall be avoided within the City. 8. The number of letters in the street name, including suffix, shall not exceed twenty characters and spaces in conformance with the 911 Emergency Communication Center system. Designation: 1. In general, street names should include a suffix, such as those following, to clearly indicate that it is part of the vehicular circulation system and to minimize the possibility of confusion with development or project place names. Names lacking such suffice or ending in such words as Harbor, Isle, or Point are not encouraged, except to retain the continuity of established naming schemes. Names utilizing terms from other languages such as Embarcadero, Camino, Via and other non - typical names shall be considered individually for appropriateness, merit, and general conformance to this policy. 3 Policy for Naming City Property, Facilities and Streets — April 3, 2007 2. Cul -de -sac or short dead -end streets a. Court b. Place c. Terrace d. Square 3. Short connecting streets generally less than 1,000 feet in length. a. Lane 4. Curvilinear streets, generally through or connecting and of higher capacity. a. Drive b. Way c. Parkway d. Boulevard 5. Street running diagonally to an established grid system a. Road b. Way 6. Generally north -south grid streets. a. Street 7. Generally east -west streets. a. Avenue RENAMING CITY PROPERTY FACILITIES AND STREETS: Should the City contemplate renaming a City property or facility, a comprehensive study shall be conducted to determine how the existing name was conceived, including an assessment of the impacts to the original honoree on renaming the facility, and the impact on the adjacent neighborhoods should the property be renamed. The appropriate Board or Commission shall review the study prior to making a recommendation to the City Council. At that time, it will be at the discretion of the City Council whether or not to rename a City property or facility. Any change to an existing street name, which would affect the addressing of any existing business or residence, shall require City Council in addition to Planning Board approval. 4 Policy for Naming City Property, Facilities and Streets — April 3, 2007 Approved as to Form CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. ADOPTING A POLICY FOR NAMING CITY PROPERTY, FACILITIES AND STREETS WHEREAS, it is the City of Alameda's goal to establish a uniform policy to name City facilities and portions thereof; and WHEREAS, the City of Alameda is responsible for a variety of public 0 facilities, including parks and park facilities, a golf complex, Alameda Power & Telecom facilities, libraries, Housing Authority facilities, fire stations, civic buildings, Police Department facilities, parking lots, ferry terminals, City streets and entryways to the City; and WHEREAS, the purpose of the policy is to honor persons, places, and/or events in the history of the City by naming City facilities after them; and WHEREAS, the process established by this policy acknowledges and memorializes a specific person or event and enhances the value and heritage of the City. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Alameda adopts the Policy for Naming City Property, Facilities and Streets attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Alameda rescinds the previous Street Naming Policy and the Policy for Naming City Property, adopted October 1, 1991. Resolution #4 -J CC 04-03-07 City of Alameda California April 3, 2007 EXHIBIT A POLICY FOR NAMING CITY PROPERTY, FACILITIES AND STREETS INTRODUCTION: It is the City of Alameda's goal to establish a uniform policy to name City facilities and portions thereof, including but not limited to: Parks and Park facilities, Golf Complex, Alameda Power & Telecom facilities, Libraries, Housing Authority facilities, fire stations, City Hall, Police Department facilities, parking lots, ferry terminals, City streets and entryways to the City. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to honor persons, places and/or events in the history of the City by naming City facilities after them. This process acknowledges and memorializes a specific person or event and enhances the value and heritage of the City. PROCEDURES: Boards and Commissions represent the community, and they have direct responsibility for various City facilities as prescribed in the City Charter and Alameda Municipal Code. It shall be the responsibility of the following Boards and Commissions to review the list of street and facility names annually and provide additions or deletions to the Historical Advisory Board. The Boards and Commissions most closely related to these facilities will, upon request from the City Council, make recommendations for potential names and the City Council will grant final approval. Recreation Commission — City Parks, Swim Centers, Boat Ramps, and Associated Facilities Golf Commission -- Golf Complex and Associated Facilities Public .Utilities Board — Alameda Power & Telecom Facilities Library Board — Libraries 1 Policy for Naming City Property, Facilities and Streets -- April 3, 2007 f Housing Commission — Housing Authority Facilities* Planning Board — Streets and all other City facilities *The Housing Authority of the City of Alameda is a separate legal entity from the City of Alameda. As such, the Authority Board will take action in lieu of the City Council in naming Housing Authority facilities. Groups from within the community and individuals may make a recommendation to the Board or Commission at the time consideration is given to naming a facility and may initiate such action. The Board or Commission will then forward their recommendation to the City Council. If a facility does not have a connection to a Board or Commission, the Planning Board will be the body that recommends a name to the City Council. The City Council will consider a recommendation from a Board or Commission and make the final decision to name a City property or facility at a public meeting in order to receive comments in an open forum. The Historical Advisory Board will continue to maintain the List of Street and Facility Names, including available names and those that have been used. Additions or deletions to the list shall be recommended by the appropriate board or commission based on written documentation of the historic importance of the name in Alameda history and as outlined in this policy and then forwarded to the City Council for final approval. Only names that appear on the list of Street and Facility Names shall be utilized for the naming of new streets or renaming of existing streets. The Planning Board shall approve names for new streets. CRITERIA: In selecting the name for a City property, facility or street, the following criteria shall be used: 1. A name that reflects the location of the facility by geographic area; 2. A name that reflects the history of a facility such as the family name of the builder, developer or person who may have donated the land when the individual has been deceased a minimum of three years; 3. A name that recognizes a significant contributor to the advancement of the City, such as a former Mayor, Councilmember, Board or Commission Member, officers or employees of the City, or member of the community when the individual has been deceased a minimum of three years; 4. A name that recognizes the donor of a significant gift of land or funds for a City facility. 2 Policy for Naming City Property, Facilities and Streets -- April 3, 2007 5. A name that is listed on the List of Street and Facility Names of the City of Alameda. 6. Only one name shall be used for each property or facility and all its various components. NAMING STREETS: General Considerations for Naming Streets: 1. Priority shall be given to utilizing street names that represent persons, places or events associated with the historical development of the City of Alameda. 2. Where feasible and appropriate, historic street names shall be chosen which directly relate to that portion of the City in which the street to be named is located. 3. Consistency in naming shall be maintained within a Subdivision Tract, Planned Development, or other d evelopment or geographic area where street names themes currently exist, are planned or are discernible. 4. Street names shall remain the same across intersecting streets and throughout the length of the street. 5. The use of the same name but different suffices for adjacent streets shall be avoided, with the exception of a small court or cul -de -sac adjacent to a main road. For example, Brighton Court off Brighton Road. 6. A street name shall not intersect another street name at more than one location. The use of circle or loop as a suffix is not encouraged except under limited, specific design situations. 7. Similarly spelled or pronounced street names shall be avoided within the City. 8. The number of letters in the street name, including suffix, shall not exceed twenty characters and spaces in conformance with the 911 Emergency Communication Center system. Designation: 1. In general, street names should include a suffix, such as those following, to clearly indicate that it is part of the vehicular circulation system and to minimize the possibility of confusion with development or project place names. Names lacking such suffice or ending in such words as Harbor, Isle, or Point are not encouraged, except to retain the continuity of established naming schemes. Names utilizing terns from other languages such as Embarcadero, Camino, Via and other non - typical names shall be considered individually for appropriateness, merit, and general conformance to this policy. 3 Policy for Naming City Property, Facilities and Streets — April 3, 2007 2. Cul-de-sac or short dead -end streets a. Court b. Place c. Terrace d. Square 3. Short connecting streets generally less than 1,000 feet in length. a. Lane 4. Curvilinear streets, generally through or connecting and of higher capacity. a. Drive b. Way c. Parkway d. Boulevard 5. Street running diagonally to an established grid system a. Road b. Way 6. Generally north -south grid streets. a. Street 7. Generally east -west streets. a. Avenue RENAMING CITY PROPERTY FACILITIES AND STREETS: Should the City contemplate renaming a City property or facility, a comprehensive study shall be conducted to determine how the existing name was conceived, including an assessment of the impacts to the original honoree on renaming the facility, and the impact on the adjacent neighborhoods should the property be renamed. The appropriate Board or Commission shall review the study prior to making a recommendation to the City Council. At that time, it will be at the discretion of the City Council whether or not to rename a City property or facility. Any change to an existing street name, which would affect the addressing of any existing business or residence, shall require City Council in addition to Planning Board approval. 4 Policy for Naming City Property, Facilities and Streets -- April 3, 2007 1, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular meeting assembled on the day of , 2007, by the following vote to wit: AYES NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said City this day of , 2007. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda Approved as to Form CITY OF ALAMEDA ORDINANCE NO. New Series AMENDING THE LEASE AGREEMENT DATED JANUARY 31, 1991, BETWEEN THE CITY OF ALAMEDA (LESSOR) AND THE ALAMEDA FOOD BANK (LESSEE) FOR REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1900 THAU WAY (REQUIRES 4 AFFIRMATIVE VOTES) WHEREAS, on January 31, 1991, the CITY OF ALAMEDA (CITY) and ALAMEDA EMERGENCY FOOD, INC. (LESSEE) entered into a lease agreement of property located at 1900 Thau Way in Alameda, California, whereby CITY leased property to LESSEE to operate a food bank (LEASE); and WHEREAS, LESSEE has recently received a Community Development Block Grant for the removal and replacement of the existing trailer; and WHEREAS, once the new trailer is installed, CITY will no longer be the owner of the trailer and will also no longer have maintenance obligations for same; and WHEREAS, CITY and LESSEE wish to amend the LEASE as regards to shorten the notice required for termination to six months. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Alameda that: Section 1. The City Council hereby approves execution of the Lease Amendment between the City of Alameda and Alameda Emergency Food, Inc. as Lessee. Section 2. That the form of Lease Amendment referred to in the above and attached hereto as Exhibit A, and its terms, conditions and covenants contained therein are hereby approved. Section 3. That the City Manager of the City of Alameda is hereby authorized to execute, for and on behalf of the City of Alameda, the attached Lease Amendment. Section 4. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after expiration of thirty (30) days from the date of its final passage. Attest: Presiding Officer of the Council Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda Final Passage of ordinance #4 -K CC 04 -03 -07 EXHIBIT A Amendment to Alameda Food Bank Lease This is an Amendment to the Alameda Food Bank Lease entered into on January 31, 1991, by and between the CITY OF ALAMEDA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "City"), and the ALAMEDA EMERGENCY FOOD, INC. (hereinafter "LESSEE") who } ho agree as WHEREAS, on January 31, 1991, the CITY and LESSEE entered into a lease of property perty located at 1900 Thau Way in Alameda, California whereby the CITY leased ert ro to LESSEE p p y to operate a food bank (hereafter "LEASE "); and WHEREAS, CITY and LESSEE wish to amend the LEASE and have agreed gr to make moot the provisions that pertain to the mobile modular trailer which is the Exhibit " subj ect of �b�t B because the trailer will be taken out of service. The terms and conditions governing g g the LEASE from the time of execution of this Amendment to the end of the remainin g period of th e LEASE are in effect; and WHEREAS, the City has programmed Community Development Block Grant funds (Grant funds) for the removal of the old modular trailer and an acquisition of a new mobile modular trailer; and WHEREAS, the LESSEE will be the owner with full responsibilit y of the new mobile modular trailer that will be placed on the property located at 1900 Thau Way; and WHEREAS, the LESEE will obtain the necessary approvals from the Cit y to install the new trailer in compliance with this agreement and the Amended LEASE; and NOW, THEREFORE, the PARTIES agree as follows: SECTION ONE. Paragraph 16 of the lease is amended in its entiret y to read as follows: 16. CITY grants LESSEE the right to alter, adjust or modify the leased . fy premises, but only if given written approval by the City Manager or his/her designee prior to gn P the alteration, adjustment or modification. Any and all improvements which become p permanent fixtures to the premises shall be the property of CITY effective at termination of this lease, in accordance with California property law. The CITY and LESSEE agree that the mobile modular lar structure which is the subject matter of Exhibit "B" of the original LEASE shall be taken out of service. LESSEE will be responsible for the removal of the mobile modular structure. Any funds derived from the salvage of the mobile modular structure shall revert to the City. y Any new structure brought upon the premises, must receive prior approval of the City, shall be the ty� property of LESSEE alone. With this understanding, at the time the original mobile modular structure is removed from the leased premises, Exhibit "B" will be deemed moot. SECTION TWO. Paragraph 22 of the lease is amended in its entirety to read as follows: y 22. This lease shall be terminated by LESSEE's failure to honor any of the provisions set forth in this Agreement. Additionally, this lease is terminable at the end of each five year period by either party provided that the party gives six (6) months notice of intent to terminate to the other party and in the case of the CITY that CITY has an adopted p lan for Redevelopment. After February 1, 1996, the lease will automatically be renewed at the end of each remaining five year period, unless the CITY has plans to use this property for another specific use in connection with redevelopment and the CITY gives six (6) months notice as provided in this paragraph. SECTION THREE. At the time the original mobile modular structure is removed from the leased premises, the following provisions will be deemed to have sunsetted and shall not be applicable to the period of time remaining upon this amended lease. Those provisions are as follows: Paragraphs 13, 14, and 19. Exhibits `B" and "C ". SECTION FOUR. Except as modified by Sections One, Two and Three of this Amendment set forth above, each and every other provision of the LEASE shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties agree to execute this document on the 20th day of March 2007. Recommended for Approval: CITY OF ALAMEDA A Municipal Corporation Matthew T. Naclerio Public Works Director Debra Kurita City Manager Approved as to Form: Attest: Mohammed Hill Assistant City Attorney al pubworksl pwadminl COUNCIL12007 1032007Toodbankamend.doc City Clerk ALAMEDA EMERGENCY FOOD, INC. Hugh Morgan Chairperson 1, 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 20th day of March, 2007, by the followin g vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, 1 have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City this 20th day of March, 2007. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda CITY OF ALAMEDA MEMORANDUM Date: April 3, 2007 To: Honorable Mayor and Cou ncil members From: Debra Kurita City Manager Re: Accept Proposed Bus Shelter Design Standards for All Future Installations in the City of Alameda BACKGROUND During 2005, 22 new bus shelters were installed throughout the City, including six shelters donated by Alamedans for Responsible Transit Shelters (ARTS). A total of seven different combinations of shelter styles and design options were installed as a pilot program to assist in developing a design standard for future bus shelter installations. The pilot program included installing three different shelter styles: full -width walled shelters, narrow - width walled shelters, and shelters with no walls; two different materials for shelter walls, tempered glass or perforated metal; two types of roofs, domed or pitched; two different materials for shelter roofs, plastic or metal; and two shelter colors, brown or green. Attachment 1 includes photographs of the different shelter styles, locations, and individual features. DISCUSSION In February 2006, Public Works staff distributed a Bus Shelter Preference Survey (Attachment 2), eliciting feedback from the community to help guide decisions about future shelter design and placement. The survey, which was developed with input from the Transportation Commission, was distributed in three ways. First, the survey was posted on the City's web site, and respondents were able to complete the survey on -line. In addition, flyers indicating that the survey could be accessed through the City's web site or by contacting Public Works fora hard copy were placed at each of the shelters. Finally, hard copies of the surveys were mailed to residents and businesses located adjacent to or within 100 feet of each of the new shelters. A total of 812 surveys were received. The survey results are presented in Attachment 3 and are summarized below: • Respondents generally approved of the appearance of all shelter types. • Respondents were generally pleased with the specific placement of the shelters at the bus stop site. All shelter types received consistently high ratings in terms of allowing passage on the sidewalk. They also received positive ratings in terms of passengers being able to see the bus approaching the stop. City Council Agenda Item #5 -A 04 -03 -07 Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers Page 2 April 3, 2007 • . Responses regarding the shelter's ability to provide protection from the wind, rain, and sun were quite variable. O The canopy shelters, which have no walls, scored significantly lower than other shelter types in terms of providing adequate protection from wind (10% believed there was adequate protection) and rain (23% believed there was adequate protection). O Those shelters with narrow walls scored somewhat lower on providing adequate protection from the rain (ranging from 35 -50 %) than those with deeper walls (56 -68 %). O Canopy shelters were ranked the lowest in terms of protection from the sun (40% responded that the protection provided was not sufficient). The survey results were presented to the Transportation Commission in April 2006. Based on this information, the Commission reaffirmed its March 2004 recommendation for minimum required bus design features. Namely, shelters should have three walls, provide full sized transit service maps with appropriate route and schedule information, and include interior seating. The Commission further recommended that wall material be selected in the following descending order of preference: tempered glass, plexiglass, and perforated metal. The Commission emphasized that perforated metal should never be used as a first option. They also recommended that adequate trash and recycling receptacles be provided at all shelters. The survey results and a proposed bus shelter design standard were presented to the Planning Board on October 23, 2006. A detailed explanation of the development of the bus shelter design standard, as presented to the Board, is included as Attachment 4. The Board adopted a resolution recommending that the City Council accept the following proposed shelter design standard. The Board further requested that staff provide Council with additional recommendations based on vandalism experienced during the pilot program as well as a proposed implementation schedule. Recommended Shelter Standard To ensure that the City's transit riders have functional shelters that do not create an onerous maintenance burden for the City, all future shelters shall conform to the following design standard: • Class walls are to be used in high pedestrian areas, at locations where vandalism is not anticipated and where wind protection is a major concern. • Full- -width walls are preferred to maximize protection of riders from inclement weather. • Where perforated metal walls are to be used, the walls should be narrow width to maximize visibility of riders for bus drivers. Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers Page 3 April 3, 2007 • All shelters shall include: trash and recycling receptacles, unless there are receptacles in the immediate vicinity of the shelter; full -sized service maps with appropriate route and schedule information; and benches, which should be surface mounted and preferably include three seats. • Shelters should be the same shade of green currently in use on many shelters in the City (including those along Park and Webster Streets), to provide visual consistency within Alameda and with other cities served by AC Transit. The color was also supported by survey respondents that answered this question. Additional considerations based on on -going vandalism concerns (Attachment 5) • For shelters with narrow -width walls, roofs should be made of metal, because it is far more durable and resistant to damage. ■ For shelters with full -width walls, metal roofs should be used unless it is determined that this would not provide sufficient lighting for shelter users. ■ Wall frames should be made of steel where possible, if it is cost-effective to treat the walls with rust - protective coating. The anodized aluminum walls are not worth the additional expense, especially since they are more vulnerable to vandalism. ■ Decorative elements, such as the gingerbread on the shelters with no walls, should only be used if they are determined to be reasonably resistant to vandalism. Anticipated Implementation of Shelter Project The City has submitted a federal appropriations request of $21 5,800 for fiscal year 2008 for the purchase and installation of 18 shelters. This would also require approximately $55,000 in local matching funds, which can be provided from the City's Measure B allocation. It is estimated that if the federal funding is secured by October, a construction contract to purchase and install the shelters could be awarded by Council in February 2008, and shelters could be installed in April 2008. BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT Acceptance of the proposed bus shelter design standards does not affect the General Fund. Measure B is an appropriate funding source for bus shelter installation and will be used as a local match for a pending federal appropriation request. MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE The City's Long Range Transit Plan calls for bus shelters to be included at heavily utilized stops. The City Council has also approved a Transit First Policy, which outlines the City's commitment to encourage the use of transit throughout the City. Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Page 4 April 3, 2007 In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this project is Categorically Exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(c), Existing Facilities. RECOMMENDATION Accept proposed bus shelter design standards for all future installations in the City of Alameda. Respectfully submitted, atth T. Naclerio Public Works Director Prepared by: avuy Barry Bergmanio,H_ Program Special st 11 MTN:BB:gc Attachments ATTACHMENT 1 Bus Shelter Styles Installed In Alameda During 2005 Appezzatol3 , westbound — Type 1 Wall depth: narrow Wall materials: perforated metal Roof. domed, translucent plastic Color: green Webster/Lincoln, southbound -- Type 3 Wall depth: narrow Wall materials: glass Roof: angled, metal Color: green Santa Clara/Park, westbound — Type 2 Wall depth: narrow Wall materials: glass Roof: angled, metal Color: green Buena VistalParu, westbound — Type 4 Wall depth: full -size Wall materials: glass Roof: domed, translucent plastic Color: green Santa Clara/9 ", westbound -- Type 5 Wall depth: N/A Wall materials: N/A Roof: domed, translucent plastic Color: brown Atlantic /Constitution, westbound — Type 7 Wall depth: narrow Wall materials: perforated metal Roof: domed, translucent plastic Color: brown Santa Clara/Willow, westbound — Type 6 Wall depth: full-size Wall materials: perforated metal Roof: angled, translucent plastic Color: brown ATTACHMENT 2 City of Alameda Bus Shelter Preference Survey- SAMPLE February 2006 During 2005, new bus shelters were installed throughout Alameda. This includes six in the Park Street area, six in the Webster Street area, and six that were purchased and installed by Alamedans for Responsible Transit Shelters (ARTS), a group of concerned Alameda residents. Now that the shelters have been in use for several months, the City is seeking feedback from the community regarding the appearance and effectiveness of the different shelter types. The responses to these questions will help guide the City Council in selecting shelter types for other locations, as future funding becomes available. We appreciate you taking the time to provide us with feedback and helping us to create a better public transportation system for all Alamedans. Thank you. Please return the survey in the attached envelope no later than FEBRUARY 28, 2006. If you wish to provide survey responses about more than 1 shelter design, visit the City's web site for the citywide shelter survey, www.ci.alameda.ca.us. PLEASE RESPOND TO THE QUESTIONS BELOW WITH REGARD TO THE SHELTER WHERE YOU PICKED UP THIS SURVEY. This shelter, located at Buena Vista Ave, and Paru St. in the westbound direction, is 12 feet long with a domed roof, and the back, rear and side walls made of glass. How often do you use this shelter? a. 5 or more days per week b. 2 -4 days per week c. 1 day per week d. 1 -2 times per month e. less than 1 time per month f. not at all Please indicate how close you live to this shelter: a. Adjacent to it b. Within 1 block c. 1 -2 blocks d. more than 2 blocks Place an "X" next to each of e following.sfia #ements to indicate: -how you feel about each of the followingF statements. $tit00011..y agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree No Op n ion/ Don't Know 1) I like the appearance of this shelter. 2) This shelter provides adequate protection from the wind. 3) This shelter provides adequate protection from the rain. 4) This shelter provides adequate protection from the sun. 5) The placement of this shelter provides adequate space for sidewalk passage. 6) From this shelter, I can easily see the bus coming. 7) 1 recommend the following color for future shelters at other sites: a. Brown b. Green c. Other (please describe): 8) I recommend the following shelter roof style: a. Domed (curved) b. Peaked (angled) c. Other (please describe): 9) 1 recommend the following bench style: a. A single long bench b. Several separate seats c. Seats that flip up when not in use d. Other (please describe): 10) Please describe any additional changes you would recommend in the design of Alameda's bus shelters. City of Alameda Bus Shelter Preference Survey Page 2 January 2006 ATTACHMENT 3 City of Alameda Bus Shelter Survey Summary of Results it should be noted that many respondents to the survey submitted forms about more than one shelter. A total of 812 surveys were submitted by 308 individuals. Points to consider in reviewing the survey results • The shelters were grouped into 7 different types, based on their physical characteristics (see Table 1 below). • Some shelters are much more heavily used than others. As might be expected, the number of responses varied considerably by shelter type (see Table 1 below). • Many people expressed no preference regarding characteristics of a particular shelter, either selecting "don't know" or not responding. These 2 categories were combined for the analysis. Key results • Respondents generally approved of the appearance of the shelters. • Respondents were generally pleased with the specific placement of the shelters at the bus stop site. All shelter types received consistently high ratings in terms of allowing passage on the sidewalk, and also received positive ratings in terms of passengers being able to see the bus approaching the stop. • Responses regarding the shelter's ability to provide protection from the wind, rain, and sun were quite variable. O The canopy shelters ( #5) that have no walls scored significantly lower than other shelter types in terms of providing adequate protection from wind (10% believed there was adequate protection) and rain (23% believed there was adequate protection). O Those shelters with narrow walls ( #1, #2, #3, and #7) scored somewhat lower on providing adequate protection from the rain (ranging from 35 -50 %) than those with deeper walls (56 -68 %). O Canopy shelters were ranked the lowest in terms of protection from the sun (40% responded that the protection provided was not sufficient). TABLE 1 Bus Shelter Types and Number of Responses Shelter T e yp Shelter Description Number of Responses T by Type 1 8' long with perforated metal walls, narrow side walls 71 2 12' long with glass walls, narrow side walls 315 3 8' long with glass walls, narrow side walls 274 4 12 long with glass walls 49 5 12' long, no walls 62 6 12' long with perforated metal walls 25 7 12' long with perforated metal walls, narrow side walls 16 Bus Shelter Survey Page 1 of 4 Planning Board October 23, 2006 TABLE 2 Number of Survey Responses by Individual Shelter Shelter Location Shelter Type Number of Survey Responses Appezzato and Third (WB) 1 18 Appezzato and Poggi (EB) 1 12 Appezzato and Poggi (WB) 1 12 Atlantic and Constitution (WB) 7 16 Buena Vista and Paru (WB) 4 26 High and Encinal (SB) 1 29 Park and Santa Clara (NB) 2 87 Park and Santa Clara (SB) 2 77 Santa Clara and Ninth (WB) 5 36 Santa Clara and Oak (EB) 2 29 Santa Clara and Oak (WB) 2 28 Santa Clara and Park (EB) 2 44 Santa Clara and Park (WB) 2 50 Santa Clara and Stanton (WB) 4 23 Santa Clara and Walnut (WB) 5 36 Santa Clara and Webster (EB) 3 40 Santa Clara and Willow (WB) 6 25 Webster and Central (NB) 3 41 Webster and Lincoln (N8) 3 40 Webster and Lincoln (SB) 3 38 Webster and Santa Clara (NB) 3 61 Webster and Santa Clara (SB) 3 54 TABLE 3A Shelter Appearance Shelter Type Number of responses Agree Disagree Don't Know/ No Response 1 71 61% 7% 33% 2 315 73% 5% 22% 3 274 62% 8% 30% 4 49 70% 9% 26% 5 62 73% 7% 23% 6 25 52% 20% 28% 7 16 63% 6% 31% Note: Totals may not equal 100% due to rounding. Bus Shelter Survey Page 2 of 4 Planning Board October 23, 2006 TABLE 3B Shelter From Wind Shelter Type yp e Number of resresponses p Agree Disagree Don't Know/ No Response 1 71 33% 37% 31% 2 315 41% 34% 25% 3 274 29% 44% 28% 4 49 53% 26% 26% 5 62 10% 72% 22% 6 25 44% 32% 24% 7 16 31% 25% 44% Note: Totals may not equal 100% due to rounding. TABLE 3C Shelter From Rain Shelter yp e Type Number of res responses p Agree Disagree Don't Know/ No Response 1 71 37% 26% 39% 2 315 45% 32% 24% 3 274 35% 38% 27% 4 49 68% 11% 26% 5 62 23% 62% 18% 6 25 56% 20% 24% 7 16 50% 19% 31% Note: Totals may not equal 100% due to rounding. TABLE 3D Shelter From Sun Shelter Type yp e Number of responses p Agree Disagree Don't Know/ No Response 1 71 50% 17% 34% 2 315 49% 29% 23% 3 274 38% 34% 30% 4 49 49% 23% 32% 5 62 42% 40% 22% 6 25 64% 16% 20% 7 16 69% 0% 31% Note: Totals may not equal 100% due to rounding. Bus Shelter Survey Page 3 of 4 Planning Board October 23, 2006 TABLE 3E Adequate Space for Sidewalk Passage Shelter Type oases (# of responses) ) Agree Disagree Don't Know/ No Response 1 (71) 71% 13% 17% 2 (315) 79% 7% 14% 3 (274) 76% 4% 21% 4 (49) 70% 13% 21% 5 (62) 78% 12% . 13% 6 (25) 76% 4% 20% 7 (16) 81% 6% 13% Note: Totals may not equal 100% due to rounding. TABLE 3F Bus Visibility Shelter Type (# of responses) i p ) Agree Disagree Don't Know/ No Response 1 (71) 61% 7% 33% 2 (315) 73% 5% 22% 3 (274) 62% 8% 30% 4 (49) 70% 9% 26% 5 (62) 73% 7% 23% 6 (25) 52% 20% 28% 7 (16) 63% 6% 31% Note: Totals may not equal 100% due to rounding. TABLE 3G Shelter Color Shelter Color Agree Disagree Don't Know/Other Green 24% 2% 72% Brown 7% 11% 82% G: Ipubworks\ LTITRANSPORTATION \Transitlbuseslbus shelter program \PB- Att3.doc Bus Shelter Survey Page 4 of 4 Planning Board October 23, 2006 ATTACHMENT 4 Development of Shelter Design Standard The shelter design standard needs to balance several City concerns: 1) encourage the use of transit by providing functional transit amenities, 2) ensure that the shelters are consistent with the City's aesthetic character, 3) stay within the City's budgetary constraints for both capital and maintenance costs, and 4) maintain some level of flexibility to adapt to the needs or constraints of sites throughout Alameda. The recommended standard was developed by considering the input from the Transportation Commission, the Planning Board, the survey results, and the experience of City staff regarding maintenance issues. The main issues for each of the design elements are discussed below: Walls -- The size and material used for the shelter walls affects the visibility of riders to bus drivers, and the ability of riders to .see busses as they approach the stop. It is also important in providing protection from the wind and, to a lesser degree, the rain. Glass offers better performance in terms of addressing these concerns. However, while damaged metal panels can often be repaired, broken glass must be replaced, potentially leading to significant maintenance expenses. Five broken glass panels have had to be replaced since May 2005. The walls on some shelters are full -size, while others are significantly narrower. While full -sized walls offer maximum protection from wind and rain, limited right-of-way may require narrower walls to be used. The width of the walls also relates to the materials selected. If perforated metal is used, this reduced visibility, so half size walls could help address this concern. Where metal walls have been used, steel and anodized aluminum have been used at various locations. Steel is more structurally stronger than anodized aluminum and is less expensive, but tends to develop rust relatively quickly. Seats — Staff has found that seats mounted on the rear wall of the shelter are more vulnerable to vandalism, and three of this type of seat has been replaced and two others have been repaired. Decorative elements — These can enhance the aesthetic quality of the shelters, but depending on the design, may result in additional maintenance problems. Two of the shelters have recently installed in the City include a crossbar trim which has been damaged numerous times by vandals. Staff has since reinforced the trim to make it more resistant. This has highlighted the need to assess the design of any decorative elements prior to installation to ensure that future maintenance costs are minimized. Trash receptacles — Many shelters can be ordered with trash receptacles, which are generally 13 gallons. While trash receptacles are important for keeping the vicinity of the bus shelter clean, some locations are in higher density areas and generate more trash than others. Based on the needs of a particular location, the City may need to install a full -size trash receptacle near a shelter if one is not already present. Roofs — Shelter roofs are generally domed or pitched in shape, and this is an aesthetic consideration, not a functional one. In terms of material, plastic or metal can be used. Plastic generally permits more light to enter the shelter, which is an important consideration for riders. However, plastic is more vulnerable to vandalism, as several plastic roofs have been punctured many times and others have been damaged by graffiti. Graffiti remover has further damaged the plastic. The specific location of the shelter should also be considered, as trees or other objects may impact shelter lighting. Colors — The recently installed shelters are either green or brown. The green included on most of the new shelters in Alameda would provide visual consistency within the City as well as with the vast majority of shelters in other cities in the AC Transit service area. It would also support the AC Transit design guide's "secondary" recommendation to use AC Transit colors on their shelters to promote identification with their service. Summary of Shelter Design Features Advantages Disadvantages Glass walls are vulnerable to damage through breakage or etching. Five broken panels have been replaced since May 2005. Metal walls allow for somewhat less visibility than glass. Steel walls have already shown signs of rust in some locations. Aluminum walls are significantly more expensive than the steel walls. Walls With glass walls, riders and drivers can more easily see one another. • Metal walls are more resistant to vandalism, and they can sometimes be repaired instead of completely replaced. Steel walls are structurally stronger than those made of anodized aluminum. Seats Seats are more durable if mounted to the ground. Seats mounted on the shelter wall are more easily damaged. Decorative elements Adds attractive visual element to shelter. Crossbar trim is made of thin is strips, which are easily bent and difficult to repair. Staff s not aware of any means to protect them from vandalism. Trash receptacles p Important as a way to keep shelters free of trash in business u s ness districts shelters are generally g y located near existin trash r t g ecep acles. Small receptacles may not be able to accommodate trash generated at major transit stops. Location- Specific Concerns The City's shelters discussed in this report were all located in a range of locations on Alameda's main island. Since the Planning Board reviewed this item, staff has been working with the Harbor Bay Business Park regarding designs and locations for new shelters along Harbor Bay Parkway. One particular concern in this area is that an important function of a shelter would be to protect riders from winds coming off the bay. As a result, perforated metal walls would be of limited value at the proposed locations. Similarly, as mentioned earlier, there are other site constraints —such as available right - of -way, or proximity to large trees or buildings-that impact on the type of shelter that would be appropriate at various locations. Since the City's experience with the new shelters has been less than two years, there may be some issues that emerge at other shelter locations, so the shelter standard should include some level of flexibility and not be overly prescriptive. Accessibility Issues At the August 2006 meeting of the Commission on Disability Issues, it was noted that the canopy shelter design is difficult to detect for visually impaired people using a cane. Since they navigate by sweeping the cane across an area, walls make the shelters easier to notice, and reduce the risk of colliding with the shelter post. Advantages Disadvantages One plastic roof has been punctured, while others have . . been damaged by graffiti. The graffiti remover further damages the plastic. Roofs Plastic roofs allow more light in during the day. shape g y s ape of the roof, domed versus pitched, is a purely aesthetic consideration. Color There is no functional advantage to any particular color. However, selecting one color to be used at future locations will provide visual consistency throughout the City. Location- Specific Concerns The City's shelters discussed in this report were all located in a range of locations on Alameda's main island. Since the Planning Board reviewed this item, staff has been working with the Harbor Bay Business Park regarding designs and locations for new shelters along Harbor Bay Parkway. One particular concern in this area is that an important function of a shelter would be to protect riders from winds coming off the bay. As a result, perforated metal walls would be of limited value at the proposed locations. Similarly, as mentioned earlier, there are other site constraints —such as available right - of -way, or proximity to large trees or buildings-that impact on the type of shelter that would be appropriate at various locations. Since the City's experience with the new shelters has been less than two years, there may be some issues that emerge at other shelter locations, so the shelter standard should include some level of flexibility and not be overly prescriptive. Accessibility Issues At the August 2006 meeting of the Commission on Disability Issues, it was noted that the canopy shelter design is difficult to detect for visually impaired people using a cane. Since they navigate by sweeping the cane across an area, walls make the shelters easier to notice, and reduce the risk of colliding with the shelter post. ATTACHMENT 5 Examples of Damage to Bus Shelters Resulting from Vandalism Santa Clara/9th --- Decorative trim has been damaged. LOCATION Panel has been damaged and knocked out from frame. Santa. Clara /Willow — Plastic roof has been defaced with graffiti and damaged by graffiti remover. Pan Am/W. Midway -- Plastic roof has been punctured. CITY OF ALAMEDA Memorandum DATE: April 3, 2007 TO: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Debra Kurita City Manager RE: Public Hearing to Appeal a Planning Board decision to deny Planned Development (PD -05 -0002) for 2241 and 2243 Clement Avenue (Boatworks Project) BACKGROUND On February 12, 2007, the Planning Board held a public hearing to consider the Planned Development application for the Boatworks Project at 2241 and 2243 Clement Avenue. After considering the public testimony and comments from the applicant, the Planning Board voted to deny the proposed Planned Development. The Planning Board's resolution denying the project is included as Attachment A to this report. On February 20, 2007, the applicant filed an appeal of the Planning Board's decision to deny the project. The applicant's appeal is included as Attachment B to this report. Staff recommends that the City Council uphold the Planning Board's decision to deny the proposed Planned Development. DISCUSSION Collins /Boatworks LLC (Applicant) is requesting Planned Development (PD) approval to construct 242 residential units on 9.4 acres at 2241 and 2243 Clement Street. These parcels are located north of Clement Avenue between Elm and Oak Streets, and adjacent to the Oakland /Alameda Estuary. In October 2006, the Planning Board reviewed the applicant's request for the necessary General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment to rezone the 9.4 acre project site for residential use. After considering all of the relevant material, the Planning Board recommended that the City Council deny the request for a General Plan Amendment and rezone the southern 4.8 acres of the property for residential use consistent with the General Plan Land Use, Housing, and Conservation and Open Space Elements. Later in October, the City Council considered the Planning Board's recommendation, denied the General Plan Amendment, and rezoned the southern 4.8 acres of the property to R- City Council Report Re: Agenda Item #5 -B 04 -03 -07 Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers Page 2 April 3, 2007 2 /PD to be consistent with the General Plan. On November 2, 2006, the City Council approved the rezoning ordinance on second reading. After the City Council action on the rezoning, staff asked the applicant if the applicant planned to revise the proposed Planned Development to bring the application into compliance with the General Plan and Zoning designations for the property. The applicant declined to revise the planned development application and requested that the City complete the review of the original proposal. On February 12, 2007, the Planning Board held a public hearing to consider the Planned Development application. After considering all of the relevant material, the Board voted unanimously to deny the application for the reasons itemized in the Planning Board Resolution (Attachment A) and described below. The project site includes two parcels totaling approximately 9.4 acres. The southern 4.8 acres is zoned R -2 /PD and the northern 4.6 acres is zoned M -2 General Industrial. The industrial zoning for the northern portion of the site has been in place since at least 1958. The designation allows a range of manufacturing and industrial land uses, but it does not permit residential uses. As shown in the figure below, the Applicant proposes to develop the entire 9.4 acres with 242 residential units. MEN -1 ter, i ,. i v ; CZ EMI 1E3 E21111:31 Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers Page 3 April 3, 2007 Staff recommends that the City Council uphold the Planning Board decision to deny the Planned Development proposal for the following reasons: The proposed project is not consistent with the General Plan. The project site is within the MU-5 Specified Mixed Use Area, which specifies a mix of uses including 300 housing units, 40,000 square feet of office use, and up to 10 acres of open space. The property is zoned to conform to the General Plan's mixed -use designation for the site. The project's proposal to utilize the entire site for residential use is not in compliance with the zoning for the property, nor is the proposed Planned Development in compliance with the General Plan's mixed -use policies that apply to the site. The proposed project is not consistent with the zoning designations for the site. As described above, residential uses are not permitted within the M -2 General Industrial zoning designation. The project proposes residential uses on approximately 4.6 acres of land zoned for general industrial uses. The proposed Planned Development does not provide for a more effective use of the site than is possible under the regulations for the district with which the Planned Development district is combined. Pursuant to Section 30 -4.13. f.3., a Planned Development must provide for a more effective use of the site, than is possible under the regulation for the district with which the Planned Development district is combined. The proposed circulation system, open space plan, parking, and small lot sizes do not provide for a more effective use of the site than would be required under the R -2 and M -2 zoning designations. Circulation and Access: The project's proposed internal circulation system is contrary to city policies and practices to extend the Alameda street grid pattern to the waterfront. The proposed internal circulation system provides extremely limited public access to the waterfront, and it does not provide for a more effective use of the site than would normally occur under the R -2 and M -2 zoning districts. Open Space: The R -2 zoning district requires a total of six hundred (600) square feet of usable open space per unit, not including roadways and driveways. The proposed Planned Development provides substantially less usable open space per unit than would be provided under the R -2 Zoning District. The lack of open space on the plan does not provide for a more effective use of the site than would otherwise occur under the City's zoning ordinance. Parking: The R -2 zoning district requires two parking spaces per residential unit. The project provides less than two parking spaces per unit and no guest parking. Several of the proposed dwelling units would only provide a single off- street parking space. The Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers Page 4 April 3, 2007 reduction in parking does not provide for a more effective use of the site and would result in overflow parking into the adjacent neighborhoods. Lot Sizes: The proposed project proposes Tots as small as 896 square feet. The small Tots would allow for a larger number of units on the site than is envisioned in, planned for, and allowed by the General Plan. Under the Alameda zoning ordinance, the project density within the R -2 /PD should not exceed one dwelling unit for every 2,000 square feet of lot area. The proposed project proposes one dwelling unit for every 1,692 square feet of gross land area. The Planned Development may have a significant adverse effect on adjacent land uses. Pursuant to Section 30 -4.13. f.3., a Planned Development must not have a significant effect on adjacent land uses. The proposed PD could result in significant adverse effects on adjacent residential areas, as well as nearby non - residential uses. Since the project cannot be approved without General Plan and Zoning designation amendments, and because the City Council City Council has not approved those requested amendments, the applicant has not been required to fund a full environmental evaluation of the proposed project over the entire 9.4 acres. Therefore, the environmental effects of the proposed project have not been evaluated, and a finding that the project would not result in significant adverse effects on adjacent land uses cannot be made. The Applicant's Basis for the Appeal: As described in the applicant's letter dated February 20, 2007 appealing the Planning Board decision (Attachment B), the applicant makes the following three arguments: 1. The Planning Board decision does not conform to the Alameda General Plan Housing Policies. 2. The Planning Board decision does not conform to State of California Housing and Density Bonus Laws. 3. The Planning Board did not have the discretion to deny the project because the proposed project included affordable housing. Each of the appellant's arguments is addressed below: Consistency with Alameda General Plan Housing Policies The Planning Board's action to deny the project was not inconsistent with the Alameda General Plan or its Housing Element policies. As described above and in the Planning Board's resolution, the action to deny the application was based on a finding that the application is not consistent with the General Plan. In 1990, the California Supreme Court held that the local general plan serves as the Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers Page 5 April 3, 2007 "constitution for all future developments ". Later in 1990, in the Goleta case, the Court reiterated that any Iocal decision affecting land use must conform to the Iocal General Plan. The Housing Element is part of the General Plan and includes a series of policies that are intended to guide the development of housing in Alameda. As stated in the Housing Element, all of the policies are intended to achieve two overarching Housing Element goals, which are to: A. Provide Housing to Meet the City's Needs: Within the limits of available resources, seek to meet the City's fair share housing needs, increase affordable housing opportunities, and provide for groups with special needs. B. Maintain and Enhance the Quality of Life of the City: Provide for housing development that is consistent with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan Land Use and Open Space and Conservation Elements without jeopardizing the qualities that make Alameda a desirable place to live. As described above in this report, the General Plan and the Housing Element identify the Specified Mixed Use Area 5 (MU -5) as an area of the City that should include a mix of uses. In November 2006, the City rezoned the applicant's property to reflect the mixed use General Plan designation for the site and the policies of the Land Use Element and Open Space and Conservation Element. The re- zoning identified which portions of the property were appropriate for housing and which portions were appropriate for non - residential development. As described in the 2006 staff reports and at the Public Hearings, the 2006 rezoning was explicitly intended to bring the site zoning into conformance with the General Plan Land Use Element, Housing Element, and Open Space and Conservation Element. As described in the October 2006 staff reports and Public Hearings and in the February 2007 Planning Board staff reports and Public Hearing, the current proposal is not consistent with the City of Alameda General Plan Land Use Element or the Open Space and Conservation Element. Therefore any action by the Planning Board to approve the application would be in conflict with Housing Element Goal B., which states that the City should, " Provide for housing development that is consistent with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan Land Use and Open Space and Conservation Elements without jeopardizing the qualities that make Alameda a desirable place to live." Contrary to the appellant's argument that the Planning Board's decision is inconsistent with the Housing Element, it is the application that is inconsistent with the Housing Element and General Plan. It was this inconsistency that was one of the primary findings included in the Planning Board's Resolution denying the application. Consistency with State of California Housing and Density Bonus Laws The appeal argues that the denial was not in conformance with California Housing and Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers Page 6 April 3, 2007 Density Bonus laws. The Planning Board decision was in conformance with State Housing law and the State Density Bonus. Two State government code sections restrict a local agency's ability to deny a housing project that includes affordable housing. The Planning Board's action is consistent with both of these State laws: Government Code 65589.5: Government Code 65589.5 states that a City may not disapprove a housing development project with affordable housing, unless it makes one of several specific findings. One of the findings that may be made to deny a project is that: The development project is inconsistent with both the jurisdiction's zoning ordinance and general plan land use designation as specified in any element of the general plan as it existed on the date the application was deemed complete, and the jurisdiction has adopted a revised housing element in accordance with Section 65588 that is in substantial compliance with this article. As described above, the Planning Board made the finding that the project was not consistent with the Alameda Zoning Ordinance and the Alameda General Plan land use designation. The City of Alameda adopted a revised Housing Element in 2003 in accordance with Section 65588, and the portion of the property that is zoned M -2 is not required to meet the housing goals of the City of Alameda as identified in the Housing Element. Government Code 65915 "Density Bonus:" Government Code 65915 et. seq. states that a City must grant a density bonus and incentives to a project if the project requests the bonus and incentives and the project meets specific affordable housing criteria. The Planning Board's action to deny the project is in conformance with Section 65915 for the following reasons: Section 65915 allows an applicant to request a bonus and incentives for an affordable housing project that is proposed on land that is designated in the General Plan or Zoning Ordinance for residential use. The state law says the City will grant a density bonus over the maximum allowed under the local general plan or zoning. Section 65915 states: For the purposes of this chapter, (density bonus) means a density increase over the otherwise maximum allowable residential density under the applicable zoning ordinance and land use element of the general plan as of the date of application by the applicant to the city, county, or city and county. Maximum allowable residential density means the density allowed under the zoning ordinance, or if a range of density is permitted, means the maximum allowable density for the specific zoning range applicable to the project. Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers Page 7 April 3, 2007 It was clearly not the intent of the State Legislature to pass a Iaw that would require a City to approve a housing project on land that is not planned or zoned for residential for two reasons: 1. Land that is not planned or zoned for residential use has a "maximum allowable residential density" of zero units per acre. Therefore a 35% density bonus over zero units per acre would result in zero units per acre for the project. 2. Allowing housing anywhere in the City irrespective of the City General Plan would be in direct conflict with the Iaw that each City must maintain a General Plan and ensure that all decisions are in conformance with that local General Plan. Therefore, the Planning Board's decision to deny the project was not in conflict with any State Housing codes or the State Density Bonus. Affordable housing The appellant claims that the Planning Board did not have the discretion to deny the project because the proposed project included affordable housing. Staff assumes that the applicant is referring to State of California Government Code 65589.5, which states that a City may not disapprove a housing development project with affordable housing, unless it makes one of several specific findings. As described above, the Planning Board does have the discretion to deny a project with affordable housing that is not consistent with the General Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Pursuant to Section 15270 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), CEQA does not apply to projects that a public agency rejects or disapproves. BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT No additional funding would be required to uphold the Planning Board's decision. MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE Actions taken on this subject do not affect the Alameda Municipal Code. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution upholding the Planning Board's decision to deny PD05 -05. Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers By: Attachments: Respectfully submitted, ZOle-ediecAr Cathy odbury Planning and IA°P , / fidrew T omas Planning Services Manager ng Director A. February 12, 2006 Planning Board Resolution B. February 20, 2006 Letter of Appeal Page 8 April 3, 2007 CITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD RESOLUTION NO. PB -07 -03 DENYING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD -05 -0002) FOR 2241 AND 2243 CLEMENT AVENUE (BOATWORKS PROJECT) WHEREAS, on October 24, 2005, Phillip Banta and Associates submitted an application requesting approval of a Planned Development project to construct 242 dwelling units on property located at 2241 and 2243 Clement; and WHEREAS, the proposed project site is within the Specified Mixed Use-5 (MU-5) General Plan designation; and WHEREAS, 4.6 acres of the site are located within the M -2, General Industrial (Manufacturing) Zoning District and 4.8 acres of the site are located in the R -2/PD, Two - Family Residence /Planned Development Combining Zoning Districts; and WHEREAS, a Planned Development is not consistent with the General Plan and is not consistent with the General Plan's mixed use policies that apply to the site; and WHEREAS, the Planned Development project is inconsistent with the zoning ordinance because it includes residential units on 4.6 acres of land zoned M -2, General Industrial (Manufacturing), which does not allow dwelling units; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board held a public hearing on this application on February 12, 2007, and has examined pertinent maps, drawings, and documents; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Board of the City of Alameda hereby denies the proposed Planned Development (PD -05 -0002) based upon the following findings: 1. The proposed Planned Development is not consistent with the General Plan, and is not consistent with the zoning for the site. The project site is within the General Plan's MU -5 Specified Mixed Use Area, which specifies a mix of land uses including 300 housing units, 40,000 square feet of office use, and up to 10 acres of open space. The City Council's recent rezoning of part of the property applies the General Plan's mixed -use policies for the larger MU -5 area to this specific property within the MU -5. The project site, as includes a combination of residential zoning and non - residential zoning. The project's proposal to develop both the 4.8 acres of residential property and the 4.6 acres of manufacturing property for residential use is not in consistent with, and is not in compliance with, the zoning for the site. Specifically, the M -2, General Industrial (Manufacturing) zoning on 4.6 acres of the site do not allow residential development. Additionally, the project's 1 City Council Attachment A to Agenda Item #5 -B 04 -03-07 proposal to develop the entire site for residential use is not in compliance with the General Plan's mixed -use policies that apply to the site, as well as the General Plan policy to create an Estuary Park. Furthermore, the Alameda zoning ordinance requires that residential projects within a Planned Development not exceed one dwelling unit for every 2,000 square feet of lot area. The applicant is proposing one unit for every 1,692 square feet of gross Iand area. 2. The Planned Development is not a more effective use of the site than is possible under the regulations for the district with which the Planned Development District will be combined because a Planned Development allows for a comprehensive development of the site. Specifically: ■ Circulation and Access: The project's proposed internal circulation system is contrary to city policies and practices to extend the Alameda street grid pattern to the waterfront. The proposed internal circulation system provides extremely limited public access to the waterfront, and does not provide for a more effective use of the site than would normally occur under the R -2 and M -2 Zoning districts. • Open Space: The R -2 zoning district requires a total of six hundred (600) square feet of usable open space per unit, not including roadways and driveways. The proposed Planned Development provides substantially Tess usable open space per unit than would be provided under the R -2 Zoning District. The lack of open space on the plan does not provide for a more effective use of the site than would otherwise occur under the City's zoning ordinance. ■ Parking: The zoning code standard for dwelling units up to 3,000 s.f. is two parking spaces per unit. The project provides less than two parking spaces per dwelling unit and no guest parking. Several of the proposed dwelling units would only provide a single off - street parking space. The project's parking does not provide for a more effective use of the site, and would likely result in overflow parking into the adjacent neighborhoods. 3. The Planned Development may have a significant adverse effect on adjacent land uses. The proposed Planned Development could result in significant adverse effects on adjacent residential areas, as well as nearby non - residential uses. Because the project cannot be approved without General Plan and Zoning designation amendments, and because the City Council has rejected some of those amendments, a full environmental evaluation of the proposed project has not been completed under the California Environmental Quality Act. Therefore, the Planning Board cannot find that the project definitely would not result in significant adverse effects on adjacent land uses. The decision of the Planning Board shall be final unless appealed to the City 2 Council, in writing and within ten (10) days of the decision by completing and submitting an appeal form and paying the required fee. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of February 2007 by the Planning Board of the City of Alameda by the following vote: AYES: (7) Mariani, Cook, Cunningham, Ezzy Ashcraft, Kohlstrand, Lynch, McNamara NOES: (0) ABSENT: (0) G:I PLANNINGI PB1 ResoIutions12007102- 12- 07\BoatworkS PD 05 0002 Reso.DOC 3 ATTE _ T: A " drew Thomas, Secretary ity Planning Board TA 3, ASSOCiATES ARCHITECTURE 6050 HOLLIS STREET, EMERYVILLE, CA 94608 www.bantadesign.com A Division of BETA, Inc. February 20, 2007 CITY OF ALAMEDA Planning & Building Department ATTN: Andrew Thomas -- Supervising Planner 2263 Santa Clara Avenue, Room 190 Alameda, CA 94501 -4477 RE: APPEAL OF PLANNING BOARD DECISION Application PD05- for 2241- 2243 Clement Avenue — Alameda, CA cat, Dear Andrew, TEL: 510.654.3255 FAX: 510.654.3259 RECEIVED 1 PERMIT CENTER ALAMEDA, CA 94501 This letter is to notify the City of Alameda that Mr. Francis Collins is appealing the Alameda's Planning Board's decision of February 12, 2007 to deny the Boatworks Housing Development Project proposed for his 9.4 acre property located in the City's Northern Waterfront area. Mr. Francis Collins is appealing because the City of Alameda's Planning Board's decision does not conform to Alameda's General Plan's Housing Policies and the decision does not recognize the State of California's Housing and Density Bonus Laws that place important limitations and obligations on focal governing agencies in the area of affordable housing. The Planning Board did not have the discretion to disapprove the housing development project which includes housing for very low, low, and moderate income households. The Boatworks project provides an opportunity for Alameda to add highly desirable housing to the Northern Waterfront area consistent with the development policies of the City's General Plan and pursuant to the housing policies of the City of Alameda and State of California's Housing and Density Bonus Laws. The Boatworks Housing Development Project must be approved accordingly. Thank you, Robert McGillis AIA -- PRINCIPAL PHILIP BANTA & ASSOCIATES 1 ARCHITECTURE 6050 HOLLIS ST - EMERYVILLE CA 94608 PH: 510-654-3255 xt:203 Fib: 510-654-3259 e -mail: RMCGILLIS @BANTADESIGN.CDM WWW.BANTADESIGN.COM • Property Owner:, Francis Collins Date: ig17101- . City Council Attachment B to Agenda Item #5 -B 04 -03 -07 PLAINNOISIDING PETITION FOR APPEAL OR CALL FOR REVIEW This petition is hereby filed as an appeal or call for review of the decision of the F7(A4 (Planning Director/Zoning Administrator/Planning Board /Historical Advisory Board) , which �05 ~ for application_ t/EL�PM�S�' (Denied /Granted/Established Conditions) (Application type) 000 -7- at 22-4 1 - GI-1-1\t\ENSC AV5. (Application Number) (Street Address) on Piu'i-'4 !2 / (Specify Date) The basis of the appeal or call for review is: -n-IG �(.At�1t�t1i�r P2A.i2.-Y3 P917 1-161' ! -lvVG "1�-l� .1:)I6cI251lm1 To 17- 64;3710-.0Nl LL�/El.'0PMcN-T WH1GN VGr2-%-i l.oW (.aUJ AND M017wl-ccTio 1 N GOM1c �-}DU�G L1Q1�iJS (If more space is needed, continue on the reverse side or attach additional sheets.) Appel land: PP1' OLL-t N5 l GJo PIA 1,117 1PKM. (Appellant Name(s), Planning Board Member or Council Member) Address: 67e7,0 1-1otAA SME►2- `(VII,1.C— GA G141o0 °v (Appellant Address) AMC Section 30 -25, Appeals and Calls for Review, provides that within ten (10) days a decision of the Planning Director or Zoning Administrator may be appealed to the Planning Board, and decisions of the Planning Board or Historical Advisory Board may be appealed to the City Council. In addition to the appeal process, decisions of the Planning Director or Zoning Administrator may be called for review within ten (10) days to the Planning Board by the Planning Board or by the City Council and decisions of the Planning Board or the Historical Advisory Board may be called for review by the City Council or a member the City Council. A processing fee of $100.00 must accompany the Petition for Appeal. No fee is required for a Call for Review. **************************************************************************** ******** *** * * * * * ***** ***** *** ** (For Office Use Only) Received By: Receipt No.: Dat�'324$glCe��ryc D fl C l� 1/ G FEB 2 02007 PERMIT CENTER ALAMEDA, CA 94501 CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. UPHOLDING PLANNING BOARD RESOLUTION PB -07 -03 DENYING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD -05 -0002) FOR 2241 AND 2243 CLEMENT AVENUE (BOATWORKS PROJECT) WHEREAS, on October 24, 2005, Phillip Banta and Associates submitted an application requesting approval of a Planned Development project to construct 242 dwelling units on property located at 2241 and 2243 Clement; and WHEREAS, the proposed project site is within the Specified Mixed Use -5 (MU -5) General Plan designation; and WHEREAS, 4.6 acres of the site are located within the M -2, General Industrial (Manufacturing) Zoning District and 4.8 acres of the site are located in the R -2 /PD, Two - Family Residence /Planned Development Combining Zoning Districts; and 9 g , WHEREAS, the Planned Development is not consistent with the General Plan Land Use and Open Space and Conservation Elements and is not consistent with the General Plan's mixed use policies that apply to the site; and WHEREAS, the City of Alameda adopted a revised Housing Element in 2003 in accordance with Government Code Section 65588; and WHEREAS, the Planned Development project is inconsistent with the zoning ordinance because it includes residential units on 4.6 acres of land zoned M -2, General Industrial (Manufacturing), which does not use; ermit residential and p use; WHEREAS, the portion of the property in the Planned Development that is zoned M-2 is not required to meet the City of Alameda Housing Goals as identified in the City of Alameda Housing Element; and WHEREAS, the General Plan requires that the City identify, zone, and preserve land for non- residential uses; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board held a public hearing on this application on February 12, 2007, and has examined pertinent maps, drawings, and documents. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Alameda hereby upholds the Planning Board Resolution PB -07 -03 denying the Y g proposed Planned Development (PD-05-.0002) based upon the following findings: findin 0 Resolution #5 -B 04 -03 -07 1. The proposed Planned Development is not consistent with the General Plan, and is not consistent with the zoning for the site. The project site is within the General Plans MU -5 Specified Mixed Use Area, which specifies a mix of land uses including 300 housing units, 40,000 square feet of office use, and up to 10 acres of open space. The site's zonin g applies lies the General Plan's mixed -use policies for the larger MU -5 area to this specific property within the MU -5. The project site, as rezoned, includes a combination of residential zoning and non - residential project's zoning. The g pjcs proposal to develop both the 4.8 acres of residential property and the 4.6 acres of manufacturing property for residential use is not in consistent with, and is not in compliance with, the zoning for the site. Specifically, the M -2, General Industrial (Manufacturing) zoning on 4.6 acres of the site does not allow residential development. Additionally, the project's proposal to develop the entire site for residential use is not in compliance with the General Plan's mixed -use policies that apply to the site, as well as the General Plan policy to create an Estuary Park. The portion of the property p Y i in the Planned Development that is zoned M -2 is not required to meet the City of Alameda Housing Goals as identified in the City of Alameda Housing Element. Furthermore, the Alameda zoning ordinance requires that residential projects within a Planned Development not exceed one dwelling unit for every 2,000 square feet of lot area. The applicant is proposing one unit for every 1 ,692 square feet of gross land area. 2. The Planned Development is not a more effective use of the site than is possible under the regulations for the district with which the Planned Development District will be combined because a Planned Development allows for a comprehensive development of the site. Specifically: ■ Circulation and Access: The project's proposed internal circulation system is contrary to city policies and practices to extend the Alameda street grid pattern to the waterfront. The proposed internal circulation system provides extremely limited public access to the waterfront, and does not provide for a more effective use of the site than would normally occur under the R -2 and M -2 Zoning districts. ■ Oren Space: The R -2 zoning district requires a total of six hundred (600) square feet of usable open space per unit, not including roadways and driveways. The proposed Planned Development provides substantially less usable open space per unit than would be provided under the R -2 Zoning District. The lack of open space on the plan does not provide for a more effective use of the site than would otherwise occur under the City's zoning ordinance. • Parkins: The zoning code standard for dwelling units up to 3,000 s.f. is two parking spaces per unit. The project provides less than two parking spaces per dwelling unit and no guest parking. Several of the proposed dwelling units would only provide a single off - street parking space. The project's parking does not provide for a more effective use of the site, and would likely result in overflow parking into the adjacent neighborhoods. 3. The Planned Development may have a significant adverse effect on adjacent land uses. The proposed Planned Development could result in significant adverse effects on adjacent residential areas, as well as nearby non - residential uses. Because the project cannot be approved without General Plan and Zoning designation amendments, and because the City Council has rejected some of those amendments, a full environmental evaluation of the proposed project has not been completed under the California Environmental Quality Act. Therefore, the Planning Board cannot find that the project definitely would not result in significant adverse effects on adjacent land uses. 4. The Planning Board's denial is consistent with the City's Housing Element, which requires that all land use decisions consistent with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan Land Use and Open Space and Conservation Elements. 5. The Planning Board's denial of the application is consistent with State Planning and Housing Law because the proposed project is not consistent with the City of Alameda General Plan or the City of Alameda Zoning Ordinance. I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular meeting assembled on the day of , 2007, by the following vote to wit: AYES NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, 1 have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said City this day of , 2007. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda